SO what you are saying is that the site itself is not illegal, so what did they get a fine and jail time for?
Pirate bay court case
- Thread starter Redgie
- Start date
Sparky__H
Sparky__H
I want to know how they expect these guys to cough up £2.5m ? 3 of the 4 are just normal people with normal jobs.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 11,742
- Location
- Northern Ireland
Sure they could just get that big old right wing fascist Carl to bail them out.
That or in a site of 3.5 million users, if 10% donate 10 euro, the fine is paid.
Last edited:
They could ask the nice PTB users... all 200 million of them
Lets face it - If you hadn't heard of it before, you will have now!
I think that rough estimates off advertisement revenue is millions so I doubt the fine is the problem.
that is what i would have thought, and that is why i am shocked.
they didnt supply any illegal material, they just developed a sharing system.
they are just making examples of them because the industry has no control over it and needs to make wild stabs where ever it can
IF the site goes down, lots others will take its place...
I'm sure this has been answered before but the name pirate bay surely suggests that they want pirate data on it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 11,742
- Location
- Northern Ireland
So, is Google next to be taken to court, after all they too assist the downloading of copyrighted material by providing links to sites that host torrents.
They provide a platform where users can share illegal files. By taking this platform out it makes it trickier for user to get these files (and de-incentivises others to start up due to not wanting jail time/a fine).
Cutting out the platform which users can share illegal files seems like a fairly sensible measure to minimise illegal file transfer.
Google didn't set out to help share illegal files. TPB did.
Looks like the collective wisdom of OcUK failed to predict the outcome of this one!
Indeed - I don't understand why the ISP don't (or aren't forced to) just block the torrent sites and suspect newsgroups. They manage to block some black listed sites (child porn for example) so why not torrent sites? It's not hard to compile and maintain a list of the the main sources of torrents.
Indeed - I don't understand why the ISP don't (or aren't forced to) just block the torrent sites and suspect newsgroups. They manage to block some black listed sites (child porn for example) so why not torrent sites? It's not hard to compile and maintain a list of the the main sources of torrents.
Sparky__H
Sparky__H
For that type of income the site would have to be a collage of adverts, not that same damn mobile software.
It would be interesting to see just how much money could be raised if they put out a general appeal?
It would be interesting to see just how much money could be raised if they put out a general appeal?
Incorrect, and this was brought up in the trial. the actual revenue from advertising and other sources not including donations was less than 96,000 euro, the vast majority of which was poured straight back into servers and hosting.
exactly.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 3,762
- Location
- My fabulous ship
Because torrenting is 100% legal. It's as simple as that.
How about if Memorex provided a supply network for its customers to distribute copies of copyrighted material?
Its all stupid and pointless. The music and film industry patted themselves on the back when they shut down kazaa and something new popped up. Even if PB disappears (doubtful) the nature of the internet is that something new will take its place. Theyre just banging their heads against a brick wall.