Ten years in the clink, file-sharing monsters! (If UK govt gets its way)

lixxus

lixxus

lixxus

Soldato
Joined
20 Oct 2006
Posts
2,595
Location
London
Article

"Concerns were also raised about the proposed increase in maximum sentence, which was criticised for being the same or higher than other serious offences such as rape, some firearms offences, rioting and child cruelty."
Click to expand...

How do you justify giving a sentence similar to that for rape in cases involving sharing music files? You don't have to, that's the beauty of being in government.
Click to expand...

You wouldnt steal a car ........:D
 
Last edited:
You wouldn't download a car. **** you, I would if I could, but I can't.

And yet fiddle the public out of £50k in expenses as an MP and get a wee while on the naughty step and your wrist slapped. Fraudulently claim a few £k in benefits and you'll get a criminal record, maybe even jail time. But don't forget, we're all in this together!
 
lixxus said:
Article

You wouldnt steal a car ........:D
Click to expand...

And presumably everyone outraged by this also believes that when their ISP offers "up to 100Mbps" that's what they'll get? Or that because 'dangerous driving' can get you up to two years that this is what you'll automatically get if you go through a traffic light just a fraction too late.

Ten years was already what you could get for copyright infringement. But the actual cases where multi-year sentences have actually been handed out in the UK are for things like trading in $20million of pirated software, channelling £50,000 advertising revenue per month through Latvian banks to South American-registered companies, to recall two cases (neither got ten years, btw). If you share movies online via BitTorrent you're not going to get sent away for a decade, you're going to get a fine.

This is about bringing online infringement in line with offline. Or do you believe that someone printing knock-off install DVDs of software should be treated differently than someone sending ISOs online.

Meanwhile IT news sites go into a feeding frenzy of click-bait revenues whilst nineteen year-old torrenters go off on rants about the "MPAAFIA". :/
 
Only people involved with the online rape of millions of £/$ revenue will end up with long sentences. Don't worry too much about it as the small fry will just get fines so get back to your normal activities.
 
Sounds like it's designed more as a deterrent as opposed to actual sentencing. I doubt anyone will ever do 10 years for file sharing if this was brought in. 10 months even seems harsh.
 
Semple said:
It does sound a bit ridiculous that in theory you could end up doing the same time as someone convicted of rape.
Click to expand...

It's about commercial-scale piracy. The article linked was very misrepresentative. If I had spent two years writing a computer game and then someone took it a distributed it for free costing me tens or even hundreds of thousands of pounds, and wasting two years of my professional life... Would that be inherently better than assault - even a sexual assault - just because it wasn't a physical crime? Whilst respecting the view that another crime is inherently more deserving of punishment, I think I've made a supportable case that you can't just say, like the article does: "but ten years is longer than some people get for ________".

Anyway, thanks to the OP for the link. I've just given the Register the benefit of my gracious opinions on the subject. We'll see that the resident commentards think of it. ;) At least they don't do what Ars Technica does which is hide any sufficiently unpopular posts!
 
With the rampant and open discussion of Kodi etc everywhere, the war on piracy is flawed from the get go. Most people are ignorant to their wrong doing etc.

Best defence against piracy is content delivery, prices etc.
 
This was never a problem before sites like the ***removed*** showed up. Now that every idiot that knows how to yews the internet innit? has access, it's a concern.

It's bloody typical of the Public to ruin a good thing.
 
eldergeek said:
This was never a problem before sites like the ***removed*** showed up. Now that every idiot that knows how to yews the internet innit? has access, it's a concern.

It's bloody typical of the Public to ruin a good thing.
Click to expand...

You can thank the great Mark Zuckerberg for that. He wants and will achieve having the whole world online.
 
MatsyLR said:
PS this only applys to people who upload and share, not download.
Click to expand...

Correct. Although technically torrenting is both. However, (minor point first), I understand that downloading is becoming popular again with faster connections people are more often just streaming the movies and tv shows they want rather than torrenting. And more significantly, I don't think the government is primarily focused on technical details like that. One of the cases they cite in their proposal is about torrenters but is explicitly about the fact that they were the first seeders of new content and that their stated goal was to be the first in seeding new content, rather than just being regular domestic pirates.

So, uh, basically I'm agreeing with you. :)
 
Laughable.

Guy at work mowed down and killed a cyclist, driver was racing a co worker in his new motor and wiped out a stationary chap on the path as he took a breather.

Got 2 years, looking likely to serve only 18 months of that, oh and his job has been kept open for him.

To quote Terry Pratchett "There's no justice, there's just us"
 
Martini1991 said:
With the rampant and open discussion of Kodi etc everywhere, the war on piracy is flawed from the get go. Most people are ignorant to their wrong doing etc.

Best defence against piracy is content delivery, prices etc.
Click to expand...

There are also open discussions about windows media centre, that too isn't of itself a means of piracy.

Yes people can install plugins in kodi, as they can install software linked to piracy in windows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom