Archive for February, 2009

26
Feb
09

Producer of Pusher 3 sueing The Pirate Bay, against his will?!

So Henrik Danstrup, producer of Pusher 3, a movie that is used in the case against The Pirate Bay is less then pleased at seeing his creation being used as ammunition against(sv) TPB. 

It’s strange. I’m very understanding of piracy and my sympathies lie with the pirates. The movie business needs to find a new model to earn money with instead of living in the past.

Nordisk Film on the other hand couldn’t care less about the creator and Irene Mikkelsen told Denmarks Radio that they support the Anti-Piracy Bureau fully. 

IFPI spends 82 000 000€ on this yearly. I wonder what the MPA spends on creating badwill for their clients…

26
Feb
09

A history of Sweden’s Piratpartiet

Ars Technica takes a look at the history behind The Pirate Party SE. It covers a lot of areas, from the first line that Falkvinge dropped in a chat (on DC iirc) to Sweden’s broadband situation and Young Pirate. 

It doesn’t mention The Bureau of Piracy though. Not that we always agree with each other. But they have done awesome work showing up for debates long before Sweden had a Pirate Party and their contribution can not be neglected.

26
Feb
09

Flowers for Roger Wallis

Like I posted earlier, Roger Wallis who pretty much obliterated all arguments by the prosecution today asked for flowers for his wife.

This led to #wallisflowers on EFnet, wich led to a simple site where people who sent stuff to wallis can register their gift.

So far (2009-02-26 18:55) the gifts total 30 368sek. That’s 3 402.53$ or 2 667.57€ or 2 375.55£. Other currencies here.

While writing this: 2009-02-26 19:00 – 30 653sek.

-Update:

2009-02-26 19:32 – 32 278sek

Damn these cheap and spoiled pirates!

-Update2:

SvD picked up on the “flowerstorm”.

-Update3

The gift tracking site crumbled under the pressure, last I saw was just over 40 000sek. But flowers are pouring in. Problem is the Wallis’ are out of wases (this sounds awfully familiar). Plz to send moar wases!

-Update4:

If you are reading this by now the Wallis’ got flowers, candy, teddy bears and wases for over 53 000sek. It’s more than they can handle and theres no need for more.

26
Feb
09

The Pirate Bay Trial – day 9

Haven’t been able to post for a few days. Back to back shifts at work and a busy weekend. I started translating the testimony with Peter Sunde and have done 40 mins of that so far. 6000 words and counting. I have a few days off now so I hope to complete a number of posts before Monday.

First some awesome news. The Pirate Party of Sweden is steadily increasing it’s number of members and currently we’re at 11042 members making us larger then both The Left party and The Greens at 10700 and 9110 members respectively! Next party to beat is The Liberal party at 17799. Here you can look(sv) at a Swedish wiki detailing party membership numbers over time. Do note the steady decline in numbers across the board among all parties in the parliament. (columns s, m, c, kd, fp, v, mp) Dare I hope for 17800 before the EU election? 

To day the court heard testimonies from Roger Wallis, a classical composer,  professor of media technology and electronic arts at KTH, member of the governments IT advisory commission and former board member of the collection society STIM. I love this guy. No seriously! Let’s look at some quotes!

Defense attorney Peter Althin (defends Peter Sunde) asks:

A: Your interest for file sharing, how did that come to be? Is it a result of the research you have done?

W: A little bit of both. I’m a practicing composer, mostly for my grand kids, but I’m also a researcher and have always been fascinated by new  technology. It started with the compact cassette of the 80’s. We had the very same debate at that time, they wanted to stop it.

A: Who are they?

W: The music and movie industry, the pushed the case all the way to the supreme court in the US but lost in the betamax case… They also dragged the Hamstradt (sp?) Amstrad case all the way to the supreme court in England. And what fascinated me with the cassette technology was how it revolutionized the ability for anyone to cheaply participate in the music industry. We got cassettes with multiple tracks which mean that you didn’t have to record at Abbey Road, Beatles Studio, to record music. You could record in your basement, and I became very interested in how  that effected the range of products on the market. And when I saw file sharing and the file sharing technology emerge… I wanted to know what benefits it had. Historically, every shift in technology has prompted the same reaction from the established companies. Trying to stop it and demonising the people using the new technology. And the best example of this that has really interested me was the introduction of radio in the US In the 1920’s. Back then the note publishers were the big ones and they attempted to ban all music on radio with the argument that if we can listen to music on the radio then the value of copyright will collapse and no one will write music any more.

A: Is there any relation between downloads and lost sales?

W: That depends on what kind of sales you are referring to. There’s a clear relation between downloads and sales of concert tickets. It’s true that CD sales have declined but it’s also impossible to pin a specific number on the decline. 

<Wallis digresses from the question>

A: Is there a direct causality on effects of downloads and lost sales? Is 10 000 downloads the same amount of lost sales?

W No, there’s a multitude of factors that effects the decline in sales. The most important reason is that the CD isn’t a practical form of distribution when people want their music on their computers or on MP3. That’s the most important reason. There are other things competing for your wallet. Cell phones, video, DVD, video games. Many of the reports, I hear a few being mentioned here, Libevitz and a whole slew of other reports that all show conflicting results. Most of these where made between 2002 and 2006. And what we learned from Music Lessons which was done 2005 to 2007/2008 explain some of the problems with analyzing this field. Many assumed that file sharers where a homo-gene group who where only driven by a desire to get stuff gratis. Our research, which we have done with The World Internet Institute who conduct research all over Europe, was that there are many types of file sharers. One group, we call them the Enthusiasts, download illegally, but buy more cinema tickets, more tracks on iTunes and so on. They are the the core of the fans that build the market, they go to concerts more. Another large group that we named Free Riders, are the same kind of people that home taped in the 80’s and gave to their friends and that never bought anything. The problems they caused was compensated for by a tax on blank media. But, if you arent sure wich of these groups you are looking at your results will be unreliable. 

This guy has done so much research into the subject that IFPI lawyer Peter Danowsky is terrified. So terrified that he doesn’t dare poke at Wallis’ arguments with a ten foot stick. Instead he attempts to discredit Wallis by insinuating that he is a part time hobbyist. I can’t be sure how the court will view his attack on Wallis but a reporter in the court room was reported to say “they just lost the case“(sv). 

An epic moment came when Anti-Piracy Bureau lawyer Henrik Pontén asks Wallis where to find his CV. Wallis reply was basically: omfg l2google!

Wallis was understandably irritated. The music industry likes to ridicule him and a few days ago Henrik Pontén had called different researchers at KTH and asked questions about Wallis’ credibility. Most touching of all was when at the end, the court asked what he asked of the court as compensation. 

“Flowers for my wife.”

Even though this all happened today she’s already gotten flowers from someone thanking Wallis for finally bringing the artists into the debate. EFnet has a newly formed IRC channel for people who wish to send flowers to Wallis’ wife. Last time the netizens of Sweden had a flower campaign we sent so many flowers that the Swedish Parliament ran out of vases to put them in. I doubt the result from this will be anything less than astounding.

21
Feb
09

My Thoughts on RW and Participant Culture

The Swedish Pirate Party talks at length about Participant Culture. The concept is the same as Lawrence Lessig’s R/W Culture.

Even more Lessig here.

Now, I doubt anyone would mind using Lessig’s term in Swedish, but a literal translation of RW Culture sounds pretty much as literacy culture in Swedish. And that’s completely incomprehensible. But Lessig describes it mostly as it pertains to cultural expressions.

To me Participant Culture refers not only to the act of remixing, where you build upon, and evolve work done by someone else in strict cultural expressions such as writing, sound or images. It also describes a way of life enjoyed by many netizens. Your friends and the people you know are your swarm, and their swarms connects to your swarm in ways you don’t know about, can’t see and can’t predict. All swarms are ever active, and since they are defined as a network of connections via any and all channels available today, they transcend borders, and physical location.A completely globalized state of being, if you will. The Piracy Bureau member Marcin de Kaminski calls this Cluster Organizational Dynamics(sv).

In these swarms specific individuals form stronger connections with individuals they like. Just like ordinary friends. You chat, share stories about your social life and hang out, at the keyboard or away from the keyboard. To us it’s all real life. Whether you can reach out and physically touch someone isn’t really important.

Now Participant Culture strengthens other connections as well. Most interestingly is connections based on interest and skills. When a swarm such as that evolves to a certain stage it gains a composite conscienceness. A will and direction derived from the similar interests, and a capability based on the collective skill set. This swarm can act as an individual of sorts and perform demanding and complex actions.

The Swedish Pirate Party is organized like this. And in my opinion as is The Pirate Bay and the Bureau of Piracy as well. If one of us desires a task to be completed that that particular individual isn’t capable of, all they have to do is communicate their desire to the swarm and chances are great it will find its way to an individual or group of individuals that have both the interest and skills required.

The older someone is, the less likely they are to intuitively understand this. Their world is defined by the one in charge. If they need something done, they try to think to most likely candidate to help them and then they contact that specific person. I that doesn’t pan out the move to no. 2 on their list.

The people of that world were the ones that refused to believe Linux could be made. A complete OS was so complex that it REQUIRED the control to be placed in the hands of a capable leader. By now we’ve have seen that this is not true, but the knowledge and understanding is far from common place.

And this creates culture clashes, where people belonging to either group are incapable of understanding the motivation of someone from the opposite group. I wouldn’t call that sad, but it sure does make you go wtf at times…

20
Feb
09

The Pirate Bay Trial – day 5

Today we got to hear Peter Sunde aka Brokep testify.

He kept his cool for the most part, but IFPI lawyer Peter Danowsky incurs his wrath during the following exchange:

D: Have you held a key note called “How to Dismantle a Million Dollar Industry as a hobby”?

S: Yes

D: Do you mention your view on copyright in that key note? [sic]

S: That’s a political question, I thought this was a court of law, not of politics!

Shortly after Danowsky ask Sunde about a blog post of his, and Sunde first questions the relevancy then says

S: Is this a political trial, or a legal trial, could I have an answer?

D: No you can’t.

The prosecution manage to get themselves reprimanded by the judge since they for the second day in a row keep introducing surprise evidence. This is not acceptable in a Swedish court and a great argument erupts prompting the court to adjourn it self. Upon return it tells the prosecution to hand over any and all surprise evidence to the defense so that they can read it. Prosecution complained that they weren’t sure they would need it but eventually caves.

We also get to hear right wing millionaire Carl Lundström testify. I keep reading it for something interesting but all it says is that he removed himself from the site because his lawyers recommended him to. He is questioned on several canceled business ventures with TPB and further explains that he would have liked to do business with TPB because it’s a strong brand that attract you people. He donated hardware to TPB while he saw a possibility to do business with them, but after he pulled out he was paid for the hardware.

The Local summarizes.

Also on TorrentFreak and ZeroPaid

Another great read is the interview with author Sam Sunberg – The Pirate Bay ‘best for choice and efficiency’

And yes, I bought the book. Multiple copies in fact. Even though the distributors supports IPRED, and should burn in hell. I feel dirty. I just hope Sam and co author Anders Rydell have good contracts so they get most of my money.

19
Feb
09

The Pirate Bay Trial – day 4.1

I’m sort of short on time today and there’s tons of stuff that needs telling. Regrettably I will have to keep it simple.

Sources: Rick Falkvinge, Christian Engström and SVD.

The day actually starts of with some humor. The Bureau of Piracy rep Tobias Andersson is in the courtroom and is being called as a witness in the case. This is not allowed according to Swedish law and he is asked to leave. mr Andersson asks the court:

“Does this mean I’m not allowed to listen to radio either?”

After some glances between all parties (the case is broadcasted live on national radio and national TV) the judge replies:

“Well, we can’t stop that, but you can’t be in here and that side *nodding towards the prosecution* wants you to leave”.

Mr Andersson shakes his head and leaves smiling.

The by now legendary King Kong Defense creator Per E Samuelson continues to explain the time lines and nature behind different actions and purchase that proves that his client Carl Lundström isn’t part of The Pirate Bay crew. He outlines several emails that proves that Mr Lundström at first tried to find country with, in his opinion, more favorable laws to host TPB but ultimately fails and removes himself from the project.

During this Gottfrid and Peter can’t stop smiling. Could it be this image that is currently seen on the front page of TPB that amuses them?

kingkong

Testimony of Fredrik Neij aka TiAMO

Neij starts the testimony by speaking freely. Talking about his passion for technology and that this was the reason he became involved with The Pirate Bay. Neij brought his laptop with him for his speech and is reprimanded by the judge. It’s not allowed to read on the witness stand.

Neij is clearly nervous.

We decided to make the tracker open and uncensored, to support the BitTorrent technology and its community.

Oded Daniel is a colleague and friend of mine. The assumptions of the prosecutions that all contact between him and me concerns TPB is not based in fact. When Oded joined TPB we where already in roughly ten other projects together. Today that number is more like 20.

Neij also points out that the statistics on TPB are unreliable largely because of saboteurs that are trying to corrupt TPB’s data.

Having covered his notes the prosecutor starts asking questions:

P: Do you have any form of technical…

N: No

P: … degree.

P: When did you meet Oded

N: When we started with ads on TPB. I have no interest in economics, i focus on the technical aspects of the site.

P: When did you first come in contact with Oded?

N: I don’t know, during 2004 perhaps.

P: We found documents at Gottfrid’s dated October 2004. Could this be the time you came in contact with eachother?

N: I don’t no, my sense of time is not to be relied on.

P: Who mailed who first and why?

N: Oded contacted us. He wanted banners on TPB.

P: You mean he contacted you?

N: I don’t know since I have never really… had the energy to answer such mails.

P: How did Oded make a living at the time?

N: I have no idea.

P: Did he want to buy banner space?:

N: Yep

P: You mentioned collaboration on other projects. Could it be that Oded is involved in the technical parts?

N: No, i handle everything technical. He isn’t very skilled with technology, he uses windows.

At this point roaring laughter can be heard from the listening room on the other side of the wall.

P: When did you understand the nature of TPB?

N: Probably when Gottfrid moved the site to me.

P: So Gottfrid moved in with you?

N: No, he moved the site to my computers.

P: How?

N: tar.gzip

P: That’s a backup format.

N: More like an archive.

P: What machine ran it?

N: A celeron *insert large amounts of technical stats here*

P: You never contemplated the symbolic value of the name?

N: not really, good name, nice logo.

P: When was this?

N: January 2004

P: From what I can tell the domain was registered in July?

N: Yes. In the beginning the tracker was called tracker.piratbyran.org, but since the site was called The Pirate Bay we acquired a domain of our own. They where alto more expensive back then.

P: Are you the one that replies to mails sent to the abuse address?

N: There is no abuse address. Not on the domain level.

P: Following this you had the desire to expand the site?

N: Well, interest in the site grew

Here Fredrik goes into detail on how the processes where split onto multiple machines.

P: How the the interest increase? Did you advertise it? On MSN or anything?

N: No. Since I don’t have the energy to answer emails I definitely don’t have the energy to advertise the site.

P: After that you translated the site into English?

N: Yes, when we discovered that 50% of our users where outside of Sweden we made the site international.

P: Who is “we”?

Discussion on the size of the crew

N: The others did the boring stuff like coding PHP and HTML.

P: Who was in charge?

N: No one was in charge. Who ever wanted something done did it.

P: Where there no discussion in the group about future goals?

N: The old one was built on a template system that was very demanding on our hardware.

Neij goes on the motivate the redesign of the site.

P: The question is though, who was in charge? Was there a boss?

N: No.

Neij describes the workings of a community

P: But that means that no one is in control of the system.

N: No. The ones with access can make changes. Like I said earlier, commercial sites are run by companies. Ours is a hobby and doesn’t really suffer from being offline a few days.

P: What makes a file sharing site popular?

N: That it works, looks nice and is easily accessed.

P: The content it provides doesn’t matter?

N: In my opinion it doesn’t.

P: Has there been any occurrences of torrents of pirated material?

N: Your investigation should have told you that.

P: Were you aware that there are torrents linking to copyright protected works on the site?

N: I guess I’ve been aware of a few. To what extent I have no idea. There is no specific file that I can recall.

Neij is trying to avoid answering. This prompts the prosecutor to read from the police interviews where it’s apparent that Neij is aware of links to pirated works.

N: If you already had the answer, why are you asking me?

P: Because the court needs to know the answer to this question

The judge agrees.

P: How where you aware of the links to the pirated works? You must have discovered it somehow.

N: Well, through the legal threats perhaps.

P: So you were aware of the complaints?

N: Yes, they were referring to US law.

P: Many of these complaints are addressed to Fredrik Neij which is you.

N: Yes, thats because I own domains.

N: We consulted lawyers to learn if it was legal to link to copyright protected material, and they told us in no uncertain terms that yes is was legal. Both before and after the copyright amendment of 2005.

P: Could it be that their answered was based on the BBS-law?

N: No, i specifically asked if The Pirate Bays was legal.

P: But that requires you to be aware of The Pirate Bay and what it does.

N: Yes, and I trusted that they did all required research before answering the question.

P: Were you in contact with any form of authority?

N: No, non of the authorities. But we have read your memos stating that our site is legal.

Roswall wrote this memo a few months before the raid in 2006. It did not sit well with the US and representatives of the Swedish justice department were flown to the US to be “enlightened”.

N: … if  a torrent doesn’t match it’s description we remove it.

P: So yo removed torrents.

N: Not me personally. The moderators did.

P: For what reasons?

N: If it contained viruses. My knowledge of the work of the moderators is very limited. I only know they exist.

P: Link to copyright protected works where not removed?

N: I did not remove any such torrents.

P: Did anyone else?

N: I don’t know.

P: This brings us to the matter of the money. You have received money from TransWorld Ad.

N: Yes, for work done for Oded Daniel. It’s his company.

P: Registered in Israel?

N: I wouldn’t know.

P: The transfers concern “Purchase of media”?

N: He calls everything that.

P: I see. What kind of work did you do?

N: Running roughly 10 sites in Holland.

P: What did you do on them?

N: Same thing I do for TPB. Took care of the technical operation.

P: Why does Oded write “Purchase of media” all the time?

N: Because he works in advertisement?

P: So he always writes that?

N: Pretty much always. Since he mostly does payments concerning advertisement that part is already filled out. He’s very lazy. Some times he send me stuff addressed to AAA1 for example. He never touches whats already written.

Roswall pulls out an invoice that says something different.

P: You just said he always writes “Purchase of media”!

No he didn’t! You ass hat! He said “I princip alltid”, litteraly “In principle always”.

N: “Always” as in usually.

Roswall pulls out an email concerning the founding of a company and ask Neij for details.

N: That has to be when Carl wanted to buy a share of TPB.

N: Gottfrid explained how it works.

P: And that got Lundström interested?

N: Apparently

P: Do you know why?

N: No the slightest, it doesn’t even interest me.

P: The email header shows it was forwarded to Gottfrid.

N: Yes. Probably so I wouldn’t have to read it.

P: It details sponsorship. What kind of sponsorship?

N: Probably refers to my lower pay in exchange for bandwidth.

P: How much lower?

N: We never discussed that, I just accepted what was offered.

P: How much did your colleagues get payed?

N: Not the slightest idea.

A bit later on Roswall asks if PRQ, the webhost that Neij owned did anything else then run TPB.

N: You carried away 185 servers, 11 of those belonged to TPB, so yes PRQ had other clients.

P: 195 servers.

This is followed by some partly confused discussion about signing of contracts and scrapped projects and who was legally responsible for what.

P: On page 43 … this is an email that you wrote, addressed to Oded, subject “Transfer Calle”, with a bank account number. Why did you write this?

N: So that he would get his money?!

P: What money?

N: For two servers that you have there that we couldnt pay at the time, so this is payment for that.

P: It says towards the end that he’s getting 1.5%. How does that relate to purchase of computers.

N: I don’t know.

P: Page 50. This details that Oded is sending, Peter, Gottfrid and you these revenue reports. In which it says, TiAMO, please send the report to Calle only after it finalized”. That indicates that Calle should receive this…

Judge: Would the prosecutor please ask the question.

P: What does this mean?

N: That Calle should get a copy.

P: Why?

N: I don’t know, he asked me to?

P: Did you?

N: I don’t recall. Was there ever a finalized version?

P: … I don’t know. That was all my questions I think. Did you answer what you paid for the computers?

N: I don’t know, prices change from one week to the next.

At this point Peter Danowsky takes over. I don’t have time today to cover that or the testimony of Gottfrid which also took place today. I will have to take care of that tomorrow.

19
Feb
09

IFPI.se defaced

IFPI.se deface

IFPI.se deface

Earlier today IFPI.se was defaced

STOP LYING HÅKAN ROSWALL ! ! !

The mindless hunt that IFPI, The Anti-Piracy Bureau, Warner Bros and all other companies med a finger in the game has now resulted in a trial where four innocent men are charged with copyright infringement.

This is a declaration of war against the anti piracy industry and those behind it, and we urge everyone to boycott and lynching of those responsible.

IFPI is only the beginning. More to come

The New Generation

# cred to: anakata, TiAMO and brokep

This pointless and stupid. Nuff said.

-Update

Brokep says: we’re winnig, stop hacknig plz.

-Update 2

ifpi.com and ifpi.org are not responding anymore.

-Update 3

ifpi.com and ifpi.org are back and appear untouched.

ifpi.se still not fully recovered.

18
Feb
09

King Kong Defense – Gotta love Wikipedia

One things for sure, its fast!

18
Feb
09

The Pirate Bay Trial – day 3

I’m reading through the English articles I found over at Scaber Nestor. He’s also tracking articles in the rest of Europe, Asia and South America. Most of them are fairly neutral, but this one was a favorite. But that probably mostly because it has a video clip and I could rest my eyes for a bit. I’m wondering though why the reporter keeps calling the site The Pirate Web when all text, logos and everyone interviewed calls it The Pirate Bay? BBC also has a good and thorough article. It even covers some of the very shady dealings the content industry have a hand in. Theres a huge list in Swedish over at Political Blogger of the year award winner Opassande. I’ve been dying to translate it, perhaps later tonight.

As you might expect Prosecutor Håkan Roswall continues to deliver. This morning he was claiming that the amended charge sheet was merely a small adjustment(sv) and should not be seen as the prosecution dropping the charges. The court requests to know if either of IFPI, MPAA or the Anti-Piracy Bureau wants to pick up the charges. Mr Roswall responds by saying that prosecution might need a recess to discuss this, but then decides not to…

Thankfully he is getting a lot less room today when IFPI lawyer Peter Danowsky, MPAA lawyer Monique Wadsted and Anti-Piracy Bureau lawyer Henrik Pontén will be making their cases against the crew of The Pirate bay and attempt explain and justify their ridiculous 13.9m € damage claims.

Danowsky argues as follows:

  • When these downloads occurred legal download sites offered the same content at an average price of 10€.
  • The record labels cut of this was 6.5€.
  • Every download is lost sale.
  • TPB are mean to rights holders that are demanding TPB follows non-applicable law (usually the DMCA).
  • TPB has hindered the development of legal services since IFPI can’t compete with gratis.
  • Sharing of songs that IFPI isn’t even selling is particularly bad and IFPI will thus demand up to 10x the ordinary 6.5€ for each such download. (Beatles 1Q is 10x)

Well, Statens Kriminaltekniska Labratorium (SKL), which is the closest Sweden has to CSI, who investigated the hardware and other materials seized during the raid against TPB, did among others things look at the code for HyperCube. This is the webserver software that Ankata wrote in C and was previously used to run TPB. SKL found bugs in the download counters. Since the prosecution is unwilling to detail the bugs I’m assuming that they either don’t understand how the bugs effects the number of reported downloads or they are trying to downplay the significance of the bugs.

Further more the claim that each download is a lost sale is based on nothing more than fantasies. It’s being thrown out of US courts and defies the most basic concepts of supply and demand. In fact independant research shows that the economy benefits from file sharing. KTH and Hardvard have published similar reports, i might update with links later.

Humorous side note, Danowsky had to clarify that one the songs in the original charges had been removed (labeled 1J), this because it turned out that they did in fact not own the rights to this song.

Pontén argues as follows:

  • APB agrees with the reasoning of IFPI/Danowsky
  • Were TPB to acquire a world wide license from the clients of APB this would have cost 700 000 sek (~64 000 €)
  • Alternative they could go for 60% of an average full price sale (their cut) per download. ~6€
  • Bugs in HyperCube is not the fault of APB or their clients and should be ignored.
  • Goodwill has been lost since release date are “planned in great detail”.
  • We seek twice the amount in damages for loss of goodwill.
  • The movies in question have been seen next to ads for sexual services.

Sexual services? Brokep comments on twitter. We are dying to see them try to prove that one! Prosecution are also cheap bastards that refused to pay for Brokeps pizza after the trial today (also on twitter). :)

Wadsted argues as follows:

  • Policing torrents on a site with 22m users is just as easy as deleting a word document.
  • Production of copies and giving access to copies are sides of the same coin.
  • Even though the DVD of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was released on DVD on in March 2006 it was available on TPB in February 2006.
  • TPB recievs huge traffic and has ads, therefore earns huge amounts of money

Here it bares pointing out that the most common source for pre-release material is from people inside of the industry. Maybe you have an uncle that operates a projector at a cinema, a music journalist that’s a child hood friend of yours and so on. The argument about the ads is quite funny aswell. She knows that any serious adds on TPB are targeted by the lawyers and the companies behind them are threatened with contributory copyright infringement unless the remove their ads from TPB. Further she has yet to provide any froof of the claim that TPB has earned these huge amounts of money. TPB is a top 100 site and has ads, thus it makes money.

Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.

She also has the gall to complain that there is more demand for content without DRM than there is for content infected with it. In her world DRM adds value and we should all pay extra for that…

At this point the defense replies to the charges:

Wadsted counters with a claim that:

“The works were available on the day in question”.

The Court:

“It would be useful for the court to know, in the case that the court decides to reject the case before it, does the plaintiff wish assume the responsibility to proceed with the dropped charges on behalf of the prosecution”?

Wadsted:

“No”

Ok, maybe a slightly convoluted translation, but I think you get the point.

Further arguments of the defense:

  • The statistics on the TPB are unreliable.
  • The content on the site is generated by the users.
  • No copyright protected material can be found on the servers.
  • The crew of the site is in fact much larger that the four being charged today.
  • The mere existence of a torrent on TPB is not equal to making copyright protected material available
  • The torrent on TPB does in no way prove that the user that uploaded it was connected to the server at the given time let alone prove that the uploader actually had the file on his or her computer.
  • The supplier of a search engine can never be made responsible for the information found through it, or file transfers made.
  • A cornerstone of the Internet is links to information, and a torrent file is such a link, meaning you have a right to provide such links.
  • European e-commerce law declares freedom from responsibility for the parties that supply the technology. And in the case of BitTorrent what’s being transfered isn’t even the copyright protected content.
  • There is no correlation between the number of downloads and economic loss.
  • Its claimed that the majority the torrents on TPB link to copyright protected works. This is not true, hasn’t been proven and the lawyer of Peter Sunde promises to expand on this later.
  • The legal counsel for Carl Lundström claims that no more than 20% of the material on TPB is protected by copyright.
  • On each of the specific charges it is clearly stated what user is responsible for uploading the torrent to TPB.

The different lawyers for the different defendants made further arguments on top of this, but they are concerning the specific and individual involvement of each individual defendant. I see little reason to list them. They all deny all forms of involvement in any form of copyright infringement. Carl Lundström denies any and all involvement with TPB since 2005 (raid was 2006).

SR International interviews The Bureau of Piracy and STIM, and their lawyer Lars Henriksson naturally confuses free with gratis. He also says that developers of file sharing platforms should come to them and conform to their business model.

Parallel to the trial, ABBA founder Björn Ulvaeus demands we stop criticizing the law just pay dammit! Long time ABBA fan and author Anna Troberg responded with “I don’t mind paying with money, but I’ll sure as hell not pay with my freedoms or rights!” Writer Gene Oberto responds on The Local and on Newsmill, a liberal debate site, hundreds of readers commented on Mr Ulvaeus article saying pretty much the same thing.

WE ARE NOT PAYING WITH OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES OR HUMAN RIGHTS!

Other day 3 reports:

TorrentFreak, Another 15 Minutes, Happily Ever After Time?, P2pNET




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.