6 ms·

Well that sucks. The US govt probably bribed the Cambodian govt into arresting him on a trumped up charge.

briandear 14y ago
Right. Blame America for Sweeden. Besides the guy's entire MO was distributing stolen files. In the article, the guy's t-shirt says it all. Anyway you slice it, he's no better than the Russian mobsters that steal credit card numbers. If you think everything should be free, then please leave your address so I can help myself to your stuff.
- nobleach 14y ago
  I think the guy's platform was a bit more nuanced than just "steal all da things". He DID help provide a service that overwhelmingly assists pirating of of movies/shows/software/music/etc. But their entire platform is that digital can not be contained. I can't say right or wrong, but I can say copying != stealing. But, if you want my address, fine.... you are welcome to exact copies of my stuff as long as the originals remain.
- ix_ 14y ago
  Stealing is not the same as duplicating.
- EliRivers 14y ago
  "Anyway you slice it, he's no better than the Russian mobsters that steal credit card numbers." That's incorrect. He is better than the Russian mobsters that steal credit card numbers. I have presented as much evidence and analysis for my conclusion as you did, so they must be equally valid. "If you think everything should be free, then please leave your address so I can help myself to your stuff." I am happy to describe to you something I own so that you can make a copy of it. Gosh, it's almost as if copying something isn't actually the same as taking a physical object from someone.
  - archgrove 14y ago
    "I am happy to describe to you something I own so that you can make a copy of it" Fantastic - your comment history indicates you're a programmer of some kind, running a company. I'm sure you've got some interesting insights into this field. If you could just write them up into a decent book, edit it properly so I can understand it, make it pithy, smart and worth reading so I can get the most of your "description", pay someone to draw some decent diagrams, etc, and then ship it over, that'd be great. But because it's just "information", and can be replicated freely, I'm not going to pay you to do any of that. I just want the "information" - the production costs are all up to you. So noone's out anything, any this is a perfectly reasoning thing to expect, right?
    - atlassic 14y ago
      Publishing a book has been on my bucket list for a while. And I have no plans to bitch about it being "stolen". Name recognition and being able to say "I wrote the book on X" is far more valuable than the royalties most authors make these days. So please, steal my book, and ask your friends to steal it too. Your free marketing on my behalf will be most welcome.
      - GHFigs 14y ago
        You're confusing your own choice to give away your own work with the choice of many to take work of others not freely given. It's unreasonable to assume that everybody would make the same choice as you, which is why a creator's right to make that choice is important. Would you, for example, feel the same way about publishing a book if you had no right to keep other people from putting their name on it and claiming it as their own? Or would you rather not have that choice at all?
        vidarh 14y ago
        > Would you, for example, feel the same way about publishing a book if you had no right to keep other people from putting their name on it and claiming it as their own? Or would you rather not have that choice at all? I'd like to point out here that in most countries, copyrights and moral rights are legally entirely separate. Moral rights (the right to be recognized as the creator of a work, and in certain circumstances the right to dis-avow your involvement with a work, if it has been modified in certain ways for example) are generally non-transferable, for example. Trying to conflate the two to argue against someone's belief that reproduction / copying a work is ok is thus rather meaningless - we can easily enough have one without the other.
- Dylan16807 14y ago
  The pirate bay is a directory that helps people get together that are often doing illegal things. The site does not actually know the contents of the files. It does not participate in the behavior. It's better than people that actually deal in credit card numbers. The idea of trumped up charges is still pretty nonsensical.
- fossuser 14y ago
  There are lots of problems with modern copyright (http://zacharyalberico.com/day/2012/01/24 http://zacharyalberico.com/day/2012/01/24 - specific to US law, but explains some of it) In this case though the pirate bay was a tracker/index site and didn't actually host any infringing materials. At the time it operated in Sweden this wasn't a crime. It's largely speculated that the US involved themselves to pressure Sweden to prosecute, but I don't know how substantiated that opinion is.

Right. Blame America for Sweeden. Besides the guy's entire MO was distributing stolen files. In the article, the guy's t-shirt says it all. Anyway you slice it, he's no better than the Russian mobsters that steal credit card numbers. If you think everything should be free, then please leave your address so I can help myself to your stuff.

nobleach 14y ago
I think the guy's platform was a bit more nuanced than just "steal all da things". He DID help provide a service that overwhelmingly assists pirating of of movies/shows/software/music/etc. But their entire platform is that digital can not be contained. I can't say right or wrong, but I can say copying != stealing. But, if you want my address, fine.... you are welcome to exact copies of my stuff as long as the originals remain.
ix_ 14y ago
Stealing is not the same as duplicating.
EliRivers 14y ago
"Anyway you slice it, he's no better than the Russian mobsters that steal credit card numbers." That's incorrect. He is better than the Russian mobsters that steal credit card numbers. I have presented as much evidence and analysis for my conclusion as you did, so they must be equally valid. "If you think everything should be free, then please leave your address so I can help myself to your stuff." I am happy to describe to you something I own so that you can make a copy of it. Gosh, it's almost as if copying something isn't actually the same as taking a physical object from someone.
- archgrove 14y ago
  "I am happy to describe to you something I own so that you can make a copy of it" Fantastic - your comment history indicates you're a programmer of some kind, running a company. I'm sure you've got some interesting insights into this field. If you could just write them up into a decent book, edit it properly so I can understand it, make it pithy, smart and worth reading so I can get the most of your "description", pay someone to draw some decent diagrams, etc, and then ship it over, that'd be great. But because it's just "information", and can be replicated freely, I'm not going to pay you to do any of that. I just want the "information" - the production costs are all up to you. So noone's out anything, any this is a perfectly reasoning thing to expect, right?
  - atlassic 14y ago
    Publishing a book has been on my bucket list for a while. And I have no plans to bitch about it being "stolen". Name recognition and being able to say "I wrote the book on X" is far more valuable than the royalties most authors make these days. So please, steal my book, and ask your friends to steal it too. Your free marketing on my behalf will be most welcome.
    - GHFigs 14y ago
      You're confusing your own choice to give away your own work with the choice of many to take work of others not freely given. It's unreasonable to assume that everybody would make the same choice as you, which is why a creator's right to make that choice is important. Would you, for example, feel the same way about publishing a book if you had no right to keep other people from putting their name on it and claiming it as their own? Or would you rather not have that choice at all?
      - vidarh 14y ago
        > Would you, for example, feel the same way about publishing a book if you had no right to keep other people from putting their name on it and claiming it as their own? Or would you rather not have that choice at all? I'd like to point out here that in most countries, copyrights and moral rights are legally entirely separate. Moral rights (the right to be recognized as the creator of a work, and in certain circumstances the right to dis-avow your involvement with a work, if it has been modified in certain ways for example) are generally non-transferable, for example. Trying to conflate the two to argue against someone's belief that reproduction / copying a work is ok is thus rather meaningless - we can easily enough have one without the other.
Dylan16807 14y ago
The pirate bay is a directory that helps people get together that are often doing illegal things. The site does not actually know the contents of the files. It does not participate in the behavior. It's better than people that actually deal in credit card numbers. The idea of trumped up charges is still pretty nonsensical.
fossuser 14y ago
There are lots of problems with modern copyright (http://zacharyalberico.com/day/2012/01/24 http://zacharyalberico.com/day/2012/01/24 - specific to US law, but explains some of it) In this case though the pirate bay was a tracker/index site and didn't actually host any infringing materials. At the time it operated in Sweden this wasn't a crime. It's largely speculated that the US involved themselves to pressure Sweden to prosecute, but I don't know how substantiated that opinion is.