4 ms·

Are you claiming TPB is not commercial because the person sending the file is not charging the person receiving the file, in a relationship facilitated commerci

Are you claiming TPB is not commercial because the person sending the file is not charging the person receiving the file, in a relationship facilitated commercially by TPB?

Falkvinge 14y ago
TPB may or may not be commercial, and it doesn't matter in the slightest here, as they're aiding a noncommercial and therefore legal sharing of knowledge and culture. Aiding that would always be legal under this proposal. Somebody making money off of aiding a legal noncommercial sharing doesn't make the original sharing commercial and illegal. Again, compare dating. And if you can make money off of people wanting to share culture and knowledge, all the better for you.
- benologist 14y ago
  By that argument there is basically nothing that qualifies as "commercial" file sharing because ultimately those bytes are moving for free whether it's P2P or a bootleg DVD transferring them to a DVD player. Everyone benefits from patent reform, copyright reform, the cost of drugs being reduced, DRM being abolished etc. Why derail those arguments with "and legalize piracy!" when TPB etc's perhaps illicit business models are of no lasting consequence to anyone but the few whose pockets they line?
  - tomp 14y ago
    I think the argument is not so much "legalize piracy" as it is "decriminalize 30% of the society". In this case, it's obvious that the law sucks. Also, it's pretty easy to judge when file-sharing is commercial - whenever it is done by a commercial entity, e.g. a for-profit radio station that would otherwise have to pay public-performance fees.
    - tzs 14y ago
      Falkvinge explicitly said above that it doesn't matter whether or not the entity is commercial.
      - Falkvinge 14y ago
        No, I said that it doesn't matter whether an entity aiding noncommercial filesharing is itself commercial (like The Pirate Bay might be; just having ads does not make an entity commercial). The analogy with the postal service made earlier was actually quite apt. Cheers, Rick
        benologist 14y ago
        I'm increasingly curious what you consider commercial - there's an awful lot of businesses out there with the exact same monetization methods as TPB that are indisputably "commercial". The line between "aiding file sharing" and "file sharing is their business model" is also very, very questionable. We all saw what happened to Mininova when they stopped "aiding".
        Dylan16807 14y ago
        Could you name a few so this discussion can make more sense? TPB could easily run without ads. In my mind adding ads to something should generally not affect legality. A guy who prints DVDs with movies on them and sells them on the street is a commercial pirate. A guy that takes DVDs someone else made and brings them to people is a courier. It's not a very complicated distinction.
        tzs 14y ago
        What about a guy who sets up a service where you submit a link to a torrent, and his service downloads the file and burns it to a DVD and mails it to you, for a fee? If it is legal for you to download a file and burn it, it should be legal for you to hire someone else to do that for you.
        14y ago
ktizo 14y ago
If I want to give something to a mate for free and do this through the post, then the delivery company is making money off the fact that I am doing so. But this does not mean that the transaction between me and my mate is commercial, even though a commercial entity is making money off the delivery.

Are you claiming TPB is not commercial because the person sending the file is not charging the person receiving the file, in a relationship facilitated commercially by TPB?

Falkvinge 14y ago

TPB may or may not be commercial, and it doesn't matter in the slightest here, as they're aiding a noncommercial and therefore legal sharing of knowledge and culture. Aiding that would always be legal under this proposal. Somebody making money off of aiding a legal noncommercial sharing doesn't make the original sharing commercial and illegal. Again, compare dating. And if you can make money off of people wanting to share culture and knowledge, all the better for you.

benologist 14y ago
By that argument there is basically nothing that qualifies as "commercial" file sharing because ultimately those bytes are moving for free whether it's P2P or a bootleg DVD transferring them to a DVD player. Everyone benefits from patent reform, copyright reform, the cost of drugs being reduced, DRM being abolished etc. Why derail those arguments with "and legalize piracy!" when TPB etc's perhaps illicit business models are of no lasting consequence to anyone but the few whose pockets they line?
- tomp 14y ago
  I think the argument is not so much "legalize piracy" as it is "decriminalize 30% of the society". In this case, it's obvious that the law sucks. Also, it's pretty easy to judge when file-sharing is commercial - whenever it is done by a commercial entity, e.g. a for-profit radio station that would otherwise have to pay public-performance fees.
  - tzs 14y ago
    Falkvinge explicitly said above that it doesn't matter whether or not the entity is commercial.
    - Falkvinge 14y ago
      No, I said that it doesn't matter whether an entity aiding noncommercial filesharing is itself commercial (like The Pirate Bay might be; just having ads does not make an entity commercial). The analogy with the postal service made earlier was actually quite apt. Cheers, Rick
      - benologist 14y ago
        I'm increasingly curious what you consider commercial - there's an awful lot of businesses out there with the exact same monetization methods as TPB that are indisputably "commercial". The line between "aiding file sharing" and "file sharing is their business model" is also very, very questionable. We all saw what happened to Mininova when they stopped "aiding".
        Dylan16807 14y ago
        Could you name a few so this discussion can make more sense? TPB could easily run without ads. In my mind adding ads to something should generally not affect legality. A guy who prints DVDs with movies on them and sells them on the street is a commercial pirate. A guy that takes DVDs someone else made and brings them to people is a courier. It's not a very complicated distinction.
        tzs 14y ago
        What about a guy who sets up a service where you submit a link to a torrent, and his service downloads the file and burns it to a DVD and mails it to you, for a fee? If it is legal for you to download a file and burn it, it should be legal for you to hire someone else to do that for you.
        14y ago

ktizo 14y ago

If I want to give something to a mate for free and do this through the post, then the delivery company is making money off the fact that I am doing so. But this does not mean that the transaction between me and my mate is commercial, even though a commercial entity is making money off the delivery.