Guilty Verdict in Record-Breaking Swedish File-Sharing Case

enigmax
November 1, 2011
74
Print

A guilty verdict has been handed down in Sweden’s largest-ever personal file-sharing trial. The 58-year-old female defendant avoided a jail sentence for sharing more than 45,000 songs online but now faces probation, a fine equivalent to 50 days pay, plus the costs of her defense. Pirate Party leader Anna Troberg described the verdict as “tragic”.

Last month, a Swedish court heard the case against a woman accused of sharing 45,000 music tracks online. No other personal file-sharing case in the country had ever considered so many alleged infringements.

The case dated back to the 58-year-old’s alleged actions in 2007, although it took a full year after IFPI’s investigation for her house to be visited by authorities. During the search a Direct Connect client was found installed on a computer, complete with logs which were later shown to contain entries backing up IFPI’s investigation.

Prosecutor Fredrik Ingblad said that the defendant was guilty of sharing the tracks either deliberately or through criminal negligence.

The main point in the case from the defense, that the 58-year-old did not have the technical knowledge to understand that uploading as well as downloading was being carried out, failed to convince the court of the woman’s innocence, not least because she holds down the job of a systems administrator.

Yesterday the court found the northern Stockholm resident guilty of copyright infringement. She was sentenced to probation and an income-based fine equivalent to 50 days pay – 16,000 kronor, around $2,500.

Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge previously told TorrentFreak that due to the large amount of music being shared in this case, he feared that the prosecution and copyright holders would take the opportunity to up the levels of punishment handed out to file-sharers in future cases.

But in the event, considering the volumes involved the punishment is lower than in a case heard earlier this year when a 26 year-old was found guilty of sharing just 44 tracks but was fined 13,000 kronor, around $2,000.

Nevertheless, Rick is not happy – any fine is too much – and the fact that the defendant also has to pay for her public defender really bothers him

“I attended the trial. You could really see the entitlement in the prosecutor’s eyes; this was just an open-and-shut case,” he told TorrentFreak this morning.

“I find it staggering that the establishment can be so oblivious to the fact that this entire structure is disappearing, and judge honest people who share culture — as if that was something bad — without a second thought. We need to change these laws. The establishment is not going to do it for us.”

Pirate Party leader Anna Troberg is equally disappointed with the verdict.

“This case doesn’t have a victim of crime,” Troberg adds. “It has a victim of law.”

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

The Art Of Spam

Historic sadness . . .
http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

And history repeats itself. It’s amusing how human being never learn.

So MAFIAA scored yet another shameful victory. Good for them. And good for us as the negative publicity increases and heads towards eruption.
- Durr hurr hur
  
  beings*
Njh

$2500 / 45,000 = 5 cents per track. not too bad considering the sums being tossed around in US courts.

still I agree that any fine is too much. Music should be free to hear!

If you’re a fan of an artist you’ll buy the CD, go to the concert, get the t-shirt.

If you’re a casual listener you might buy it on itunes or amazon, the other 99% will download and listen to it for free.

I am the 99%
- Abunchofgibberish
  
  In your attempt to make a semi-clever 99% joke, you contradicted yourself.
djnforce9

Yes, the sooner this old model dies, the better. I seriously doubt music would stop getting created if these large corporations that demand exclusive distribution (and sell music for outrageous prices) disappeared in the future. Something far better and more consumer friendly is bound to replace them.

I think part of the problem are the judges being relatively old and not fully understanding the file-sharing trend and its benefits so they are therefore quick to buy into MAFIAA propaganda rather than condemn it. In the future, those judges will retire and get replaced by someone whom may have also shared files as a youth. Then these cases will hopefully be fair and penalties limited to those PROFITING directly from piracy.
- http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell
  
  Old judges are part of the problem. They simply do not understand the technical details of this stuff, to be blunt, and think that IP address = specific person because the prosecution tells them that it is, when they know damned well it is not.
  - Ven
    
    The defense admitting to the uploading pretty much puts the technical details to bed.
    - http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell
      
      Then this woman had a piss-poor defense and her lawyers should be put up to the bar for charges.
    - http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell
      
      Then this woman had a piss-poor defense and her lawyers should be put up to the bar for charges.
    - Ven
      
      @CK
      
      I don’t know who said it, she may have admitted to it before ever seeking legal council. Most people who aren’t familiar with the legal systems of the world rarely understand how and where being completely truthful and honest can bite them in the ass.
  - Ven
    
    The defense admitting to the uploading pretty much puts the technical details to bed.
  - Obvious
    
    That’s all very well if they find no evidence.
    If they raid a house belonging to the specific IP address and the share folder items match the files they have recorded, it’s a bit difficult to deny the ownership,
    
    Moral: keep your folder to a minimum, STOP using DC++ or similar, mask your IP.
  - Obvious
    
    That’s all very well if they find no evidence.
    If they raid a house belonging to the specific IP address and the share folder items match the files they have recorded, it’s a bit difficult to deny the ownership,
    
    Moral: keep your folder to a minimum, STOP using DC++ or similar, mask your IP.
    - http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell
      
      Actually, no, it isn’t. The fact is that files in a ‘shared’ folder (which could be My Documents or My Music) proves absolutely nothing.
Pingback: Guilty Verdict in Record-Breaking Swedish File-Sharing Case | TorrentForce Blog
http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

For goodness sakes, there were NUMEROUS ways that this woman could say “An IP address does not point specifically to me!”

Was her defense team a bunch of damned nitwits!
- Durr hurr hur
  
  But that would be lying and that would be bad.
  - http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell
    
    Who says that would be lying? It’s only lying if you come to the viewpoint from the start that any allegation against someone = the truth. That is the problem with the legal system in France at the moment.
    - Borderliner
      
      > Who says that would be lying?
      Umm… the evidence? One thing is to have only the accuser’s claim that IP X did domething bad, having this claim backed up by data on the accused side is a whole different matter. What you are suggesting is in the lines of getting caught shoplifting and then proclaiming that you have no idea how all this marked stuff got into your pockets. Often used, but very pathetic.
      
      PS! I apologize for going the “copying = theft” way.
Anonymous

http://tinyurl.com/4skyaqr
- Captain Buzzoverinthehead DFC
  
  Any chance we could get these stupid spammers banned?
- Captain Buzzoverinthehead DFC
  
  Reported to TinyURL – let’s see whether they actually enforce their terms of service.
  - Guest
    
    Nice one. I’ll start reporting too.
  - Guest
    
    Nice one. I’ll start reporting too.
Jimbo

Anna Troberg described the verdict as “tragic”. i call it already written, before the trial began. yet another case of ignorant judges making rulings over something that they have no knowledge of, except for the ‘brown envelope’ that dropped on their desk!
- Anonymous
  
  I’d like to leave something brown on the Judge’s desk.
- Anon
  
  The bad thing is that the judge probably thinks he understands.
gudrun

It’s horrible, horrible.Like a chicken
Iampirate

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/nov/01/governments-must-not-censor-internet?newsfeed=true
- Anon
  
  They still don’t allow comments I see…
http://www.facebook.com/fredrikkarlsson1 Fredrik Karlsson

TPB got jailtime for assisting in commiting copyright infrightment of 30-ish
Joey

I read yesterday on here that the US would soon be cut off from the PB. What changes can we make to ‘stay in the loop’? Mucho Thanko!!!
- http://www.facebook.com/PCR.Tech.SC Tim Holmes
  
  VPNs
- http://www.facebook.com/PCR.Tech.SC Tim Holmes
  
  VPNs
- Anon
  
  Escape while you still can.
Anonymous

What is this “Pirate Part” in the summary?
ThumbsUpThumbsDown

It bad, very bad, and, it will get worse.

We will be angrier and more indignant each day. We will be made angrier with
each new example of yet another digital neighbor ensnared in predatory legalities
which we know never would have been written by a free, humane, and democratic people.

We will be told each day, “These laws are fair.”

We will be told, “Your contractual obligations are the result of arms length bargaining between equal counterparties and are therefore fully enforceable legalities.”

We will be told, “Of course you’ve had the benefit of full disclosure prior to signing.”

We will be told, “Your democratic legislators have only your best interest and the social good at heart.”

We will be told, “Long term copyright laws are necessary in order to fairly compensate artists and distributors.”

Under the burden of all these lies and the repressions which will enshrine them a small fllament of our integrety will remain, crushed almost beyond recognition; and that part of our humanity will be very very angry.

Anger is good.

Ricks comment is spot on, “We have to change these laws…” But it will require very angry people indeed to mass before the voting booths with voices powerful enough
to throw the corporations out of the legislatures and replace their shills with human voices that speak of human rights and human priorities as attributes of human beings rather than businesses.
- Anon
  
  Anger is good.
  
  Intelligence is better.
  Corporations are nothing more than groups of human beings on common mission. Without these groups of other humans you’d not have a computer to post your rubbish. Nor electricity to turn it on.
  
  The facts are that artists AND their agents, not just the rights holders anymore, are influencing legislators because there is nothing “human” about hiding behind a VPN or spoofing someones wireless and making unlawful (free) copies of work the creators intend for sale, and the artists know it now. So they are standing up for their rights, right that exist for the creator of the work regardless of the format of the work itself. And that’s the part the pirates have always gotten wrong, their sense of selfish entitlement to everything free, piracy is parasitic and doomed to nearly ruin the internet we all love, the same as credit card fraud, spoofing and a lot of other parasitic digital behavior.
  
  Without their humanity, corporations are empty real estate, you fool. If you honestly believe that human voices, human rights and human priorities are not an inherent part of the very human beings who work for larger companies, you should get out of the house more often. Maybe meet a corporate employee–another fellow human being– now and then.
  
  Or at least say thank you to the corporation that created your computer and stop using it to post your self-important rubbish.
  
  http://www.copyrightalliance.org/
  
  http://artistsagainstdigitaltheft.com/
  
  http://www.copyhype.com/
  - Anon
    
    What else is credit card fraud but “sharing” someone elses credit card number? Only a copy was made. The owner still has the original so no harm was done.
    
    lol
    - http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy
      
      “Anger is good. Intelligence is better. Corporations are nothing more than groups of human beings on (sic) common mission. Without these groups of other humans you’d not have a computer to post your rubbish. Nor electricity to turn it on.”
      The RIAA and MPAA are not corporations. Those two things are monopolies. Big difference. They control all of the music and all of the movies which are created professionally, putting them at extremely high prices.
      Corporations often do things that are bad, or corrupt. Did you hear about that company which gave Syria equipment to censor the internet?
      That one, was exposed.
      However, that is not the main point I want to go over here.
      Oh, damn, there are lots of points that I want to make.
      “The facts are that artists AND their agents, not just the rights holders anymore, are influencing legislators.”
      Are you sure? Other than Lily Allen, I don’t see any artists who have straight out said that they like legislation like this. Have you heard what has been said by Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber?
      They contradict you, to say the least.
      There are other artists who would agree, see Dan Bull and others. I’m not going to list them all, because my screenreader is already slowing up, and I haven’t even gotten to my final point yet.
      Oh, one more thing about Justin Bieber, despite Justin Bieber actually saying that he disagrees with the copyright legislation in s. 978, openly and publicly, his lawyers are still trying to end the “Free Bieber,” campaign.
      “What else is credit card fraud but “sharing” someone else’s credit card number? Only a copy was made. The owner still has the original so no harm was done. lol”
      Imagine that Bob Doe has just shared a song with you. Every time he listened to the song, the quality of that song degraded. Because he shared with you, every time you listened to it, the quality degraded. Yes, I am talking about the audio quality here.
      That is how a credit card works. If I were to tell you that my credit are number was XXXXXXXX and so on, you could use it, and every time, the amount of money on that credit card will get lower, therefore degrading the quality of that credit card, so to speak.
      In all reality, if Bob Doe shared a song with you, you could listen to it as many times as you want, and the quality of that song will not degrade. The only thing will get lower from the copy is the true value of the song, which is calculated by the rarity of the song. That’s one thing with computers and IT that you guys don’t understand; the amount of times you can copy something is virtually limitless. Therefore, digital products have absolutely no value. Also, digital products, unlike credit cards, do not store anything which is not copyable.
      Why aren’t file sharers going around copying money and doing things like that? Because they do understand the importance of money, and if money were to be copied, a global inflation would begin.
      Does this make any sense? I am really trying my hardest to explain the realities of the copy.
    - Anon
      
      @ Alyssa
      
      “Therefore, digital products have absolutely no value….I am really trying my hardest to explain the realities of the copy.”
      
      You might stick to your day job, Ms. Blindy.
      The reality is a digital copy is marginally no-cost only after the original is created and the copying and distribution equipment is purchased and into place. But the act of creation, digital or otherwise, begins with talent, is honed with schooling, requires lots of practice and often professional instruction and equipment to practice on, a studio to hold the equipment, transportation, marketing, photography and so on. Even a distributor like iTunes or Amazon has huge server distribution and electrical costs, but even if the artist can take the time to write, self-record, self-market, self-photograph and self-distribute, they still need the time ($) to do it and the equipment and bandwidth to do it on.
      
      So the facts are quite different, Alyssa, and your “facts” are simply wrong.
      
      The arc of education and practice that takes raw talent and refines it into professional quality creation is time consuming and remarkably expensive and it all needs a roof over its head and food in its stomach the entire time, and it all needs to be recouped one digital sale at a time, not a pirated copy Alyssa, a sale, not a donation when you feel like it Alyssa, a sale or do without it. That’s what the artists are saying now, not just the rightsholders and I gave you three links to begin to educate yourself.
      
      “Does this make any sense?”
      
      No, Alyssa, you do not. You are ignorant of even the most basic realities in the creative digital arts. But these realities are not lost on those who do the actual work: the musical and graphic and literary creators, their representatives and the governments that will either teach you to purchase merchandise in all its forms or you’ll learn to do without it. The legislators the world over will continue to pass laws and raise penalties until you have no means through sheer punishment to infringe any longer. And I think on some level you understand this but you are so young and so greedy in your own mind to “digital products [that] have absolutely no value” you don’t care to open your eyes.
      
      Fair enough. The tide is turning. Stay willfully blind, Alyssa, keep making free copies that pay nothing to the creators and end up another statistic if that’s how you define your integrity.
    - Anon
      
      @ Alyssa
      
      “Therefore, digital products have absolutely no value….I am really trying my hardest to explain the realities of the copy.”
      
      You might stick to your day job, Ms. Blindy.
      The reality is a digital copy is marginally no-cost only after the original is created and the copying and distribution equipment is purchased and into place. But the act of creation, digital or otherwise, begins with talent, is honed with schooling, requires lots of practice and often professional instruction and equipment to practice on, a studio to hold the equipment, transportation, marketing, photography and so on. Even a distributor like iTunes or Amazon has huge server distribution and electrical costs, but even if the artist can take the time to write, self-record, self-market, self-photograph and self-distribute, they still need the time ($) to do it and the equipment and bandwidth to do it on.
      
      So the facts are quite different, Alyssa, and your “facts” are simply wrong.
      
      The arc of education and practice that takes raw talent and refines it into professional quality creation is time consuming and remarkably expensive and it all needs a roof over its head and food in its stomach the entire time, and it all needs to be recouped one digital sale at a time, not a pirated copy Alyssa, a sale, not a donation when you feel like it Alyssa, a sale or do without it. That’s what the artists are saying now, not just the rightsholders and I gave you three links to begin to educate yourself.
      
      “Does this make any sense?”
      
      No, Alyssa, you do not. You are ignorant of even the most basic realities in the creative digital arts. But these realities are not lost on those who do the actual work: the musical and graphic and literary creators, their representatives and the governments that will either teach you to purchase merchandise in all its forms or you’ll learn to do without it. The legislators the world over will continue to pass laws and raise penalties until you have no means through sheer punishment to infringe any longer. And I think on some level you understand this but you are so young and so greedy in your own mind to “digital products [that] have absolutely no value” you don’t care to open your eyes.
      
      Fair enough. The tide is turning. Stay willfully blind, Alyssa, keep making free copies that pay nothing to the creators and end up another statistic if that’s how you define your integrity.
    - http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy
      
      @anon
      If you really want to play this game, Mr. © I’m willing to play.
      Let’s start by going over the difference between what you assume, and what is true, Mr. ©.
      “keep making free copies that pay nothing to the creators and end up another statistic if that’s how you define your integrity”
      Hold up. You, Mr. © are accusing me, right here, in this text, of making illegal copies. When have I said that I make illegal copies? I haven’t, because I do not make them. However, I understand, and support, those who make illegal copies, Mr. ©. I know and understand their reasoning behind it, and it is much bigger than where you are going, Mr. ©.
      The recording industry is taking monopolies over the sheer product of music. They are demanding more and more for it, and demanding that file sharing websites be blocked, etc. etc. etc. PROTECTIP, s. 968 while Rihanna, MNM, and all sorts of others make millions and millions and millions of dollars, just through advertisements that are put on the radio. The strangest part? The record industry still ends up making all of the money.
      Something even stranger, Mr. © is the fact that there are artists who are trying to become popular, but because the radio only takes those “professional” songs recorded by studios, Mr. ©, the new artists can’t even come about.
      And with your bill, S. 968, Mr. ©, the artists will no longer be able to share their music through bit torrent and such types of protocols.
      Mr. ©, you are the one who can’t see things from both sides. In fact, only when I started meditating every day, Mr. ©, did I begin to understand. Only when I began to meditate, did I realize there was more to the “pirate” movement than “I want my music and movies free.”
      There is a lot more to it, Mr. ©.
      “Therefore, digital products have absolutely no value….I am really trying my hardest to explain the realities of the copy”
      “the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something:”
      I think you know what that defines. Music, is not physically “worth” anything once it is copyable.
      A movie is not “worth” anything once you can make a copy of it.
      The only way at which it is worth something, is if you believe it is worth something.
      So many critics can go and tell you how much a song, or movie is worth, and they would all be different.
      However, with a house, where things are so mathematically set, value changes upon the amount of space in the house, the amount of appliances in the house, etc. etc.
      When I say “Music has no value,” I am speaking of physical value.
      That may be where you are getting confused.
      Maybe you, Mr. ©, should try to understand the depth of our values, the way we think, and how we want to give the artists money, but maybe, we want to follow the model set out by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
      Now, I really can’t do this now; I have a long day ahead of me tomorrow so I must get to sleep, but in all honesty.
      It’s those like you who are ignorant. Ignorant of the ways we can compromise.
      There will need to be compromise between your extremists, and our extremists. That, will make better, more flexible, copyright law which will protect the artist, and not some label who acts as a proxy between the artist and the public.
      Mr. ©, what is it that you say? That is “not human” for “pirates” to hide behind VPN’s and proxies?
      Well, it’s not human for your artists to hide behind proxies (record labels,) Mr. ©
      It’s not human for your record labels to round people up into these huge lawsuits based on sheer numbers (IP addresses) Mr. ©.
      And before I go, one more thing I will say.
      I have four books, all expressing different views on Intellectual Property. I like to read them, analyze them, and think about them while listening to CC new age music.
      So, Mr. ©, I understand that your impressions of me as an uneducated person who doesn’t know anything about copyright, and only cares about “free stuff” are very wrong.
      Thanks for the good laugh tonight, and goodnight, Mr. ©.
      ©=copyright
      I hope you have lots of dreams, with lots of ©.
      Don’t let them “pirates” sink your ship.
    - Anon
      
      @ Alyssa
      
      “maybe, we want to follow the model set out by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.”
      
      Oh really? Like Fred von Lohmann, once senior staff attourney for the EFF who left for the MONEY from GOOGLE as their Senior COPYRIGHT Counsel?
      
      Lol
      Fred made damn sure HE GETS PAID.
      Go to bed Alyssa, you have a long day tomorrow. Listening to new age cc music while meditating and reading your four copyright books must be really exhausting and remember, digital files have no value after they’ve been copied.
      
      Or some ignorant thing like that.
    - Anon
      
      @ Alyssa
      
      “maybe, we want to follow the model set out by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.”
      
      Oh really? Like Fred von Lohmann, once senior staff attourney for the EFF who left for the MONEY from GOOGLE as their Senior COPYRIGHT Counsel?
      
      Lol
      Fred made damn sure HE GETS PAID.
      Go to bed Alyssa, you have a long day tomorrow. Listening to new age cc music while meditating and reading your four copyright books must be really exhausting and remember, digital files have no value after they’ve been copied.
      
      Or some ignorant thing like that.
    - Anon
      
      I don’t know what weak system your credit cards use, but mine are useless without username + password + bank generated number and correct feedback through a device given to me by my bank.
http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy

I would agree that this case was so easy for the anti-piracy people because of the lady’s job as a systems administrator.
And, I think I found a typo…
“Pirate Part leader Anna Troberg described the verdict as “tragic”.”
I’m suffering from Stockholm Syndrome…
Wow.
I don’t really know why I can’t stop laughing about Stockholm; guess it’s just a, natural reaction to this craziness…
- http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy
  
  @anon:
  First of all, just because I divulged that I do my meditations while reading books on Intellectual Property Law does not give you the right to think that, this is the only thing I do, because quite frankly, it is not.
  Also, just because the previous founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation has become corrupt, that does not speak for the entire organization, or its entire business model and way.
  If you want to really go into corruption and people only caring about money, read about the ridiculously corrupt, “pay up or else” scams which are going around, and are now set to go to Australia.
  If you think this is right, if you think this is a good thing, then, that is quite corrupt in itself.
  You and your friends at the Copyright Alliance all know that the Pay up Or Else schemes are not going to go on forever; you know how bad they are, and how inane they are. Suing a dead person? Wow, that’s really low of you and your group.
  So, if you want to find corruption in the EFF, I can certainly find corruption in the copyright groups.
  And it doesn’t take me very long to do so.
Pingback: P2PTalk » Guilty Verdict in Record-Breaking Swedish File-Sharing Case
Pingback: Guilty Verdict in Record-Breaking Swedish File-Sharing Case | Links Daily
LOLZ-IFPI

More ammo for the IFPI to do what the US is about to do with the PROTECT IP ACT.
PowerlessPeasant

That is one low-paid sysadmin. $50 a day, in Sweden!?
Shocker.
Although if she didn’t figure large DC hubs to be inherently insecure, she’s hardly going to be a good one…
Fake

No police time to investigate bankers!

No space in prison for rapists!

All our resources are for finding and locking up little old women who share music!

What will future generations make of our choices?
Anonymous

tiny.cc/qcfnd
- Captain Buzzoverinthehead DFC
  
  Reported to TinyCC as spam. We’ll see how that goes…
ElJefeHugoChavez

I like a nice, long, jaunty scarf to keep me warm in the winter times.
ThumbsUpThumbsDown

We begin first by giving credit that the standard of analysis of this Anon is significantly more coherent and more responsible than what we see regularly on this site and on the internet in general. Fair minded people will look past his categorical descriptoin of my posting as “self important rubbish” or at least reserve judgement untill they have read my postings and can decide for themselves what coherence and insight might benefit them therein. I would like to offer this Anon a better explanation than he might normally expect to receive, and, a more consructive understanding than what his present posting offers, for why we dissent from his corporate and copyright friendly world view.

First point: This Anon answers my comment that anger is good (I ment only that anger is good as a necessary precurser to effective political action) by claiming that “intelligence” is better. I would put it that we have sufferred horrtbly from the misapplication of both: In the American South of the 1950′s a black man was considered “intelligent” if he was “smart” enough to stay “legal” by eating his lunch next to the outhouse at the back of the department store. Better intelligence? I do not think so. I say that it was only when his anger infomed his intelligence that he became enlightened enough to his humanity to insist that the laws be chaged to enable him to own space at the human table. For years America’s dominant corporate bankers could flaunt their intelligence by the elaborate pyramid of exotic intruments which they had created at the heart of the American economy. Was this better intelligence? Don’t we know better now?.

Second point: This Anon tells us that corporations are nothing more than people
on a common mission. Yet, no first year law student in any western jurrsdiction can afford to misunderstand the idea that the corporation is a legally real entity separate from the shareholders who own it. It is through this constructive legal fiction of “personhood” that shareholders are removed from legal liability for corporate acts. That Anon is wrong here is a matter of basic law. Anons’ claim implies that there is a moral singularity, a common interest in humanity, between people at the centre of these corporations and the rest of society. I would like to express that the law in its construction of the legal fiction of Corporate personhood, specificly absolved shareholders and employees from liability for corporate acts, and, specficly limited the extent of possible claims against corporations to the level of their corporate equity. So much for the unity of human interest between corporations and the society at large. Anons’ claim, to the extent that it expresses a unity of interest between shareholders and corporations, is most compelling only at the social and political level (not legal), and it produces exactly the opposite of what Anon would want us to believe: I mean, first, that it is in regard to the greatest concentrations of private wealth and the steepest concentrations of oligopolistic and monopolistic power in our markets that we see huge singularity of interest between insider management, insider shareholders, and the corporations they are invested in. Second, the result of this is the expression in enacted law
of the vast gulf between the interests of our elites, corporate and otherwise, in perpetuating a system that extends and concentrates their priviledges into infinity and the rest of our democratic citizenry which must find sustenance at the bottom or middle of the pile in a system that every day allows less opportunity and produces more debasement, not as an afterthought, but as a matter of directed policy. We do not say that our elites are genericly less worthy, but we do say that the practices and systems that are in place to perpetuate their previledges afflict the rest of the society horribly. We want this Anon to understand that these are our views, not because we are distracted or confused or otherwise uninformed, but because we can see clearly enough to know that it is the presence of these corporations in our legilatures that has rendered us mute and unwanted in our legislatures. What else explains these laws? Perhaps a one or two or three hundred year copyright law is good for this Anon. Not for the rest of us. Perhaps a bankrupcy law that denies bankrupcy default protection for families drowning under credit card debt is good for this Anon. But not for the rest of us. And when just two years later, the seven largest banks on the planet (the very banks whose might denied these families bankrupcy protection) grabbed our legislative leaders by the balls and told them seven trillion bucks or else, and, incidentally, these bankrupcy laws apply only to families; not to us, because we are too big to fail, the irony of this situation was wasted on this Anon. But not on us, not on the rest of us.

This Anon tells us (“You fool”, he calls us) that there are good people working hard for the common good within these large corporations. Once again he’s right: They are honest, hard working people who live on one or two times minimum wage. Their social security and medicare benefits must be reduced, they’re told.
They can’t understand why the health insurance company that took their payments shows them ten pages of fine print each time they file a claim. They can only live paycheck to paycheck so when they’re told that their cable bill is twice what they were told it wold be, they get angry because they understand the meaning of abuse. And then when their mortgage payment doubles because a piece of fine print called an ARM One Year Option Clause kicks in, then they start to seethe. They become really really angry.

This Anon would counsel us, that intelligence is better.

I repeat that anger is a good thing: It is what makes us speak truth to power. It is what makes us insist, even on the rack, that we are still human beings.
- Anon
  
  Wow. Talk about a pointless, strawman argument.
  
  Anytime you equate civil rights and the current state of corporate personhood with hiding behind a VPN so you can fill your harddrive unlawfully with stolen entertainment, we’ve reached the end of our discussion. Do what you wish and take your chances. I’ll keep working to see that you get caught and significantly punished for digital theft. It is what it is.
- http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy
  
  From what I am seeing, he will just never get it. It’s sort of, sad.
  It reminds me of earlier, when I was trying to explain the concepts of quantum physics to a group of people. I told them that we do not know something with certainty until we see it. For example, if you roll a dice, the combinations are all virtually sitting in front of you, until you look at the die and you see what the numbers truly are. No one understood it; everyone said that basically, it is what it is as soon as the die are rolled. The numbers are there. I also tried to explain how a tree doesn’t make a sound when it falls, unless there is something to hear or record that sound. Without the presence of something with the capability of getting auditory information, only waves audible to the ear are being created by the fall of that tree. No “sound” is created whatsoever.
  It is this type of Tunnel Vision which keeps our anon coming back to this site, and bringing us to write so many explanations of our values. It is that type of same Tunnel Vision which motivates him, and inability to look deeper.
  Music has no physical value. The value that music has is whatever value you put it at, when you get your copy.
  The internet is a different world, which integrates new concepts and old ones, making them clash together, sometimes for the bad, and sometimes for great purposes.
  Our Anon, who likes to stick to the status quo, and keep all the same, does not accept the change which is going on.
  He also does not understand how you could be possibly making clear analogies; he only becomes upset that you are bringing civil rights movements of history into this discussion of Intellectual Property and its ethics.
  Now, this Anon is not alone. There are other people on his side, just as we are not alone; there are others that support us.
  Eventually, we will all compromise, hopefully, and find the solution that satisfies all parties involved.
  We will probably see what happens anon.
  - Anon
    
    If you’ll forgive the presumption, Alyssa, the mistake you are making is one all young people make. Society as it is, is the perfect reflection of our values and our true nature. Some will exploit and prevail, some will be exploited and fail. This reaches back to the beginning of human time because it is who we are.
    
    You appear to honestly believe that a new format, a digital format, can wipe clean thousands of years of history and more importantly, hundreds of years of near universally agreed upon values about business, fair play, the inherent human rights of the creator (codified by the United Nations, not incidentally.)
    
    Civil Rights embraced an honor that nothing was in it for those who were not black and yet stood up for it. Pirates preach altruism but in the end, always evidence they are in this for free stuff, whether it takes a vpn or encryption, spoofing and blaming it on someone else, it’s always about avoiding payment and getting something free for THEM. There is no altruism in piracy because without the free entertainment, your cause withers.
    
    You’d get a lot more respect if you ran the risk with nothing in it for yourself. THAT’s what civil rights were all about. Risk with no personal reward. THAT’s why it is so cheap for pirates to wrap themselves in that noble cause. The black man couldn’t do it on his own. It required non-blacks (who already HAD their rights) to stand up FOR him. That’s not what pirates do. If they don’t get free stuff one way, they will find (technically) another. THAT, Alyssa, is what pirates do. Getting stuff remains the point. Pirates take free stuff every second.
    
    It’s cheap and disrespectful on so many levels of historical significance, respect for the creator and payment as evidence of that respect or just leave it alone and do without and let the market simply take the creator away. Thousands of years of barter is the basis for this. Piracy is piracy. Call it “sharing” and it’s still ripping off the one who actually did the work for you.
    
    I feel for you in some ways. I remember when my ideals so clouded my eyes I struggled with reality until reality, as it always does and always will, won. Reality IS. It always prevails because it’s real. But this time is different. You’ve been given profound tools, trusted to you with no lawful right to them at all, just a global agreement that if you don’t abuse them to much, you can keep and use and enjoy them.
    
    You are too young to understand this. You keep pushing as if your ideals might trump the truth of human nature. You, too, will be lost if you don’t mature and gain wisdom before it is too late.
    
    We all lived where you do, Alyssa, but we didn’t have your technology. Silly you to believe that mere tech can change who we are. We’ve been here before. We’ll be here always because this is who we are. Storm the portals of your government or sit down, Alyssa. Your pointless support of unlawful infringement agitation only strips the rest of us of our rights and when you gain some vantage, you’ll see the damage you’ve done.
    - http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy
      
      Change can and may easily occur in society. The internet is a second world, whether we like it or not. Or, maybe, that is where the debate really comes in, where differences in views and differences in estimates of society come in. Many people on your side do not see what the inter webs are. The internet is completely new, a world where bits make up a bite, instead of atoms making up particles. The internet is a world which works because we invented it, all other “worlds” so to speak, have come by biological factors, or maybe even quantum factors. there are many ways at which the internet is a different world, where values of marketing and capitalism can change. See the book, “The Pirate’s Dilemma,” by Matt mason.
      Piracy is not all about getting free things, as much as you may think that is all it is about. It is a new way for people to express a need for change. There is something much deeper than just “free stuff” in the movement.
      I used to feel the same way you did, I used to, but that changed. I almost feel for you, the same way at which you feel for me. I feel as if you can not except changes which are coming, and you feel that I can not accept the way it is is how it is is how it is, and so on, so forth.
      That’s where things get so heated, and it saddens me to see that have to happen.
      You would think that if “piracy” is so big, copyright holders would look to negotiate laws which would help them; they would look for a compromise.
      But no.
      You can’t argue that piracy is so small that no change to laws is needed, that would be hypocrisy.
      You are trying to preserve your views by passing things like s. 968, s. 978, H.R. 3261, and even H.R. 1981.
      All things which I have signed petitions against.
      There is a difference between the physical model which is made up of atoms, and the virtual model which is made up of bits.
      If you can’t even see me on that, then there is no reason to even continue this debate because I predict it will get hostile. I don’t need anymore of that energy at the moment.
      Thank you.
      ~Alyssa
    - http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy
      
      Change can and may easily occur in society. The internet is a second world, whether we like it or not. Or, maybe, that is where the debate really comes in, where differences in views and differences in estimates of society come in. Many people on your side do not see what the inter webs are. The internet is completely new, a world where bits make up a bite, instead of atoms making up particles. The internet is a world which works because we invented it, all other “worlds” so to speak, have come by biological factors, or maybe even quantum factors. there are many ways at which the internet is a different world, where values of marketing and capitalism can change. See the book, “The Pirate’s Dilemma,” by Matt mason.
      Piracy is not all about getting free things, as much as you may think that is all it is about. It is a new way for people to express a need for change. There is something much deeper than just “free stuff” in the movement.
      I used to feel the same way you did, I used to, but that changed. I almost feel for you, the same way at which you feel for me. I feel as if you can not except changes which are coming, and you feel that I can not accept the way it is is how it is is how it is, and so on, so forth.
      That’s where things get so heated, and it saddens me to see that have to happen.
      You would think that if “piracy” is so big, copyright holders would look to negotiate laws which would help them; they would look for a compromise.
      But no.
      You can’t argue that piracy is so small that no change to laws is needed, that would be hypocrisy.
      You are trying to preserve your views by passing things like s. 968, s. 978, H.R. 3261, and even H.R. 1981.
      All things which I have signed petitions against.
      There is a difference between the physical model which is made up of atoms, and the virtual model which is made up of bits.
      If you can’t even see me on that, then there is no reason to even continue this debate because I predict it will get hostile. I don’t need anymore of that energy at the moment.
      Thank you.
      ~Alyssa
    - http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy
      
      Change can and may easily occur in society. The internet is a second world, whether we like it or not. Or, maybe, that is where the debate really comes in, where differences in views and differences in estimates of society come in. Many people on your side do not see what the inter webs are. The internet is completely new, a world where bits make up a bite, instead of atoms making up particles. The internet is a world which works because we invented it, all other “worlds” so to speak, have come by biological factors, or maybe even quantum factors. there are many ways at which the internet is a different world, where values of marketing and capitalism can change. See the book, “The Pirate’s Dilemma,” by Matt mason.
      Piracy is not all about getting free things, as much as you may think that is all it is about. It is a new way for people to express a need for change. There is something much deeper than just “free stuff” in the movement.
      I used to feel the same way you did, I used to, but that changed. I almost feel for you, the same way at which you feel for me. I feel as if you can not except changes which are coming, and you feel that I can not accept the way it is is how it is is how it is, and so on, so forth.
      That’s where things get so heated, and it saddens me to see that have to happen.
      You would think that if “piracy” is so big, copyright holders would look to negotiate laws which would help them; they would look for a compromise.
      But no.
      You can’t argue that piracy is so small that no change to laws is needed, that would be hypocrisy.
      You are trying to preserve your views by passing things like s. 968, s. 978, H.R. 3261, and even H.R. 1981.
      All things which I have signed petitions against.
      There is a difference between the physical model which is made up of atoms, and the virtual model which is made up of bits.
      If you can’t even see me on that, then there is no reason to even continue this debate because I predict it will get hostile. I don’t need anymore of that energy at the moment.
      Thank you.
      ~Alyssa
    - Anon
      
      Alyssa, your belief (or hope?) that the internet represents “a second world” where human nature will not prevail is naive and profoundly so, and you are inevitably to deal with crushing disappointment as maturity and a broader world view of true understanding manifests in your life. You have my respect for your fruitless idealism and my sympathy for the painful adjustments to reality that lie ahead for you. Be well.
Anonymous

Her guilty verdict is no surprise but she was lucky to get away with only a small fine compared to other cases. We can all wish that sharing was caring and not sharing is unlawful but in this case and law system the Judge did fair enough.

She was very lucky this was not the United States where they do not even support fines this low in their malfunctioning non-profit sharing with caring cases on a profit and greed focused viewing law. Well they keep ranking their fines as unconstitutional and the law really needs a clear profit and non-profit split.

A sad day in any case. Still she did it and like each and every one of us we should always be aware of the law and accept the risks and the known punishment.
Anonymous

tiny.cc/qcfnd
Anonymous

http://tinyurl.com/4skyaqr
Anom

This just proves how important that not keeping LOGS, and system wide encryption is. Truecrypt can encrypt whole computer including system hard drives so computer wont even boot up without entering password, then just do not tell your password under any circumstance to anyone. i think its legal in mostly countries that you do not need help police(why would you want help them? it does not get you lesser sentence in these cases) to get evidence that can be used against you (same as having right to be silent after arrest so) even with court order. Well i mighty tell with court order but in that case it would that safe side (since truecrypt allows hidden encryption part too and there currently no proofen way see if encryption part has hidden one too).
Anonymous

http://tinyurl.com/4skyaqr
Anonymous

http://tinyurl.com/4skyaqr
Anonymous

http://tinyurl.com/4skyaqr
Anonymous

tiny.cc/qcfnd
Pingback: Penycuic – Tune Bandits

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Guilty Verdict in Record-Breaking Swedish File-Sharing Case

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

NewsBits

Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

Feds Seize Cash from Major Bitcoin Exchange’s Dwolla Account

MostDiscussed

Pirate Bay Takes Over Distribution of Censored 3D Printable Gun

McAfee Patents Technology to Detect and Block Pirated Content

Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

Copyright Trolls Threaten to Call Neighbors of Accused Porn Pirates

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

CopyQuote

PopularArticles

VPN Services That Take Your Anonymity Seriously, 2013 Edition

Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2013

Which VPN Service Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?

What’s The Best VPN / Proxy for BitTorrent?

BTGuard Review: How Does it Work?

Optimize Your BitTorrent Download Speed