Pirate Bay founder Gottfrid Warg gets lengthy jail term

[practicaldreamer]

3 and a half years.

Seems a lot to me.

[chopstick]

No doubt he was targeted due to his involvement with pirate bay.

The entertainment industry has a lot of political power.

Meanwhile, I will continue to torrent movies in his honor.

[ScryptAsic]

IP laws seem to be particularly harsh. This is no doubt because of the large number of lawsuits that revolve around IP (as well as the associated income to trial lawyers). It is the trial lawyers who traditionally carry a lot of political power and want to make these laws strict in order to generate more income for themselves

[Mudd]

3 and a half years.

Seems a lot to me.

It's not actually that long. Hacking into computers to steal police and social security files is quite a serious offense regardless of their PirateBay involvement.

[arbitrage001]

fuck these bastards,nobody should pay for music or film unless its made by small independent labels

What is the incentive for artists to produce if everyone is stealing?

[brian_23452]

fuck these bastards,nobody should pay for music or film unless its made by small independent labels

What is the incentive for artists to produce if everyone is stealing?

Music existed for how many literally thousands of years before copyright laws came into being? 

[Lethn]

IP laws seem to be particularly harsh. This is no doubt because of the large number of lawsuits that revolve around IP (as well as the associated income to trial lawyers). It is the trial lawyers who traditionally carry a lot of political power and want to make these laws strict in order to generate more income for themselves

Yes, it's all about the money, it's ridiculous he got jailed for something as simple as copying several thousand files onto the internet which essentially all these copyright lawsuits are about, the hollywood producers and their ilk are all dying out and they're trying to take it out onto the people who run the technology that's putting them out of business.

[Lethn]

What is the incentive for artists to produce if everyone is stealing?

issue releases free online on a pay as you want basis and the artists will get their money but the billionaire jew media moguls wont get theirs

No, everyone isn't stealing, if you think that copying is stealing you have something wrong in your head and need to go look at a dictionary. Nevermind the fact that filesharing is basically free worldwide advertisement, I'm an artist and I don't support copyright, I'm obviously against plagiarism but copyright is a whole other thing. If people want to download my work and use it for themselves that's their business, it's only when they try and re-sell it for a profit that I have a problem and filesharing just doesn't do that.

The people in the copyright industry are delusional and have made up these numbers of sales that they have 'lost' by claiming that said amount of people downloading this equals to however many sales they could have gotten if the technology didn't exist, I'd also like to point out that these same scumbags never stick up for independent or small artists and consistently rip them off.

[Balls]

IP laws seem to be particularly harsh. This is no doubt because of the large number of lawsuits that revolve around IP (as well as the associated income to trial lawyers). It is the trial lawyers who traditionally carry a lot of political power and want to make these laws strict in order to generate more income for themselves

Yes, it's all about the money, it's ridiculous he got jailed for something as simple as copying several thousand files onto the internet which essentially all these copyright lawsuits are about, the hollywood producers and their ilk are all dying out and they're trying to take it out onto the people who run the technology that's putting them out of business.

Who are you talking about here? This guy in the op stole people's personal details.

What is the incentive for artists to produce if everyone is stealing?

issue releases free online on a pay as you want basis and the artists will get their money but the billionaire jew media moguls wont get theirs

No, everyone isn't stealing, if you think that copying is stealing you have something wrong in your head and need to go look at a dictionary. Nevermind the fact that filesharing is basically free worldwide advertisement, I'm an artist and I don't support copyright, I'm obviously against plagiarism but copyright is a whole other thing. If people want to download my work and use it for themselves that's their business, it's only when they try and re-sell it for a profit that I have a problem and filesharing just doesn't do that.

There's a difference between theft and copyrite theft. Good luck trying to make a living off your 'art'.

[Reziner]

He wasn't getting a "long term" for being a part of the pirate bay. This is the biggest 'hacker' case in Denmark's history and there are always long sentences to the first once because they want to set an example.

But it's really not that long, if it were America then he would properly been jailed for 20-30 years for the same crime.

[Lethn]

There's a difference between theft and copyrite theft. Good luck trying to make a living off your 'art'.

No, there isn't, copyright theft is a term made up by the copyright lobby in order to justify what they are doing, theft is when you actually steal a physical object or the original, for instance, if I took someones code or their artwork and declared it was mine that would be actual theft, also known as plagiarism if I decided to sell it for money and make copies from it, that is something that the copyright industry does on a regular basis though they do tend to make a few changes so they can say it isn't plagiarism.



Of course, being a moron I wouldn't expect you to understand any of this and you'll carry on believing what you believe.

[jaysabi]

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to justify electronic stealing.

[brian_23452]

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to justify electronic stealing.

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to equate a civil, financial, business decision like copyright law with a moral issue like theft. 

[jaysabi]

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to justify electronic stealing.

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to equate a civil, financial, business decision like copyright law with a moral issue like theft. 

I am not a net defender of IP laws, as they are protectionist and anti-innovation, but that doesn't justify people who's criticism of IP law is really just an excuse to steal movies and music they don't think they should have to pay for.

If you have a valid criticism of the system, I'm quite open to hearing it. I'm already pre-disposed to not agree with IP law. But I don't agree with people who think there should be no consequence for putting the work of others on the internet (be it movies or music or writing) without the owner's permission, which is what things like Pirate Bay are, or that people have a right to download that work without paying the owner for it because 'internet freedom.'

[practicaldreamer]

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to justify electronic stealing.

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to equate a civil, financial, business decision like copyright law with a moral issue like theft.  

I am not a net defender of IP laws, as they are protectionist and anti-innovation, but that doesn't justify people who's criticism of IP law is really just an excuse to steal movies and music they don't think they should have to pay for.

If you have a valid criticism of the system, I'm quite open to hearing it. I'm already pre-disposed to not agree with IP law. But I don't agree with people who think there should be no consequence for putting the work of others on the internet (be it movies or music or writing) without the owner's permission, which is what things like Pirate Bay are, or that people have a right to download that work without paying the owner for it because 'internet freedom.'

IP is, today, unenforceable due to p2p filesharing. How does this affect the production of knowledge ? Negatively ? I'm not so sure.

The analogy is with bitcoin - you could say that (a nations) central bank(s) monopoly on the control/ownership and price of fiat currency (their profiting from such production) is no longer sustainable, by virtue of bitcoin and the blockchain. Or rather, its not so much that its not sustainable (it may or may not be) - its more that its is no longer viable in the presence of a democratic alternative.


The economy should be a participatory domain for the citizens of the nation/world - as should its culture. It shouldn't be something controlled by a minority at the expense of the majority. The majority should not be excluded in order to maintain profits.

[brian_23452]

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to justify electronic stealing.

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to equate a civil, financial, business decision like copyright law with a moral issue like theft. 

I am not a net defender of IP laws, as they are protectionist and anti-innovation, but that doesn't justify people who's criticism of IP law is really just an excuse to steal movies and music they don't think they should have to pay for.

If you have a valid criticism of the system, I'm quite open to hearing it. I'm already pre-disposed to not agree with IP law. But I don't agree with people who think there should be no consequence for putting the work of others on the internet (be it movies or music or writing) without the owner's permission, which is what things like Pirate Bay are, or that people have a right to download that work without paying the owner for it because 'internet freedom.'

Because it isn't stealing.  Stealing is a moral issue; we as a society have defined it as being "wrong" since the begining of civilization.  Copyright violation is an invented crime, quite new in terms of human history.  It is not "inherently" morally wrong (the romans had a phrase for this type of law, malum prohibita); it is "wrong" simply because the people who stand to profit from calling it wrong, declared it to be so. 

Now, if you want to call it what it is, a civil matter, I have no fight with that.  But don't tell me it is morally wrong.  Morality only works when we are all playing by the same rules anyways, and when it comes to large corporations, they don't play by ANY rules so it is kind of moot as far as I am concerned.

[wunkbone]

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to justify electronic stealing.

It's amusing the gymnastics people go through to equate a civil, financial, business decision like copyright law with a moral issue like theft. 

I am not a net defender of IP laws, as they are protectionist and anti-innovation, but that doesn't justify people who's criticism of IP law is really just an excuse to steal movies and music they don't think they should have to pay for.

If you have a valid criticism of the system, I'm quite open to hearing it. I'm already pre-disposed to not agree with IP law. But I don't agree with people who think there should be no consequence for putting the work of others on the internet (be it movies or music or writing) without the owner's permission, which is what things like Pirate Bay are, or that people have a right to download that work without paying the owner for it because 'internet freedom.'

I think the idea behind IP laws is that if the inventor/author/creator of something is not going to be able to get properly compensated for their work then there will be no reason for them to create their work in the first place. If there is nothing that prevents people from copying their work then they will have a very hard time selling their work.

[Vod]

fuck these bastards,nobody should pay for music or film unless its made by small independent labels

What is the incentive for artists to produce if everyone is stealing?

Music existed for how many literally thousands of years before copyright laws came into being?  

Exactly.

Do you really believe that  Johnny Galecki, Jim Parsons and Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting each deserve $1,000,000 for every 22 minute episode?  I sure don't, and will never pay for any of their work, although I will download and enjoy it.

[wunkbone]

fuck these bastards,nobody should pay for music or film unless its made by small independent labels

What is the incentive for artists to produce if everyone is stealing?

Music existed for how many literally thousands of years before copyright laws came into being?  

Exactly.

Do you really believe that  Johnny Galecki, Jim Parsons and Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting each deserve $1,000,000 for every 22 minute episode?  I sure don't, and will never pay for any of their work, although I will download and enjoy it.

The reason they can command such a high "salary" is because they can draw in enough viewers to watch the big bang theory. When there are more viewers, CBS can charge more for advertisements.

Also it can be argued that if you are enjoying something, then you are receiving a benefit from it, if you are receiving a benefit from something without paying (even in the form of allowing advertisements to be served to you) then you are in the wrong

[Vod]

The reason they can command such a high "salary" is because they can draw in enough viewers to watch the big bang theory. When there are more viewers, CBS can charge more for advertisements.

Also it can be argued that if you are enjoying something, then you are receiving a benefit from it, if you are receiving a benefit from something without paying (even in the form of allowing Advertisements to be served to you) then you are in the wrong

I'm in the wrong thinking they deserve less than $760 per second for working?  Not even including their royalties which they will get forever for doing nothing?  No, I don't think I am in the wrong.