Kino.to “Main Admin” Sentenced to 3 Years in Jail

enigmax
December 11, 2011
78
Kino.to
Print

A man described as the main administrator of movie streaming portal Kino.to has been sentenced to 3 years in jail for criminal copyright infringement. The 27-year-old is said to have made around 230,000 euros profit from the site, which was shut down earlier this year as part of the biggest anti-piracy operation ever to take place on European soil.

Back in June this year, the biggest operation aimed at online movie piracy took place in Europe. The target for police in Germany, Spain, France, and the Netherlands was movie-streaming portal Kino.to and its affiliates. More than a dozen people were arrested and slowly but surely they are now facing the courts.

Last week, 33-year-old web designer Marcus V. was handed 2.5 years in prison by a Leipzig court for his role in the site. Today we bring news of another sentencing.

The defendant, named as 27-year-old Martin S., confessed to being Kino.to’s “main admin”. He stood accused of being jointly responsible for 1.1 million instances of commercial copyright infringement that allegedly took place via the site.

Reportedly the brother-in-law of former Kino.to owner Dirk B., Martin S. was also said to run a file-hosting site that contained more than 16,700 movies used as a source by Kino.to’s index.

The trained car mechanic from Leipzig allegedly brought in nearly 400,000 euros via site advertising and what were described in court as “subscription traps”, services that suck unsuspecting users into expensive recurring payments for otherwise free products.

Once site costs had been taken into consideration, it was claimed that between August 2009 and the closure of Kino.to in June 2011, Martin S. made around 230,000 euros for himself .

In his ruling Judge Mathias Winderlich said that the defendant was primarily motivated by the possibility of making “quick and easy money” and that his income “exceeded by far that of the general population.”

The District Court in Leipzig found Martin S. guilty of criminal copyright infringement and sentenced him to 3 years in jail, four months less than the time demanded by the prosecution. According to Bild, the state also confiscated his house, Audi A6 and bank accounts. There will be no appeal.

At least 5 other Kino.to suspects remain in custody, and another 20 people remain under investigation. The trial of another site admin will be heard next week.

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

Derpface

I wonder if MPAA lawyers will add costs of bribing judge(s) to their famous “losses caused by piracy” sum?
- Guest
  
  Well, the judge is likely not bribed, and even if he was, there is vast difference between commercial piracy and noncommercial file sharing.
  What the government and copyright lobby fails to understand is that the commercial market for piracy only exists because noncommercial file sharing is risky and illegal. Legalize noncommercial file sharing, and down goes all commercial piracy.
  People won’t pay for buying access to pirate sites, if they can get the same content for free. If the government is successful in stamping out noncommercial file sharing, the next kid on the block is the Russian mafia or aanother private actor willing to use violence in defense of its business.
  A copyright law firm will then have to calculate the physical risk to its employees from taking on copyright cases.
  - Johnny
    
    No such thing as noncommercial file sharing? Any ad on the website = commercial… (which Kino.to did)… the only noncommercial file sharing site I’ve seen was video2k (by duckload) but they profited from the putlocker affiliate system (as well as the other file hosts) :-
    - Anon
      
      If the creator offers a file at no price but wishes to retain control of that file as is their ethical and legal right, but loses that control to piracy, that can be said to be non-commercial file sharing, because no “money saved” was involved.
      
      But pirates kid themselves that making copies of for-sale files thereby saving themselves the purchase price is ANYthing but commercial. This was settled back in the Napster case and no amount of whining is going to change that. Anytime you take for-sale merchandise but leave your money in your pocket, it’s a commercial use, regardless of ads, access costs, infrastructure expenses.
      
      1.1 million instances of infringement and he gets a slap on the wrist like three years? wtf? It’s a start. Let’s hope pirates are stupid enough to continue online piracy anyway so the punishments can ratchet up over time to more permanent solutions.
    - http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay
      
      If the creator offers a file at no price but wishes to retain control of that file as is their ethical and legal right, but loses that control to piracy, that can be said to be non-commercial file sharing, because no “money saved” was involved.
      
      Ethical right? You’re full of it as usual. Copyright law does not determine ethics and you know it. Also, pirates are underserved customers. Of course you know that to make your false claims that piracy is about pirates wanting something for nothing, when all evidence speaks otherwise. If the legal copyright holders want to make money, they should put up their own cheap alternatives and allow the platforms that sell access to survive or fail on their own merits. That is a free market. What we have now is rent seekers who leech off of others to make money they didn’t earn.
      
      Also, just because the law bans something doesn’t mean an “underground” doesn’t appear. The Prohibition era as well as the War on Drugs should have taught you that.
      
      But pirates kid themselves that making copies of for-sale files thereby saving themselves the purchase price is ANYthing but commercial. This was settled back in the Napster case and no amount of whining is going to change that. Anytime you take for-sale merchandise but leave your money in your pocket, it’s a commercial use, regardless of ads, access costs, infrastructure expenses.
      
      Right, because you’ve never heard of a remix, a cover song, or any other example of people expressing themselves on a mass communications medium. Also, guess what, Napster got shut down, people went to Grokster, that shut down, people went to Limewire. When that went down, people went to Bittorrent. And now you have decentralized search engines and Magnet Links to contend with. The point that you obtusely never understand the more the industries attacks the centralized areas of distribution, the more that consumers choose decentralized networks for filesharing. It’s really not that hard.
      
      1.1 million instances of infringement and he gets a slap on the wrist like three years? wtf? It’s a start. Let’s hope pirates are stupid enough to continue online piracy anyway so the punishments can ratchet up over time to more permanent solutions.
      
      Ever heard of human rights? In the US, we have the Constitution to uphold. The fact that he’s not given due process would be enough of a huge stink here. So I’m sure that someone in Europe can point out the problems of not allowing this man an appeal. That’s obviously not you.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Any ad on the website = commercial…”
      
      Commercial website does not equal commercial filesharing.
    - http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja
      
      Well, if he made money from the ads and nothing more then it would be all cool. But if he mislead visitors into paying for whatever then he deserved all that. As always, take official sources with a grain of salt and 2 tons of suspicion. In any case, copyright-tards seem to confuse selling the content with earning money for providing an indexing service.
    - Anon
      
      @ Ninja
      
      “if he made money from the ads and nothing more then it would be all cool.”
      
      You must be drunk.
      That’s like setting up an illegal back door to a concert or movie theatre with ads at the entry, using the content as the lure, offering free access to a for-sale medium while making cash on the ads.
      
      And, while telling yourself the whole thing is cool because the access is free.
      
      Artist copyright advocates need look no further than this for the reasons why this kind of action deserves punishment, not thoughtful consideration.
- Yourmom
  
  They should go watch some good porn at
  http://www.deviloid.net
Mafiaasucks

“The trained car mechanic from Leipzig allegedly brought in nearly 400,000 euros via site advertising and what were described in court as “subscription traps”, services that suck unsuspecting users into expensive recurring payments for otherwise free products.”

Wow I will remember that when someone needs assistance for mafiaa extortion, they said movies and whatnot were free.
- Justin Case
  
  No that’s actually true. The movies were free but when you chose a movie on kino.to it sent you to a to a streaming portal that told you to get divx webplayer and linked to a site where you would get it. This site then offered you access to all their downloadable content (not just the divx webplayer) for around 100€/year. While actually the needed player would have been available for free on divx.com
http://twitter.com/rabbitkillrun Sean Gordon

Commercial piracy is just wrong. It’s just someone else getting money from others’ work rather than the labels.
- http://otester.myopenid.com/ PiRat
  
  If you’re against commercial file-sharing then that means you support the idea behind IPR, therefore support the MAFIAA.
- Ogra
  
  Uh huh. So, let me get this straight; If I offer someone else’s work for free (not even non-profit, because I can still use advertising), then I’m a good person who’s protecting freedom of speech or something else like that. If I get money for doing it, I’m bad. Why? Because profiting makes me evil?
  
  The labels aren’t bad because they profit; that’s only natural. They’re bad because they restrict others from using their own property in the manner they choose. Their making money is completely irrelevant to that fact.
Pingback: Kino.to “Main Admin” Sentenced to 3 Years in Jail | TorrentFreak | Dzker
Jimbo

i feel sorry for those involved going to jail but i think there is a vast difference between commercial ‘file sharing’ (making loads of money) and preserving what you have legitimately bought by making a backup or sharing music and movies with a couple of friends. even the thick cow in the New Zealand government said that when voting in the 3 strikes law there!
http://profiles.google.com/orfetheo Orfeas Theofanis

SERIOUSLY??
“Once site costs had been taken into consideration, it was claimed that between August 2009 and the closure of Kino.to in June 2011, Martin S. made around 230,000 euros for himself .

In his ruling Judge Mathias Winderlich said that the defendant was primarily motivated by the possibility of making “quick and easy money” and that his income “exceeded by far that of the general population.””

S E R I O U S L Y ?
“his income (230.000euro) “exceeded by far that of the general population.””
How about the FUCKING hollywood trolls that make billions per year?!??! Doesn’t that exceed the income of the general population (ALLTOGETHER) ?????
- Yeah Seriously
  
  Hollywood people make money legitimately by producing their own content. The owner of Kino.to made money illegally from contents Hollywood produced without paying royalties.
  
  Get a grip fool. You are obviously not the sharpest knife in the drawer but this should be common sense for just about anybody. If they did everything legally like Netflix, nobody would have raised an eyebrow.
LOLZ-DUCKLOAD

Dirk = Duckload

Child molester = 1 year + rehab
Rapist = 2 years
Copyright infringer = 3 years
Murder = 10 years
Manslaughter (I killed you without the “intent”) = 4 years

Are we missing something here? How can manslaughter = copyright infringement? The guys didnt kill anyone and the profit went into their pockets instead of the mafiaa’s….!
- Anonymous
  
  like everything to do with so called ‘copyright infringement’, the punishment far outweighs the crime. unfortunately, that’s what happens when the politicians and law makers are allowed to receive ‘incentives’ for their decisions and rulings, especially when the entertainment industries are able to make out that their lies aren’t lies at all. it’s so sad when punishment for taking a human life or violating a human being, which could and often does, result in psychological scaring for life, is less than copying some files! how can that be right? what a fucked up world this has become!
- Anonymous
  
  Funny how when they’re aiming for damages, it’s a civil case, yet when they’re aiming for the person, it’s a criminal case. Sure wish I had enough money to bend the law to my will.
  
  To be more clear: Stealing a physical album from a store (the crime: theft) would be worth about a hundred bucks in charges. Copying an album on the internet (the crime: copyright infringement) would be worth anywhere from “holy shit your wallet just exploded, taking out your leg”; to “you might as well kill yourself, starvation is a horrible way to go.”
  
  A slap on the wrist and a fraction of a pay check versus living in squaller for the rest of your life and likely spending the next five to ten years in a court room wondering whether those dollars signs in their eyes are contacts or not. What the fuck.
- Anonymous
  
  There’s no worse crime than taking money from rich people.
- Guest
  
  Let’s man slaughter a lot of entertainment executives!
  
  Oops your Honor! Sorry! I did not mean it!
- Yeah-seriously
  
  Isn’t money laundering a crime too? Why not just tell the judge, “it’s only money, nobody got hurt, so why bother?”. Yeah unfortunately for you, making loads of money illegally is a crime because people do get hurt in the process and because the rest of us have to break our back to earn what he did sitting in the comfort of his home.
Party Time

I am going to throw a party to celebrate this 3 year jail sentence.
- Guest
  
  Celebrate all you want, but remember that the opening for commercial piracy is caused by the crackdown on noncommercial file sharing.
  
  If the government didn’t care about noncommercial file sharing, there wouldhn’t be any market opportunities for commercial pirates.
  - It’s a fit-up
    
    And don’t forget the wrestling, oh what fun you’ll have oiling each other up.
    Just make sure there’s no skiddies on your Y-frounts.
- Me
  
  That’s going to be one sweeeeet party. The three of you will have a great time, you, your mom and the old guy from your church. Better make make sure you have lots of tea & ginger pop in. PARTAAAY!!!
Guest

And since the commercial piracy market show the bankrupcy of overexpansive copyright enforcement, I hope that copyright enforcement becomes another unwinnable effort in overcriminalization like the war on drugs.

Destroy all noncommercial actors, and the only ones left are the crime syndicates willing to kill prosecutors, lawyers and copyright enforcers.

They deserve it for trampling on noncommercial file sharing.
- Anonymous
  
  I don’t buy it. Commercial piracy has existed as long as non-commercial file sharing.
  
  This guy was charged with “criminal copyright infringement,” yet his crime was luring people into giving him money for free crap.
  - Guest
    
    An internet publication (maybe Arstechnica?) ran an article about a man who made a fortune on selling pirated cds. After Napster and broadband popularized file sharing his business took a dive.
    
    You therefore have it backwards. Commercial piracy was a concern long before noncommercial file sharing became widespread, cheap and easy.
    
    Note that most antipiracy legislation is not really targeting what we normally think is commercial piracy.
    
    Hadopi in France, Digital Economy Act, and the implementation of the IPRED (EU Intellectual Property Enforcement Directive) only makes logical sense when considered in the context of not for profit file sharing.
    
    Of course, the law in many countries is really not honest, since it often attempts to categorize noncommercial file sharing with commercial piracy. In German y
    - Guest
      
      the law imposes criminal sanction for piracy on a commercial scale, regardless of the profit motive.
      
      It’s really creepy when the government punishes you as a commercial “thief” for a transaction lacking any profit motive.
      It’s like arguing that not buying health insurance is commercial activity or that having sex with 1000 women is sexual exploitation on a commercial scale.
    - Joke
      
      @Guest. An Indian man got jailed this month because he cheated on his wife and had sex with another woman. Why should lawyers and judges even intervene in the personal lives of others? If natural human desires can earn harsh punishments like this in some countries, anything is punishable by law these days. So don’t count out anything.
    - Anonymous
      
      How do I have it backward? I said commercial piracy has existed as long as non-commercial file sharing. People have been trading USB drives, burning CDs and borrowing games just as long as people have been selling fake copies of them on the street.
      
      What I’m saying is that the introduction of more laws against non-commercial file sharing will not result in more commercial piracy.
LOLZ-KINO

The guys making the young kids sell DVD on road has made a very very good life – if they stopped in time or smart enough to stay under the police-radar!
http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

I don’t have a problem with this conviction if, BUT ONLY IF, the cash amounts kino made were IN FACT true and proven beyond any doubt whatsoever in Court with expert witnesses under oath.

But as always, anything to do with facts and financial accuracy when combined with any element of the MAFIAA simply isn’t to be trusted without independent witnesses and proper irrefutable evidence.

The problems usually arise where the finances are estimated and can’t be proven at all – and the MAFIAA & their lawyers + accountants are expert at avoiding financial facts. For example, their reasoning for claiming that non-commercial filesharing is piracy and therefore tantamount to theft by unlawful possession and distribution.

We need a new business model for the MAFIAA ffs
*yawn, taps fingers impatiently…
Chaosritter

Fun fact: a Turk who kicked a random German to death for the lulz got two years on probation. The German law system at work.
Gavman

sorry I had to laugh – if this is the BIGGEST operation carried out and all he ‘supposedly’ made was 230,000 euros then I would hardly call this killing the movie/music/whatever industry.
- Yeah-seriously
  
  230,000 Euros is a small deal? You must be earning that much everyday.
Kr0nz

These trials will never, not until the Mafiaa start losing huge profits.

We need to boycott them, and then get all Robin Hood on their asses.

ITS SO FRUSTRATING TO FEEL SO POWERLESS AGAINST THESE BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRYS
- Chaosritter
  
  And when we boykott them, they’ll blame the pirates for the declining profits…
- Ogra
  
  See, here’s the problem with this boycott; they’re still making things people want, and the people haven’t told them anything to the contrary. The people still want their movies, their music, and everything else they produce. Every time someone downloads their stuff without paying, it’s not saying “I’m boycotting you”, it’s saying “I can’t live without what you make, but I don’t want to pay”. Understandably, that message falls on deaf ears.
  
  The first step is actually learning to live without what they produce. That means stop the filesharing, and actually get some discipline.
  - Yeah-seriously
    
    Stop filesharing? Like that’s gonna ever happen. Most TF readers are what I call hypocritical pirates who will bash every movie produced by Hollywood and bitch about how standards of movie making have fallen but they won’t stop downloading either because they like what Hollywood produces and just need an excuse to justify piracy. Its like saying you don’t like pizza but you still can’t stop ordering.
    - Ogra
      
      No, you’re making an error. Generally, those who bash the Hollywood movies (more than the rest of us do) are the ones who choose not to watch them. The ones who don’t do the bashing are the ones who do download the movies. Don’t assume homogeneity among us. We don’t all believe the same thing. Those who like the movies download them, and those who don’t, don’t. It’s really that simple.
      
      And if people don’t want to stop, they don’t have to. My post was meant to illustrate what to do if people want to send a message. Many of us don’t want to send that exact message. Those people aren’t hypocrites if they choose to keep downloading.
http://www.twitter.com/echoman74 echoman

Commercial piracy and making a profit i have no sympathy for. They get what’s coming for them. But it seems your average file sharer has and will get mixed in. Why should the average non-commercial file-sharer have to suffer in the hands of those whose intent are to make money?

This is the problem aswell commercial pirating and their intent to profit on others work angers me. I see vendors on the streets even in libraries etc. I mean seriously prices of cd’s/dvd’s have gone down you can practically buy them for pennies.

Then there are site owners whose intent are not to sell others work!! But only have ads to keep their sites running sharing culture. The industry does not see that, they count it as theft. How exactly is it theft? Does that necessarily count as piracy yes/no?

Well simply because those who don’t understand the “net” the industry/government think it’s perfectly fine to shutdown sites and destroy businesses. Sometimes even fully legitimate businesses. Which then get seized, as we all already know has happened. Taking innocent people to court. Even innocent old ladies. Aswell as threatening people making them pay making ridiculous amounts of money mostly fear-mongering to where they will give up….in total panicky fear..

To me that’s criminal, the lawyers and lobbyist wishing to censor the web.. Where there are no laws which we live in a virtual global world not like the real world. Where our civil liberties are violated. Treasonous lawmakers going over boarders that’s beyond over their jurisdiction.

Then your average Jane/Joe just file-sharing. But have no intent to sell, but rather watch and most likely if they really like the film. will most likely rent or purchase the film. This is culture, This is what our generation does. We share. We inspire. We let others know and find stuff we never knew existed. There have been countless amount of times, i saw film from Australia, Spain, Brazil, Italy, Canada and the list goes on…

So to end this post i say arrrggggh to the pirates and grrrrrr to the thieves!! I say thanks to the file-sharer’s with no intent to profit. I say to those website owners watch your back..it’s dangerous world out there in a corp-rat society.
Johnny

If someone has the websites and it’s popular, you’ll need to buy servers. Which normally gets paid from ads – which is commercial piracy. It’s stupid – how can a website stay up without getting some sort of money coming in. They can’t even get donations as that’s still classed as commercial piracy in MAFIAA’s eyes :(

Anyone want to explain how I could make a website without getting profit from it?

I don’t even remember a noncommercial website being online which provides piracy :-
- Prick
  
  You pay outta your own pockets nigga or GTFO.
  - Johnny
    
    TPB pays a lot of money for their servers – if they didn’t have ads – how could they afford that without being filthy rich in the first place? ^_^
    
    And it’s not like webmasters can say they only use the money for the servers – as MAFIAA doesn’t see it that way.
- Guest
  
  No one needs a commercial website for distribution. Bit torrent is a fantastic protocol for file sharing, and no commercial gain for the seeder or leecher.
  
  So noncommercial distribution of copyrighted content without advertising is possible.
  Regarding Anon’s stupid Napster argument, the outcome in the Napster case did not rest on any distinction between commercial or noncommercial activity but on the US copyright law which ddoesn’t require commercial intend.
  
  I suppose Anon is a supporter of Obamacare. Under Obama care, government can force you to buy health insurance or fine you for not buying health insurance on the theory that inactivity is affecting interstate commerce.
  - Johnny
    
    Torrents – you get the .torrent file from the internet – TPB for example. They make a lot of money from torrents… :-
    - gudrun
      
      so use dc++ or adblock if you don’t like it
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Torrents – you get the .torrent file from the internet – TPB for example. They make a lot of money from torrents…”
      
      They have income from ads, not torrents.
Solidmass

230grand profit? fuck off to jail plz thx
Guest

The fact that an intermediary has a commercial stake in the infrastructure used to communicate doesn’t render sharing over bittorrent commercial. By the same token arranging a date over the phone is prostitution by the fact that the phone company earns from selling the infrastructure.

And torrenting is possible without a tracker. You are moving the goalposts.

A transaction is commercial if one or both of the participants promise doing something for commercial gain.
Asd

Making profits off piracy is lame, it’s basically what music labels do. Completely opposed to the spirit of file sharing.
- Ogra
  
  No, it isn’t opposed to the spirit of filesharing. It’s opposed to your definition of the spirit of filesharing. By my definition, the only reason the music labels are bad, the ONLY REASON, is because they restrict others from copying and selling music. That’s it. They place restrictions on what other people can do with their property, and use the law as a cudgel to enforce those restrictions. That’s the only reason they’re bad. Not because they make money, which is perfectly and completely fine, and should be expected in a free market society, but because they place restrictions on property rights.
  - Guest
    
    No That’s not it. They are destroying our societies our cultures and our economy just like the bank just in the name to enrich themselves even further. This has to stop and will stop one way or another.
    
    What if for every year of prison sentence imposed on any innocent citizen by the entertainment industry someone decide to kill one entertainment executive? That would rough some feathers would not it?
    
    May be you want it to reach this point. No justice no peace.
    - Ogra
      
      That probably would rough some feathers. It would also be one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in American history, even bigger than the one being perpetrated right now by the copyright industry. This isn’t a situation that calls for violence. Non-violent movements are showing progress. Violence is only necessary if the non-violent movements are being suppressed. They aren’t.
      
      If you go and kill entertainment executives, you’ll set back all the work that was done. Here’s an example; the state of Kansas in 2009 was making legislative progress towards increasing their bans on abortion. Then, an abortion doctor named George Tiller was killed, and legislative and public movement towards banning abortions stopped still. This is the same situation. Your desire for violence will only discredit a legitimate movement (and before anyone asks, no, I’m not in favor of the anti-abortion people. The pirate movement has much more justice and reason behind it than them.)
    - Ogra
      
      Also, I’m still waiting for the citations on some of your earlier claims, particularly the “child-raping” accusation you brought against the copyright industry.
    - Guest
      
      No to violence. Violence against a strong state is always going to fail. Some might argue that killing members and enablers of the copyright system is beneficial to the pirate movement, but violence rather than galvanizing the public in favor of one’s cause gives the state an excuse for a harsher crackdown.
      
      On the other hand, there is a difference between actively using violence and being mum when the consequences of excessive copyright enforcement blows back.
      
      One likely consequence of the state’s policy is causing organized crime to fill the vacuum. We should have no active part in violence, but should not decry when organized crime groups starts defending its illicit operations with violence.
      
      Cracking down on noncommercial piracy is going to be a endgame for the state.
      
      The state must either use all means at its disposal including deadly force, or scale back copyright to reasonable proportions.
      Of course, reasonable proportions should be zero copyright, but let the state and taxpayer find out how much copyright enforcement is bad for the economy, business, civil liberties and social cohesion.
    - Ogra
      
      In fact, that comment above was posted from a different comment history than the one I just responded too. So, who’s the one “hiding” now.
  - Guest
    
    Your are a paid troll and you are a troll and your are wasting your time. Nobody care about your fake opinion. Also stop changing your name we can spot you.
    - Ogra
      
      Oh, are we making accusations now? Ok, let me make one too. You’re a violent maniac who sees murder as an acceptable solution for a non-violent issue. You, and people like you, are probably the single greatest threat to our movement. Piracy can be legalized and property rights can be returned, but not if you ever have your way. Your violence will destabilize everything, and you’re too obsessed with vengeance (and yes, it’s vengeance, NOT justice, because justice knows restraint), to see that.
      
      “. Also stop changing your name we can spot you. ”
      
      This from the guy who uses different e-mail addresses in his posts so that his posting history is obscured. And don’t lie and say you haven’t, because I very much doubt that the words “kill them all” can be found in all of these threads by coincidence. Which also makes me think that this isn’t just a trap, because I very much doubt you possess that sophistication. Then again, doing the exact same thing you always do and just calling it a trap doesn’t require much sophistication.
      
      You don’t speak for the people here. You don’t get to say who is respected or not. You aren’t like Anoixiona or Electric Worry or company; you hold no influence
  - Guest
    
    You are an idiot you just fell into the trap of my little provocation. Now we know who you are and what you are doing in there.
    - Lulz
      
      Anoixiona has influence
      he can make…….. you….. bleeeeddd….. with…. poor…
      grammar _______ that is pathetics
      excuse for ~~attention…….~~
      seeeking
      like this.
      
      I like Anoixiona’s posting style. I thought I’d try it out. Hope it worked.
    - Kjshdkjahsdlh
      
      Ooh fun.
      
      insert poor grammar and spelllingss here~~please~~
      Blahblahblah.
  - Jess
    
    Take your pirate-for-profit mentality somewhere else, Orga. A lot of people are getting tired of it.
    
    No one here has the “problem” with profit you claim, we just aren’t absolute pricks that think anything we can get our hands on is ours to use to grab someone by the balls and make them “pay up or go without it.”
    
    You got it without paying, and everyone else is entitled to that JUST as much, if not more (which I would argue based on your obscene attitude) as you.
    - Ogra
      
      “Entitled”
      
      No, you aren’t. Neither you nor me nor anyone else is entitled to anything, least of all getting something without paying. The only reason you can get something free is because someone posts it for free. If I started a website offering to sell something and that’s the cheapest option available, or the cheapest that you’re willing to find, than that’s the cheapest that you’re entitled to.
      
      Don’t assume that if I’m selling it, I got it for free. I may very well have paid for it. I could very easily have bought a CD, and then copied it from there. In fact, if I’m selling it, I’d probably rather do that, assuming that it’s the earliest form of the content released.
      
      And frankly, I’m sick of moralizing. If you’re going to argue this based on whether people are “pricks” or not, I’d be willing to say that downloading past what we’re willing to pay makes everyone here pricks. We all download more than we’re willing to pay for. We all show greed. We’re all bigger pricks than the people who decide to pay for whatever they can, and then show discipline in not going beyond their means. And you know what; that doesn’t matter. At all. We’re not causing harm, so it’s fine, and you have to realize that this principle means that your morality doesn’t apply.
      
      As a quick aside, I’m not actually engaged in commercial piracy, and do you know why; because I personally find it to be distasteful, along with having little interest in the business. However, I won’t judge those who are… well, not much.
      
      Oh, and a lot of people do have a problem with “profit”. Start looking for the people who demonize making money. You’ll be surprised at what you notice.
      
      Side Note: Does that last paragraph of mine sound like confirmation bias? Why yes it does, other me, yes it does. Oh well.
Guest

Well, I do not necessarily agree with the argument that killing benefactors and enforcers of copyright is wrong.

Benefactors of an unjust law can’t morally avoid responsibility for their own actions. However, the other Guest is probably acting covertly for the other side. Don’t respond to him.
Advocating violence is counterproductive.
Pelouze

Don’t bend for the soap Martin ;)
Pingback: Kino.to “Main Admin” Sentenced to 3 Years in Jail | TorrentForce Blog
Anonymous

phlpn.es/829r8s
Guest

I wholeheartedly agree that someone in this situation was “primarily motivated by the possibility of making ‘quick and easy money’” and that someone’s “income ‘exceeded by far that of the general population.’”

I just disagree whom should be thrown in jail for the above actions.
http://tinyurl.com/anoixiona-personal-info NotAnoixiona

Oh, are we making accusations now? Ok, let me make one too. You’re a violent maniac who sees murder as an acceptable solution for a non-violent issue. You, and people like you, are probably the single greatest threat to our movement. Piracy can be legalized and property rights can be returned, but not if you ever have your way. Your violence will destabilize everything, and you’re too obsessed with vengeance (and yes, it’s vengeance, NOT justice, because justice knows restraint), to see that.

“. Also stop changing your name we can spot you. ”

This from the guy who uses different e-mail addresses in his posts so that his posting history is obscured. And don’t lie and say you haven’t, because I very much doubt that the words “kill them all” can be found in all of these threads by coincidence. Which also makes me think that this isn’t just a trap, because I very much doubt you possess that sophistication. Then again, doing the exact same thing you always do and just calling it a trap doesn’t require much sophistication.

You don’t speak for the people here. You don’t get to say who is respected or not. You aren’t like Anoixiona or Electric Worry or company; you hold no influence
- Ogra
  
  Is there a reason you copied my exact post? I’m assuming your name has something to do with it, but my grip on internet sarcasm remains poor.
Pingback: Buzz Matutino – 17 diciembre 2011 | POWERPYMES
Catrashcatrash

We live in a free world where a corporation can have its dvds made at low labor cost in china, and sold at high price in europe.

But when a few kids are innovative enough to provide new streams of distribution, then they are thieves who ought to go to jail… simply because they break a monopoly of distribution that is nothing else than a legal rent.

This is justice of the middleages
Rom3o Dragon

Well Can I Ask A Question

What If We Are Running A Movie Stream Site And We Dont Host The Files But Stream It From Other Site Which Are Not Belonging To Us ? Would That Be illegal To ?

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Kino.to “Main Admin” Sentenced to 3 Years in Jail

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

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

The Pirate Bay Moves to .SX as Prosecutor Files Motion to Seize Domains

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