5 ms·

Imagine BitTorrent Group Sysop Speaks Out as He Heads to Prison

71 points by anons2011 14y ago

rtpg 14y ago
I can't imagine anyone going to jail so long for a non-violent crime.... though it's hard to understand where the limit is. I'd also like to see some people thrown in jail for other non-violent crimes. Punishment seems hard to get right.
- zokier 14y ago
  > Punishment seems hard to get right. That's why some advocate focusing on rehabilitation instead of punishment. I'm not really sure if I agree, rehabilitation sounds bit too close to brainwashing and clockwork orange in my mind.
  - pyre 14y ago
    Well, there is an idea that they should stay in jail until we are reasonably sure they don't pose a danger to society / won't re-offend. When you file for bankruptcy, you are usually required to take some classes on managing your finances. This is a rehabilitation of sorts, but I wouldn't call it 'brainwashing.'
    - bjustin 14y ago
      >Well, there is an idea that they should stay in jail until we are reasonably sure they don't pose a danger to society / won't re-offend. Sounds quite a bit slowly than actively trying to reform them.
      - pyre 14y ago
        Sorry, I wasn't entirely clear. I meant actively trying to reform them, but not releasing them until we know that they are reformed. Some people seem to have the idea that reforming criminals is just a bunch of 'bleeding hearts' going into the prisons and singing 'kumbaya' with the prisoners, then releasing them as 'reformed.'
    - jessaustin 14y ago
      until we are reasonably sure they don't pose a danger to society / won't re-offend This might make sense for murder, but for most lesser crimes it's problematic. If someone is in the habit of getting in bar fights every few times he goes out drinking, would we be justified or even well-served to put him in jail until we're sure he would never go out drinking again? That could be decades! It goes without saying that this idea is extremely problematic with respect to "crimes" against fictitious "property" like we have here.
- tucson 14y ago
  Would be interesting to see statistics of average sentence per crime. Something that would rank all crimes from highest average sentence to lowest, and where visitors can vote for sentences to go up or down. Crowdsourcing justice? Or is it better to leave justice in the hands of the few?
  - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
    >Something that would rank all crimes from highest average sentence to lowest, and where visitors can vote for sentences to go up or down. Sounds like something extremely likely to have the "voters" self-select in a way that biases the results. You can easily imagine e.g. prison companies exhorting all their employees to vote in favor of excessive sentences for the things in danger of having their excessive sentences reduced or eliminated, with the argument that if it happens they'll lose their jobs. But more than that, it seems pretty obvious in general which crimes have excessive penalties: It's the non-violent not-for-profit ones with felony penalties. I'm sure you can think of specific exceptions (e.g. "not-for-profit" state-level espionage), but in general it's a very good heuristic. In particular, the "assume profit from volume" characteristic of some of these laws is a major failure that needs to go. With the drug laws the limits are set sufficiently low that you have recreational users who just buy/have a lot at once entirely for personal use being prosecuted as distributors, and with copyright the number of copies made is so far abstracted from the actual harm to the copyright holder and is so hard to accurately measure that making it the deciding element in criminal law is a blunt instrument at best and to be less kind is exactly the sort of thing that can lead to the felony prosecution of someone like Aaron Swartz. If the government wants to prosecute someone for engaging in a for-profit activity, they should have to actually prove that you made a profit from it.
- smogzer 14y ago
  His punishment is work for the public good for X hours in a way he chooses. He chooses to digitalize and publish works of creativity that deserves to be seen by the masses. As he already done that already; he gets as change, the thank you from the public and a medal for his work even going against the laws.
digitalengineer 14y ago
These IMAGiNE members were charged with several counts of criminal copyright infringement and they eventually received prison sentences ranging from 23 months in prison up to five years". ... " “... he mentions that in his opinion the case should have been a civil one, and he doesn’t see why copyright infringement is a federal offense." Can anyone elaborate why is it a Federal crime, like say kidnapping or bankrobbing?
- chewxy 14y ago
  I'm not American, but doesn't federal crime simply mean that the crime does not fall under the jurisdiction of states? I can totally understand why it is a federal crime - copyright has to be enforced across the country. It'd be rather senseless to enforce copyrights by states. Now, the real issue of course is as what he said: Why is this a crime? Shouldn't this be a civil issue, to be settled between the two parties? This is the part about copyright enforcement laws I don't get: how is it a crime?
  - scarecrowbob 14y ago
    Not that I agree with this, but there are a range of factors that make infringement a criminal offense: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506 http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506 Specifically: "(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution."
  - zokier 14y ago
    > Shouldn't this be a civil issue, to be settled between the two parties I kinda understand at least one reason why it's not that simple. In high profile cases like this, you could have hundreds of copyright holders wanting action. Coordinating all those people could be impossible, and thus legitimate cases would fall flat on their faces just for lack of cooperation.
    - pyre 14y ago
viseztrance 14y ago
In for a penny, in for a pound. I wonder if he would had made any money from this, a better lawyer would had better represented him in court, and thus serve a lesser sentence. That is, even while facing more serious charges.
lucian1900 14y ago
I don't understand why criminal copyright infringement exists. If there is no copyright holder to sue, then by all logic the works should be in the public domain, thus no copyright to begin with.
- samwillis 14y ago
  Not all copy right holders have the financial means to sue for copyright infringement. It should be a criminal offence, what is wrong is the level of punishment associated with different levels of infringement.
  - icebraining 14y ago
    Not all copy right holders have the financial means to sue for copyright infringement. That might be a good reason for funding state-provided attorneys. It's a terrible reason for making it a crime.
    - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
      Providing state attorneys is a bad idea in general. You'll immediately get frivolous lawsuits everywhere if the attorneys don't have discretion to decline cases, and if they do then all you're doing is having the state prosecute a de facto criminal case where the penalty is a fine, except that you've unjustly reduced their burden of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to the preponderance of evidence. Having for-profit copyright infringement be a misdemeanor is not without reason. But it should have to be for-profit, i.e. actual money is proved to go into their pockets, not assumed to be for-profit based on circumstantial nonsense, and the penalty should be very low for first time offenders and no more than a year in any case.
    - jessaustin 14y ago
      I agree this should be a civil matter, but don't complicate matters like this. Typically, wronged parties with limited means are able to hire lawyers on contingency. That's true even if they're facing giant insurance companies that have hundreds of lawyers on retainer. The defendants in this sort of case are likely to have much shallower pockets.
zokier 14y ago
Frankly I think he just sounds like the bitter old man he is. At least the TPB guys are idealistic in a cute way, but Cherwonik just seems self-entitled and grumpy. I might add that the continuous allegations of bribery and corruptness does not really help his case.
- ithcy2 14y ago
  Agreed... I think his punishment is ridiculous, but his own justifications are equally so. He comes off like a whiny teenager who's been caught sneaking out with the car. And I don't think his "I bet I paid a thousand or so for hosting" complaint is going to win him any sympathy. To the uninformed, that's just going to sound like a burglar complaining to the judge that burglary tools cost money.

71 points by anons2011 14y ago

rtpg 14y ago

I can't imagine anyone going to jail so long for a non-violent crime.... though it's hard to understand where the limit is. I'd also like to see some people thrown in jail for other non-violent crimes. Punishment seems hard to get right.

zokier 14y ago
> Punishment seems hard to get right. That's why some advocate focusing on rehabilitation instead of punishment. I'm not really sure if I agree, rehabilitation sounds bit too close to brainwashing and clockwork orange in my mind.
- pyre 14y ago
  Well, there is an idea that they should stay in jail until we are reasonably sure they don't pose a danger to society / won't re-offend. When you file for bankruptcy, you are usually required to take some classes on managing your finances. This is a rehabilitation of sorts, but I wouldn't call it 'brainwashing.'
  - bjustin 14y ago
    >Well, there is an idea that they should stay in jail until we are reasonably sure they don't pose a danger to society / won't re-offend. Sounds quite a bit slowly than actively trying to reform them.
    - pyre 14y ago
      Sorry, I wasn't entirely clear. I meant actively trying to reform them, but not releasing them until we know that they are reformed. Some people seem to have the idea that reforming criminals is just a bunch of 'bleeding hearts' going into the prisons and singing 'kumbaya' with the prisoners, then releasing them as 'reformed.'
  - jessaustin 14y ago
    until we are reasonably sure they don't pose a danger to society / won't re-offend This might make sense for murder, but for most lesser crimes it's problematic. If someone is in the habit of getting in bar fights every few times he goes out drinking, would we be justified or even well-served to put him in jail until we're sure he would never go out drinking again? That could be decades! It goes without saying that this idea is extremely problematic with respect to "crimes" against fictitious "property" like we have here.
tucson 14y ago
Would be interesting to see statistics of average sentence per crime. Something that would rank all crimes from highest average sentence to lowest, and where visitors can vote for sentences to go up or down. Crowdsourcing justice? Or is it better to leave justice in the hands of the few?
- AnthonyMouse 14y ago
  >Something that would rank all crimes from highest average sentence to lowest, and where visitors can vote for sentences to go up or down. Sounds like something extremely likely to have the "voters" self-select in a way that biases the results. You can easily imagine e.g. prison companies exhorting all their employees to vote in favor of excessive sentences for the things in danger of having their excessive sentences reduced or eliminated, with the argument that if it happens they'll lose their jobs. But more than that, it seems pretty obvious in general which crimes have excessive penalties: It's the non-violent not-for-profit ones with felony penalties. I'm sure you can think of specific exceptions (e.g. "not-for-profit" state-level espionage), but in general it's a very good heuristic. In particular, the "assume profit from volume" characteristic of some of these laws is a major failure that needs to go. With the drug laws the limits are set sufficiently low that you have recreational users who just buy/have a lot at once entirely for personal use being prosecuted as distributors, and with copyright the number of copies made is so far abstracted from the actual harm to the copyright holder and is so hard to accurately measure that making it the deciding element in criminal law is a blunt instrument at best and to be less kind is exactly the sort of thing that can lead to the felony prosecution of someone like Aaron Swartz. If the government wants to prosecute someone for engaging in a for-profit activity, they should have to actually prove that you made a profit from it.
smogzer 14y ago
His punishment is work for the public good for X hours in a way he chooses. He chooses to digitalize and publish works of creativity that deserves to be seen by the masses. As he already done that already; he gets as change, the thank you from the public and a medal for his work even going against the laws.

digitalengineer 14y ago

These IMAGiNE members were charged with several counts of criminal copyright infringement and they eventually received prison sentences ranging from 23 months in prison up to five years". ... " “... he mentions that in his opinion the case should have been a civil one, and he doesn’t see why copyright infringement is a federal offense." Can anyone elaborate why is it a Federal crime, like say kidnapping or bankrobbing?

chewxy 14y ago
I'm not American, but doesn't federal crime simply mean that the crime does not fall under the jurisdiction of states? I can totally understand why it is a federal crime - copyright has to be enforced across the country. It'd be rather senseless to enforce copyrights by states. Now, the real issue of course is as what he said: Why is this a crime? Shouldn't this be a civil issue, to be settled between the two parties? This is the part about copyright enforcement laws I don't get: how is it a crime?
- scarecrowbob 14y ago
  Not that I agree with this, but there are a range of factors that make infringement a criminal offense: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506 http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506 Specifically: "(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution."
- zokier 14y ago
  > Shouldn't this be a civil issue, to be settled between the two parties I kinda understand at least one reason why it's not that simple. In high profile cases like this, you could have hundreds of copyright holders wanting action. Coordinating all those people could be impossible, and thus legitimate cases would fall flat on their faces just for lack of cooperation.
  - pyre 14y ago

viseztrance 14y ago

In for a penny, in for a pound. I wonder if he would had made any money from this, a better lawyer would had better represented him in court, and thus serve a lesser sentence. That is, even while facing more serious charges.

lucian1900 14y ago

I don't understand why criminal copyright infringement exists. If there is no copyright holder to sue, then by all logic the works should be in the public domain, thus no copyright to begin with.

samwillis 14y ago
Not all copy right holders have the financial means to sue for copyright infringement. It should be a criminal offence, what is wrong is the level of punishment associated with different levels of infringement.
- icebraining 14y ago
  Not all copy right holders have the financial means to sue for copyright infringement. That might be a good reason for funding state-provided attorneys. It's a terrible reason for making it a crime.
  - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
    Providing state attorneys is a bad idea in general. You'll immediately get frivolous lawsuits everywhere if the attorneys don't have discretion to decline cases, and if they do then all you're doing is having the state prosecute a de facto criminal case where the penalty is a fine, except that you've unjustly reduced their burden of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to the preponderance of evidence. Having for-profit copyright infringement be a misdemeanor is not without reason. But it should have to be for-profit, i.e. actual money is proved to go into their pockets, not assumed to be for-profit based on circumstantial nonsense, and the penalty should be very low for first time offenders and no more than a year in any case.
  - jessaustin 14y ago
    I agree this should be a civil matter, but don't complicate matters like this. Typically, wronged parties with limited means are able to hire lawyers on contingency. That's true even if they're facing giant insurance companies that have hundreds of lawyers on retainer. The defendants in this sort of case are likely to have much shallower pockets.

zokier 14y ago

Frankly I think he just sounds like the bitter old man he is. At least the TPB guys are idealistic in a cute way, but Cherwonik just seems self-entitled and grumpy. I might add that the continuous allegations of bribery and corruptness does not really help his case.

ithcy2 14y ago
Agreed... I think his punishment is ridiculous, but his own justifications are equally so. He comes off like a whiny teenager who's been caught sneaking out with the car. And I don't think his "I bet I paid a thousand or so for hosting" complaint is going to win him any sympathy. To the uninformed, that's just going to sound like a burglar complaining to the judge that burglary tools cost money.