5 ms·

Sweden fines pirate $650,000 for illegally sharing a single film

68 points by madhukarah 13y ago

bberrry 13y ago
He actually admitted to sharing 13 films illegally (accused of sharing a total of 517 films). He was an uploader on a private Swedish tracker called Swebits.org which is where the alleged crimes took place.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
  - jeltz 13y ago
    It would have been important if it had been correct. In the verdict it is made clear that the damages are only awarded for "Beck, Levande begravd". So it is 650k per movie. Punitive damages are also illegal in Sweden so the fact that he shared multiple movies does not matter here. https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/902374/12-506-vastmanland-swebits-dom-tingsratten.pdf https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/9023... EDIT: My theory for why they only targeted one movie is to make the trial simpler, and they would not be able to get more money than this anyway. They will charge you with enough movies to reach what you reasonably can pay off.
    - pbhjpbhj 13y ago
      Presumably the copyright holders of the other movies can now prosecute and get the same amount per movie in judgement?
dspillett 13y ago
Fines are not just to recompense the apparent victim of an action, they are intended to deter others from repeating the action. If the risk of getting caught is small the fine needs to he high enough that ChanceOfGettingCaught*Punishment is far enough from zero that it figures in people's minds. Unfortunately this only seems to apply to individuals: companies seem to get slap-on-the-wrist fines were individuals get send-you-to-the-poverty-line fines.
- tspiteri 13y ago
  I find the thought of having punishment inversely proportional to chance-of-getting-caught disturbing. Because if the risk of getting caught is very small (which is the very case the system would be addressing), the punishment would necessarily be disproportionately huge. I can never agree with a disproportionately huge punishment.
  - 3825 13y ago
    I wonder if gp would call for people to be hanged, quartered, and drawn for treason.
    - dspillett 13y ago
      I wasn't calling for, agreeing with, or supporting anything. I was simply stating how such a fine value would likely have been arrived at.
- belorn 13y ago
  The word "fine" here is a mistranslation of the judgment. The court rewarded damages to be paid by the one sentenced. They did not issue any fines. Fines and damages are two different concepts, because one is about restoration (damages), while the other is about punishment and repentance. The first is about the victim, and the second is about the state. In this case, the court decided on $650,000 damages to be repaid to the rights alliance, and as punishment gave a suspended jail sentence and 160 hours of community service. > If the risk of getting caught is small the fine needs to he high enough that ChanceOfGettingCaught*Punishment is far enough from zero that it figures in people's minds. Thats not the point of either fines or damages. In a historical perspective, fines exist because other more inhumane punishments like beating, lashing and shaming were deemed inappropriate. In today's theory, (see http://www.criminology.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.74227.1328107386!/menu/standard/file/2011c_Josefine_Augustsson.pdf http://www.criminology.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.74227.1328107386!...), it's more about providing a standpoint in society about what is acceptable and what is not. It should also be mentioned that fines have a maximum of $600 per crime, or 150 days of a person's current income. Damages on the other hand are only about restoration, and is not allowed to be issued as punishment. It is illegal for the court to issue damages as a form of punishment.
kken 13y ago
This should be put in context. This is no unassuming teenager who downloaded a film via a file sharing network and was caught "distributing" it, due to the nature of file sharing. He uploaded an unreleased movie that has not been released otherwise, thereby causing significant damage to the original producers. Furthermore he got fined extra to due uploading the film in bad quality, thereby damaging reputation.
- Maakuth 13y ago
  > He uploaded an unreleased movie that has not been released otherwise, thereby causing significant damage to the original producers. Furthermore he got fined extra to due uploading the film in bad quality, thereby damaging reputation. What the... I find this highly amusing, as copyright holders have previously argued that high quality copies are also damaging.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    You remind me of two things: 1. I have read (and don't take this as trustworthy; my memory could be failing or my forgotten source could have just been making it up) that after a PR campaign to get mexican prostitutes and their patrons to use condoms, condom use was no more prevalent, but prostitute earnings were up. The campaign had gotten men to ask for their preferred mode, and the prostitutes acted as if they preferred the other mode and charged more for the "accommodation". 2. In the first Myth Adventure book, Skeeve is taught the concept of the "magician's choice". As illustrated in the book, it's used like so: Skeeve has, say, a horse and a lizard. The only magic he can do is an illusion to make the lizard look like a horse. So, to prove to some important individual that he's a mighty magician, he brings his horse and his horse-that-is-secretly-a-lizard. He asks, "would you be so kind as to choose one of these horses?" The dupe points to the real one. "Very good. By your word shall that creature be spared." And he dispels the illusion on the lizard, taking credit for the fearsome ability to curse horses (and, presumably, other things) into lizards. Since that was the only thing he could do, the "magician's choice" consisted of asking his dupe to choose an animal, so that they felt in control, but without specifying any consequences of the choice. Had the guy indicated the fake horse, Skeeve would have cursed "the creature you have doomed with a word". Sadly, I think copyright holders as a class will be able to get away with talking out of both sides of their mouth as long as they don't make both complaints (low quality is especially damaging because it damages the film's reputation, and high quality is especially damaging because it depresses demand for the official product) in the same case. Personally, of those two theories, I think the argument for high quality being more damaging is much stronger.
orjan 13y ago
This isn't a fine. This is the damages he's been sentenced to pay to the rights holders.
- jeltz 13y ago
  And Sweden does not have statutory or punitive damages either so this is all supposed to compensate for real harm.
- Dylan16807 13y ago
  So if the damages for thousands to millions of copies of the movie are being blamed on the initial public seeder, does that mean nobody else in the torrent is responsible for any damages?
  - gizmo686 13y ago
    The damage that a single peer causes is roughly that they themselves are less likely to purchase the movie. There is an aggravate effect of having such a large swarm enable additional people to enter this group, but the contribution of any individual to this is small. In contrast, the initial uploader is what enabled the entire thing in the first place.
e_proxus 13y ago
Here's a nice write up of the actual, bizarre details of how the sum was calculated: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcomputersweden.idg.se%2F2.2683%2F1.540098 http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&tl=en&u=ht... Complementary dictionary: Hittepåsiffror - made-up-numbers filmbranschräv - a sly old movie industry fox ickebevisade - non-proven svajjiga - shaky
drdaeman 13y ago
It's not the first time something like that happened. So, I wonder, what are reactions to such cases except for discussion on Internet forums? Were there any petitions to governments, maybe even some civil protest actions or, on the other hand, initiatives to replace non-anonymous BitTorrent with anonymizing networks?
MichaelGG 13y ago
How was he caught? A specially leaked watermarked version? It seems that if you're in the scene, you'd want to take a lot of network precautions.

68 points by madhukarah 13y ago

He actually admitted to sharing 13 films illegally (accused of sharing a total of 517 films). He was an uploader on a private Swedish tracker called Swebits.org which is where the alleged crimes took place.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- jeltz 13y ago
  It would have been important if it had been correct. In the verdict it is made clear that the damages are only awarded for "Beck, Levande begravd". So it is 650k per movie. Punitive damages are also illegal in Sweden so the fact that he shared multiple movies does not matter here. https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/902374/12-506-vastmanland-swebits-dom-tingsratten.pdf https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/9023... EDIT: My theory for why they only targeted one movie is to make the trial simpler, and they would not be able to get more money than this anyway. They will charge you with enough movies to reach what you reasonably can pay off.
  - pbhjpbhj 13y ago
    Presumably the copyright holders of the other movies can now prosecute and get the same amount per movie in judgement?

dspillett 13y ago

Fines are not just to recompense the apparent victim of an action, they are intended to deter others from repeating the action. If the risk of getting caught is small the fine needs to he high enough that ChanceOfGettingCaught*Punishment is far enough from zero that it figures in people's minds. Unfortunately this only seems to apply to individuals: companies seem to get slap-on-the-wrist fines were individuals get send-you-to-the-poverty-line fines.

tspiteri 13y ago
I find the thought of having punishment inversely proportional to chance-of-getting-caught disturbing. Because if the risk of getting caught is very small (which is the very case the system would be addressing), the punishment would necessarily be disproportionately huge. I can never agree with a disproportionately huge punishment.
- 3825 13y ago
  I wonder if gp would call for people to be hanged, quartered, and drawn for treason.
  - dspillett 13y ago
    I wasn't calling for, agreeing with, or supporting anything. I was simply stating how such a fine value would likely have been arrived at.
belorn 13y ago
The word "fine" here is a mistranslation of the judgment. The court rewarded damages to be paid by the one sentenced. They did not issue any fines. Fines and damages are two different concepts, because one is about restoration (damages), while the other is about punishment and repentance. The first is about the victim, and the second is about the state. In this case, the court decided on $650,000 damages to be repaid to the rights alliance, and as punishment gave a suspended jail sentence and 160 hours of community service. > If the risk of getting caught is small the fine needs to he high enough that ChanceOfGettingCaught*Punishment is far enough from zero that it figures in people's minds. Thats not the point of either fines or damages. In a historical perspective, fines exist because other more inhumane punishments like beating, lashing and shaming were deemed inappropriate. In today's theory, (see http://www.criminology.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.74227.1328107386!/menu/standard/file/2011c_Josefine_Augustsson.pdf http://www.criminology.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.74227.1328107386!...), it's more about providing a standpoint in society about what is acceptable and what is not. It should also be mentioned that fines have a maximum of $600 per crime, or 150 days of a person's current income. Damages on the other hand are only about restoration, and is not allowed to be issued as punishment. It is illegal for the court to issue damages as a form of punishment.

kken 13y ago

This should be put in context. This is no unassuming teenager who downloaded a film via a file sharing network and was caught "distributing" it, due to the nature of file sharing. He uploaded an unreleased movie that has not been released otherwise, thereby causing significant damage to the original producers. Furthermore he got fined extra to due uploading the film in bad quality, thereby damaging reputation.

Maakuth 13y ago
> He uploaded an unreleased movie that has not been released otherwise, thereby causing significant damage to the original producers. Furthermore he got fined extra to due uploading the film in bad quality, thereby damaging reputation. What the... I find this highly amusing, as copyright holders have previously argued that high quality copies are also damaging.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  You remind me of two things: 1. I have read (and don't take this as trustworthy; my memory could be failing or my forgotten source could have just been making it up) that after a PR campaign to get mexican prostitutes and their patrons to use condoms, condom use was no more prevalent, but prostitute earnings were up. The campaign had gotten men to ask for their preferred mode, and the prostitutes acted as if they preferred the other mode and charged more for the "accommodation". 2. In the first Myth Adventure book, Skeeve is taught the concept of the "magician's choice". As illustrated in the book, it's used like so: Skeeve has, say, a horse and a lizard. The only magic he can do is an illusion to make the lizard look like a horse. So, to prove to some important individual that he's a mighty magician, he brings his horse and his horse-that-is-secretly-a-lizard. He asks, "would you be so kind as to choose one of these horses?" The dupe points to the real one. "Very good. By your word shall that creature be spared." And he dispels the illusion on the lizard, taking credit for the fearsome ability to curse horses (and, presumably, other things) into lizards. Since that was the only thing he could do, the "magician's choice" consisted of asking his dupe to choose an animal, so that they felt in control, but without specifying any consequences of the choice. Had the guy indicated the fake horse, Skeeve would have cursed "the creature you have doomed with a word". Sadly, I think copyright holders as a class will be able to get away with talking out of both sides of their mouth as long as they don't make both complaints (low quality is especially damaging because it damages the film's reputation, and high quality is especially damaging because it depresses demand for the official product) in the same case. Personally, of those two theories, I think the argument for high quality being more damaging is much stronger.

orjan 13y ago

This isn't a fine. This is the damages he's been sentenced to pay to the rights holders.

jeltz 13y ago
And Sweden does not have statutory or punitive damages either so this is all supposed to compensate for real harm.
Dylan16807 13y ago
So if the damages for thousands to millions of copies of the movie are being blamed on the initial public seeder, does that mean nobody else in the torrent is responsible for any damages?
- gizmo686 13y ago
  The damage that a single peer causes is roughly that they themselves are less likely to purchase the movie. There is an aggravate effect of having such a large swarm enable additional people to enter this group, but the contribution of any individual to this is small. In contrast, the initial uploader is what enabled the entire thing in the first place.

e_proxus 13y ago

Here's a nice write up of the actual, bizarre details of how the sum was calculated: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcomputersweden.idg.se%2F2.2683%2F1.540098 http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&tl=en&u=ht... Complementary dictionary: Hittepåsiffror - made-up-numbers filmbranschräv - a sly old movie industry fox ickebevisade - non-proven svajjiga - shaky

drdaeman 13y ago

It's not the first time something like that happened. So, I wonder, what are reactions to such cases except for discussion on Internet forums? Were there any petitions to governments, maybe even some civil protest actions or, on the other hand, initiatives to replace non-anonymous BitTorrent with anonymizing networks?

MichaelGG 13y ago

How was he caught? A specially leaked watermarked version? It seems that if you're in the scene, you'd want to take a lot of network precautions.