New Piracy Law Hits Net Traffic Hard

[Arbre]

"dealing with illegal file-sharing is a job for the police. It is their job to enforce the law. Now we have given private corporations the legal right to go after our civilians. That's not how Western democracies work."

Seeming as the police aren't doing that great a job at it, I condone this new law wholeheartedly.

Finally, an anti-piracy measure that looks promising!

It puts into the private sphere (the milieu where large amounts of money are found, controlled by magnates who also own various media) the role of the police.
Funny how when a whole pan of the banking sector, a private affair in the end, fails and leads all worlds on a crash course, we end with other private parties getting even more power, while we know how power works: presidents are moved around through banks, governments, think tanks, military and oil companies, and media companies. It's all a big group of pals.

And the "low" people ask for more! Because they think it's actually good??

 

[Rajin Cajun]

Is it just me or "Swedish Pirate Party" sounds simply awesome for all the wrong reasons?

I keep imagining a ship. Filled with swedish pirates of some kind.

It is probably the only party that at least makes sense with its platform. The whole idea of freedom of information is appealing. Ah leave it to those liberal, weirdo Scandinavians to make a cool party like that. Must be the viking in them.

 

[Freestyle270]

This law screams of big-brother-ism, but then again a lot of countries have open monitoring of internet traffic, even if there are no intellectual property rights protection, or weak enforcement abilities.

 

[Cortheya]

I want to see a legal service where we pay a flat rate yearly, and then we can share files between ourselves legally.

second on that

 

[mattttherman3]

Well since its down a third, I guess that means that a third of all the worlds pirating went thru sweden?

 

[bitzi61]

Handing law enforcement over to private corporations is simply wrong, especially when they are so reluctant to admit that they can target the wrong people or that their CEO's are idiots who truly believe that 1 pirated copy = 1 lost sale.

law enforcement is the domain of organizations that can remain objective whatever the situation, this kind of law turns the supposed victim into the judge, jury and executioner.

Go go Umbrella Corp! (They had their own 'security' group right? You know... the ones that shot people, forced them back into a city swarming with zombies.. and left behind their own people. Yah.. they're morally right in the head to 'enforce' laws..)

 

[Higurashi]

Oh come on! Swedish Pirate Party! What? Too easy? Pfft...still think that's one of the stupidest names for an anti piracy group ever. (Still pretty funny too though xD) For goodness sake, they've even got a ship's flag for a logo! Slap a skull and crossbones on it, maybe hand out some parrots and eyepatches...

You got it. Shall we say a shipload? Standard rates?

Isn't this kind of putting too much power in the hands of private businesses? I don't see this ending well.

I see no actual power. They get the ability to find out who steals their shit. The big thieves do make a difference, so I see why they would want to bring them down.

Handing law enforcement over to private corporations is simply wrong, especially when they are so reluctant to admit that they can target the wrong people or that their CEO's are idiots who truly believe that 1 pirated copy = 1 lost sale.

law enforcement is the domain of organizations that can remain objective whatever the situation, this kind of law turns the supposed victim into the judge, jury and executioner.

Perhaps you should look up what the terms "judge, jury, and executioner" mean, and then look up how civil suits are done.

Yes, and read the article again. This is very far from "law enforcement".

 

[Lord Krunk]

"dealing with illegal file-sharing is a job for the police. It is their job to enforce the law. Now we have given private corporations the legal right to go after our civilians. That's not how Western democracies work."

Seeming as the police aren't doing that great a job at it, I condone this new law wholeheartedly.

Finally, an anti-piracy measure that looks promising!

It puts into the private sphere (the milieu where large amounts of money are found, controlled by magnates who also own various media) the role of the police.
Funny how when a whole pan of the banking sector, a private affair in the end, fails and leads all worlds on a crash course, we end with other private parties getting even more power, while we know how power works: presidents are moved around through banks, governments, think tanks, military and oil companies, and media companies. It's all a big group of pals.

And the "low" people ask for more! Because they think it's actually good??

The "low" people are the pirates. If someone wants to protect their property, then I say go for it.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

"We won't do this for small offenders, this is just for the big fish"

what do they mean by that?

It means they're pissed Pirate Bay ran legal circles around them.

Frankly i'm amazed, Sweden always seemed 100% against this kind of thing. I think the Pirate Bays grandstanding may have something to do with it. Pride goeth before the fall, even for magnificent bastards. What remains to be seen is how LONG this remains to be a law, Sweden doesn't like other people telling them how to handle their shit.

Besides the piracy will just move to other, less nice regions. Like Africa. Put a law in one country and it moves. Unless you have ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT, a -LAW- will never be a successful deterrent against ANYTHING on the internet because it's completly global, and different countries have different laws. And I defy you to try and get a Darfurian warlord to enforce copywrite laws while he makes millions selling bootlegged pirate software to Americans and refunnels that money into buying arms.

Am I saying PIRACY FUNDS TERRORISM!? Of course not. I'm saying it could, if they push it in the westernized nations enough. What did Leia say to Vader? "The harder you squeeze, the more systems will slip through your fingers..."

The OBVIOUS solution is to have a reasonably priced pay to buy Torrent service done by the the legit people. Half of the people who pirate do it for convenient. The other half do it cause it's free stuff, lol, and your never going to stop that half.

In summation, I have a single word with which to respond to those who believe you can eliminate an activity you find morally reprehensible and legally questionable through legistlation.

"Prohibition"

 

[asinann]

It would be nice if the rest of the entertainment industry would wise up like Valve and view piracy as something to compete with rather than hemorrhage resources trying to stamp it out.

But how does one make people buy music rather than pirating it? There is hardly anything you as a publisher can offer to make the CD more attractive.

Try not making a 16 song CD with one song that's worth listening to.

"dealing with illegal file-sharing is a job for the police. It is their job to enforce the law. Now we have given private corporations the legal right to go after our civilians. That's not how Western democracies work."

Seeming as the police aren't doing that great a job at it, I condone this new law wholeheartedly.

Finally, an anti-piracy measure that looks promising!

It puts into the private sphere (the milieu where large amounts of money are found, controlled by magnates who also own various media) the role of the police.
Funny how when a whole pan of the banking sector, a private affair in the end, fails and leads all worlds on a crash course, we end with other private parties getting even more power, while we know how power works: presidents are moved around through banks, governments, think tanks, military and oil companies, and media companies. It's all a big group of pals.

And the "low" people ask for more! Because they think it's actually good??

Nice knee-jerk there. Will somebody please tell me where they get the idea that the copyright holders will suddenly have the ability to go out there and willy-nilly fine people at random? They don't have the role of the police, any more than you have the role of the police is someone breaks a contract with you and you go after them for it.

All this does is allow them to find people who may well be pirating their material. That's it. No other change has happened. The companies always had the ability to sue before, they just didn't have any way of getting evidence. So you guys are saying that being able to obtain evidence of their copyright being violated is a bad thing? Next you'll be saying that companies shouldn't have the ability to track which purchases are made with fraudulent credit cards and be able to try to get their product back.

Because it's already been done. Look at the RIAA, they've been bankrupting families and forcing gifted students out of school. $27,500 for ONE SONG. And you have to prove you didn't download it to not pay the fine.

 

[WickedSkin]

I have a question, not entirely related to this, but relevant.

How come I'm not allowed to rip or download a movie I own? I mean I bought it and I should be able to do whatever I want with it.

EX: I have some DVDs and I'm going on a long trip. Now I want to watch some movies on my laptop as I travel through the country.

Instead of packing 3 DVDs along with me I figure it's a lot easier to just download the movies or rip them onto my laptop. Why would that be illegal? it makes NO sense what-so-ever. I mean I OWN them, I have already payed for them.

 

[Rhayn]

But how does one make people buy music rather than pirating it? There is hardly anything you as a publisher can offer to make the CD more attractive.

Try not making a 16 song CD with one song that's worth listening to.

Obviously, but that wasn't my point. With games you've got the whole manual and possibility for DLC only for people who've bought the game, but you do not with CDs. What I was trying to say is that CDs are not as attractive to BUY than to pirate them, since they only contain the music and nothing else.

 

[stompy]

How come I'm not allowed to rip or download a movie I own? I mean I bought it and I should be able to do whatever I want with it.

I think it's because, with software, all you buy is the licence to use the software, in the way they sold it to you. So, if you bought a physical DVD, of say, V for Vendetta, by law, all you have the right to is watch V for Vendetta by inserting the DVD into some kind of DVD player and watching it. You cannot, by law, copy it (though, I think there may be an exception where you may make one back-up copy which you cannot distribute), lend it to friends, upload it onto a computer, etc.

Because it's already been done. Look at the RIAA, they've been bankrupting families and forcing gifted students out of school. $27,500 for ONE SONG. And you have to prove you didn't download it to not pay the fine.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought burden of proof lies with the plaintiff?

Hell, I'd far rather Sony be able to launch a civil suit than the gov't be able to launch a criminal case.

Why? At least the government is accountable for its actions... private companies aren't.

Isn't this kind of putting too much power in the hands of private businesses? I don't see this ending well.

Neither do I. There's a reason why we don't let businesses run the government, and instead use elected representatives...

 

[Asehujiko]

"We won't do this for small offenders, this is just for the big fish"

what do they mean by that?

It means that everybody with a bittorent client or a p2p program installed or a related website in their broser history will be sued for impossible ammounts of money, have their house repossesed because they don't pay their fines and is jailed because they still don't pay their fines afer that, the same thing they are already doing on a 1 person/month scale.

 

[Ranooth]

I want to see a legal service where we pay a flat rate yearly, and then we can share files between ourselves legally.

We can dream, we can dream.