UK piracy case

[BREWSTERS]

What do you think of this?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-16544335

I'm sure he's not as naive as he's cracking on, but I don't like the US reaching out over here the way they do. Haven't they got any targets on their own soil?

 

[murph]

Bang out of order. He should be tried here.

 

[newguy]

It's disgusting. We extradite people to the States a whim here, but when the situation is reversed, we have to move heaven and earth. More poodle than bulldog at this rate.

 

[Pred]

yup this is obscene, dont get me started on this

it wasn't a filesharing site.
he provdided some links. hes a decent guy at end of uni course, never been in trouble

this is worse than the lese majeste cases in thailand. well on a par
at least they waited for someone to walk through customs that dared to post a link to an unofficial autobigraphy about their royal family
and he was an american
along with numerous other cases
shows your nationality being British or American doesn't protect you anywhere in world anymore. used to mean something

say you were in u.s and shot someone and returned home. sure you would need to be extradited, but this is insane
theoretically millions of people could be extradited on this pathetic case

in the u.s eyes wikileaks is evil, virtually a terrorist anti-american site, which of course it's not
but they see it as an attack on them and 'illegal filesharing' I guess of 'classified info'

so when the guardian editors post links to wikileaks, which they do, and reproduce the info does that count? could they then be extradited? surely that is more serious in these nutcases eyes

they should have took domain at most for this imho and suspended hosting account. served a take down notice. companies who feel wronged could have taken a private copyright case. max imo
saved taxpayers a fortune on both sides too

the judges and politicians allowing this to happen should feel eternal; shame over this
standardin u.s prisons rape and murder etc
go watch a few videos of life in u.s prisons
. lock up etc

the crimes committed by the people making these 'decisions' on a global scale is staggering, they are criminals of the highest order, 'top ranking' politicians

and we don't even have the same extradition policy with u.s. not that we want it as costs fortune paid to scum lawyers from OUR taxes anyway
we need to pull away from the yanks big time, although with a tory government/coalition will only get worse, when tories get in fully
they are traditionally the biggest u.s arsekissers
maggie and reagan were virtually screwing
blair broke the mould. he was the ultimate traitor and committed our men and women to illegal wars and is personally responsible for deaths and suffering in the hundreds of thousands and pissed most of our 'civil rights' and bill of rights into the sea with u.s and eu


rant over

 

[Silverz]

I don't understand how they can even have a case against him, since anyone who knows about these types of sites, whether they be public torrent sites, private torrent sites or these new modern streaming sites know that no illegal content can be found on the website/servers, it's just ridiculous :/

 

[scooter]

This has been well organised, thought out and agreed upon long before they raided.

UK and USA raided. I think the UK will be happy as you can't get a stronger signal than this. Feck with the big boys of film copyright and you are off to the good ol US of A.


Speaking before the hearing, Mr O'Dwyer said he was "surprised" when police officers from the UK and America seized equipment at his home in South Yorkshire in November 2010.
Why? He cannot claim innocence with setting up p2p sharing copyrighted material worldwide with all cases that had gone before. Was he declaring his £150,000 earnings?

This is not a victimless crime and he has gained substantially from it. That is a lot of money. (£75K a year) I know with these things they normally exaggerate "potential income". I think with this it will actually be earned income.

I would love to read more. Like visitors and what country his server(s) location.




.

 

[scooter]

I don't understand how they can even have a case against him, since anyone who knows about these types of sites, whether they be public torrent sites, private torrent sites or these new modern streaming sites know that no illegal content can be found on the website/servers, it's just ridiculous :/

Sorry, I disagree. It is the vessel that brings all together to share copyrighted content for free. Without the vessel, there would be no sharing. (at least, not on the same colossal scale)



.

 

[Pred]

Sorry, I disagree. It is the vessel that brings all together to share copyrighted content for free. Without the vessel, there would be no sharing. (at least, not on the same colossal scale)



.

so every search engine owner in world should be in dock
for piracy, illegal pornography, terorrist sites etc etc
they are the true vessels

wait, the owners and holders of the root servers
and icann, and the regsitries etc

this wouldn't even get to court in uk
if it did it would be by copyright holders themselves not gov imo who would have to bring case

 

[Pred]

this is copyright infringement via links, no more
if anyone thinks it is ok for a british national to be extradited to nutjob america for this then i hope it's not your son, cousin or you next

copyright now
what about trademark infringement
most every domainer has one or two whether they know it or not. usually not as they are subjective sometimes

what if wipo stops, udrp stops and cops take that over
cops have already took over seizing domains for illegal activity on both sides of atlantic without any right of reply or hearing
and these are people who are years behind traditionally in understanding technology and all the repurcussions

draconian times

 

[Silverz]

Sorry, I disagree. It is the vessel that brings all together to share copyrighted content for free. Without the vessel, there would be no sharing. (at least, not on the same colossal scale)



.

People will find a way if they want to download copyrighted content, if this type of thing happens on a larger scale then it will be driven more underground, but it will still happen. There are so many more less obvious ways with which content is shared, from IRC to Usenet.

Should we stop sales of kitchen knives just on the off chance some nutter may go on a killing spree ? or household chemicals in case someone tries to poison themselves or others...it's not the vessel but an individuals choice.

 

[scooter]

so every search engine owner in world should be in dock
for piracy, illegal pornography, terorrist sites etc etc
they are the true vessels

wait, the owners and holders of the root servers
and icann, and the regsitries etc

this wouldn't even get to court in uk
if it did it would be by copyright holders themselves not gov imo who would have to bring case

Every site that promotes piracy, illegal pornogrophy or blatant terrorism that is within the UK is now targeted.

I agree. It should be brought to court in the UK. The UK have the power to do so. I would be happy to see him face a possible 5yrs here and his £150K taken and what he has spent, should be a debt he has to pay in the future.

But it is the classic fear factor of the possibility of going to the USA that will shut others down. Who wants to take the chance? Who's got the balls?


copyright now
what about trademark infringement

Already happens for both if it is blatant and what he did was humungously blatant. Not only that but he pocketed £150K in the process for his illegal activities. Whats the difference between this and getting caught with 10,000 illegally made dvd's that he would have sold for a fiver each? The difference is, through his site a lot more than 10,000 films will have been downloaded and he made £150K


.

 

[Pred]

the biggest danger here is that this is only a copyright infringement case
big corporates losing money
ok, not ideal and they have a right to act. they. not foreign govs extraditing and being their henchmen

think about it. what if you're saying things well within your rights in YOUR country but another country doesnt like
your right. if you visit that country they are tracking you, we are seeing that and your embassy will be able to do naff all

our freedoms are different to americans, different to thais , different to chinese
which is why you need to be tried in your own country or judged by our rules

the mckinnon case is different i think as he was hacking into nasa and government etc. that was crazy. the yanks have a right to want to act
having said that he was physically on our soil, crossing an internet connection means zip in my books
so try him here with his rights as a uk citizen
let the americans give testimony and finsings in ciourt here, and we jail him, if guilty

i think only when a serious crime is committed pysically in another country can you get extradited. thats how it should work imo

anyways, this nuts law needs repealing, QUICK!
its just another way they can get anyone they want, anyway

julian assange perfect example. no charges even levelled. they want to 'talk to him' in sweden
so come here to talk
sweden has a reputation of extraordinary rendition (illegal kidnapping) to the states and foreign climes as we do. thats why he knows the yanks may pull a dodgy one with the swedes

 

[Pred]

Every site that promotes piracy, illegal pornogrophy or blatant terrorism that is within the UK is now targeted.

I agree. It should be brought to court in the UK. The UK have the power to do so. I would be happy to see him face a possible 5yrs here and his £150K taken and what he has spent, should be a debt he has to pay in the future.

But it is the classic fear factor of the possibility of going to the USA that will shut others down. Who wants to take the chance? Who's got the balls?


copyright now
what about trademark infringement

Already happens for both if it is blatant and what he did was humungously blatant. Not only that but he pocketed £150K in the process for his illegal activities. Whats the difference between this and getting caught with 10,000 illegally made dvd's that he would have sold for a fiver each? The difference is, through his site a lot more than 10,000 films will have been downloaded and he made £150K


.

yeah, think you missed what i was saying
google, yahoo etc serve up everything people want to search for. they could block everything. most people have own filters to stop trash getting through with kids etc. netnanny etc. but law enforcement will find illegal sites through search engine websites!
so they are culpable


not doubting what has been done may be illegal and I don't know about profits made

2 issues i can see. firstly let the corporates sue him, use their own cash
second let trading standatrds fine him and take domain etc
and let taxman look into what taxes he paid

but u.s gov getting involved? extradition etc? and his life at risk over there
insane

save this for the real hardcore scum out there
that would mean making arrests in government and the whitehouse and governements and major corporations around the world
and to date, that hasn't happened

 

[scooter]

I totally agree with you pred. Try him here.

But what a blinder to play. Watch as the little sites close down pronto. All that has to happen here is our courts to grow some balls and give them up to 5yrs here.


Just to point out I also do not agree with the current extradition agreement. It's fecked and so one sided.

It needs a radical change. Our govenment needs to grow some balls and stand up for its own people.


.

 

[BREWSTERS]

It's the extradition mullarky I have a problem with. If he's been facilitating file sharing then the little sod has to be stopped and yes, made an example of...in this country...where he acted out the wrong-doing.

We all like good films and music, and they don't get produced without us paying for them - fair's fair...but aren't there probably 20,000 similar sites in the US...and 100,000 in China? What's Big Sam doing about those? Start at home; clean up your own back yard first. Britain is a soft target - makes me think of Bob Hoskins speech in 'The Long Good Friday'; "bit of the old Dunkirk Spirit, you know what I mean...?"

 

[Retired_member41]

There is no way he will be extradited. Never in a million years.

They have probably already chosen a higher judge to squash it.

As someone above mentioned. It's a very dangerous PR stunt at the highest levels.

 

[Aegean]

Well I don't know about the illegality of what he's done since he wasn't hosting or selling the pirated content himself, but personally I'm sick of the UK brown-nosing to the US all the time without pausing for thought. If the US asks us to extradite someone we just do it, yet when we pleaded with the US to stop its citizens funding the IRA, they just ignored us.

The UK needs to stop being so lilly-livered with the US.

 

[murph]

I don't even think this should be copyright infringement. He does not host anything. To link to sites, I agree is grey territory, but shouldn't be illegal. Don't they appreciate a website finding the sources of the copyright infringement, so they can go after them...the real law breakers??

 

[scooter]

I disagree. It should be and is illegal. The real criminal is the p2p site that gives them the facility to come together and share. Bite the head off the snake and that's what they have done.


If it wasn't illegal we would all have one of those sites and we would all be making a few pennies in affiliation. But it is illegal, he built it, published it and he got the traffic (300,000 a month according to bbc news last night) and with it came the illegal gains £150K. He only made this because it is illegal.



If it was a p2p site set up for sharing paedophile videos would you feel the same way? Would this be acceptable as they do not hold any videos on their server?




There is no difference. Both facilitate criminal offences.










.

 

[Silverz]

I understand what point you're trying to make scooter, but perhaps it's because you don't know about how a torrent sites works, let me give you some details ;

A torrent site is a place where people share files they have with a group of other people that are members of a website. The website has no control over what is shared, this is down to the individuals uploading the content to share with other people.

There are many torrent sites that do not have any copyrighted material being shared because the members choose not to.

This is similar to bad websites being indexed on google, google is not to blame, they are indexing websites, it's up to the individuals to choose to not use the website in question, just as it is down to the individuals not share illegal files.

I'm not arguing that sharing copyrighted material is not wrong, I'm arguing about the facts. nothing illegal is hosted on the website, it is the individuals choice as to what is uploaded and shared and who downloads it.

You questioned murph on paedophile videos, and whether it's Ok or not...of course it's not, neither is the illegal file sharing, but would I attack the website ? no...I would load the torrent, which would then mean I have access to the persons ip address who uploaded it (the seeder) and everyone else's ips who are also sharing and arrest them all.

Essentially the people are who committing the offence are the original uploaders, who is the seeder, and the peers who are sharing it.

My point is, torrent websites can be a genuine, law abiding place to share files, go after the seeders who are sharing the illegal files rather than the website.