Major Cyberlocker Movie Pirate Faces 5 Years In Prison

enigmax
May 8, 2012
107
cyberlockers
Print

Later this month an individual who allegedly uploaded thousands of movies and TV shows to cyberlocker services will face trial and a possible 5 year prison sentence. The 29-year-old, who was also the moderator of a warez forum, committed the alleged infringements over a period of more than 4 years. The movie industry claims he cost them nearly $4.2m but the Pirate Party reject the damages calculations as “simply ridiculous.”

Online he was known as “Stainless” and according to the MPA-affiliated anti-piracy group chasing him down, he was the will become the most prolific movie and TV show Internet pirate ever to face trial in the Czech Republic.

Later this month the now 29-year-old will go to court to face charges of copyright infringement on Hollywood blockbusters such as Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.

According to the Anti-Piracy Union, the piracy activities of Stainless date back to 2006 and are on an unprecedented scale. He allegedly uploaded thousands of movies and TV shows to cyberlocker file-hosting sites before publishing their links online in order to facilitate downloads.

Initially Stainless is reported to have used RapidShare and Hotfile, but later used a web service called Multiload to upload to several sites at once. One of the main sites listed by Multiload is Hellshare and Stainless reportedly had around 11,500 files stored there. Exactly how many of those were infringing is unclear.

Nevertheless, Stainless still stands accused of significant infringement. He is alleged to be responsible for the piracy of more than 2000 movie and TV shows including Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and a selection of local movies. Not helping Stainless’ case is the fact he was the moderator of so-called ‘warez’ forum.

As is increasingly common in these cases, the damages claim made by the studios is significant. They claim that Stainless cost them more than $4 million and as a result when he goes on trial later this month he will face between six months and five years in prison, plus a fine.

“The way they estimated the damages is simply ridiculous,” Mikulas Ferjencik, vice-president of the Czech Pirate Party told TorrentFreak.

“The Czech Pirate Party believes that it should be up to the copyright monopoly owners to prove that they were actually damaged by downloads. We think that the current setup, where copyright monopoly owners receive the ‘average market price’ multiplied by three, is unconstitutional.”

The Czech Pirate Party, know for their provocative actions including setting up their own file-sharing sites, have courted controversy again recently.

In setting up their new web portal located at Pirat.cz, they blatantly copied the design of the Czech Republic’s biggest search engine, Seznam.cz, fueling a considerable online debate and an interesting outcome.

“Seznam.cz admitted that what we did is actually fully legal and they even drew another version of the Piráti.cz logo for us using their font – the one we originally used was just an imitation,” Ferjencik concludes.

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

Arthoheen

omg
- Caladol1
  
  sharing is caring , it’s a human right.
  
  pirates ? where? did he have a boat?
  - yello
    
    he cost em 4.5million, they reckon that its multiplied by 3…
    so a.. 1.5million he cost em, so the movie company will be in deficit after court, lawyers… When will they learn its cheaper to let us pirate their shit, and let a majority of people still buy their overpriced crud…
    - liquidmonkey
      
      u get less time for killing or raping someone.
      whats wrong with society?????
  - Anonymous
    
    Are you looking for some extra cash, you can join trusted online money making campaign, my senior is part of such campaign and making good weekly cash, This figure is approx 2500$ weekly, Would you like to see the more ===>>??http://must2join.blogspot.com
- Anonymous
  
  One of my familiar share his experience about online work, he told me the secret that last couple of days, he got approximate 1500$ through internet work, I was so inspired that I just Would you like to share the link ??http://startbytoday.blogspot.com
- Anonymous
  
  One of my familiar share his experience about online work, he told me the secret that last couple of days, he got approximate 1500$ through internet work, I was so inspired that I just Would you like to share the link ??http://startbytoday.blogspot.com
- Ronald Reagan: Porn Master
  
  I bet “Stainless” is making a brown stain in his shorts now.
  - pitch pine
    
    I hope so.
  - Anonymous
    
    One of my cousin is a part of web worker community and working on computer, In last few weeks he bring 8500$ at home, the more details are enclosed at this link ===>>??http://freelancer111.blogspot.com
- Anonymous
  
  One of my familiar share his experience about online work, he told me the secret that last couple of days, he got approximate 1500$ through internet work, I was so inspired that I just Would you like to share the link ??http://startbytoday.blogspot.com
- Guest
  
  I know. The Czech Pirate Party is saying the copyright industry should actually have to prove its allegations.
  
  WTF LOL!!
Uncle Sam(arionette)

Ha ha ha, another pirate to the gallows!

How’s that you filthy dogs?

Oh, and here’s a message for you all:

Love, Uncle Sam.

PS: Torrentfreak owes me 150000$ for each reader that views my gorgeous creation. Should have bought that license, eh?
- YouRuninformed
  
  Someone remove this asinine twit. Ban his IP. ———-> Uncle Same Arionette
  He’s the type of person that is destroying the internet. A cut from the same cloth of ignorant A-holes that knows nothing and cares to know nothing about how regulations deteriorate file sharing.
  - Cfh
    
    What he said^^^ damn imbecile
  - Tvqochsg
    
    No, you learn to read instead: it’s called sarcasm and Uncle Sam(arionette) post is full of it.
    
    Fool.
    
    My question is btw:
    How did they get to his info?
    IP, mails and stuff.
    Was it his own fault, or maybe someone ratted him out?
  - He done a funny
    
    if it was my post….. it probably would have been flagged / or mod deleted.
    I get a lot of those, sometimes for no apparent reason. Sometimes I deserve it :/
    But @6a1808b3927634bbc70574c224f498a3:disqus is clearly making sarcastic funnies.
    
    however……Since I have a square spikey stick up my ass
    about some of my posts getting vaporized for stupid non-reasons.
    
    I shall flag YOU for senseless flagging.
    Wow … being a hypocrite never felt so good : )
    - Uncle Sam(arionette)
      
      You are a model americunt citizen, Uncle Sam praises you!
    - He done a funny
      
      @6a1808b3927634bbc70574c224f498a3:disqus ( BritFag now / Used to be Americunt… close enough )
      
      @d95536832fc8cae1f47bf7b1fc80ab5f:disqus Ended up getting your obvious sarcasm flagged.
      
      “Kanye West syndrome” …must be
  - Uncle Sam(arionette)
    
    GOD BLESS AMERICA, YOU ARE A MODEL CITIZEN FOR THIS GLORIOUS COUNTRY!!!!
  - Stan
    
    if you dont got a willy you dont get the silly !!
- tonyj
  
  The Special School must have let out early today.
  - Close mouth, ooppsss too late!
    
    @8a213cbd767aeec8b1f5ec2447ea8d0c:disqus, your comment proves it!
Swan

$4.2 million. HA! That’s an absolute joke.
- MAFIAA
  
  Of course it is. They added decimal, when there shouldn’t be any. He owe us $42 million.
  - pitch pine
    
    quite!
foff

Here is what is wrong with this. No one person is responsible. One person cannot cause a loss when plenty of other copies are online. There is no rational way to calculate any loss from a specific person. In fact, who is to say there was any at all. If I saw a movie at home and recommended it to a friend who doesn’t download and went to the theater. They have a sale they never would have had. So it is very possible there is no loss if you take this form of advertising into account and as is claimed in music there might actually be a net gain.

These are valid arguments why oh why does not a judge, who is supposed to be smart, not take this reasoning into account. Why do they continue to just believe the bullshit claims of the industry?
- asdf
  
  WELL, the next thing you know, they’re claiming the pirates are making huge profits which sum up to exactly (or more) what they claim they’re losing!
  
  Oh wait, they’ve done that already.
  - Uncle Sam(arionette)
    
    oops, used the wrong name
http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

Bottom line is that these people could have gotten the ‘pirated’ stuff from friends or the local library. It’s time to start throwing these cases out of court unless “More than server costs” comes into the picture here.
Fbi

I know someone would die if I was sentenced to that crazy shit, and it wouldn’t be me.

Just a matter of time until someone decides that nuff is nuff and throws something explosive at the criminal companies responsible for this. Bad luck for the ugly employees.
- Anonymous
  
  Yes I have long awaited the day for the first explosion to happen. But then I always keep in mind one thing which is that all the time they do not use violence then we should not either.
  
  Fight them in politics and the law. We may be a long way behind and they are well organized to propose new stronger enforcement laws every 2 to 4 years but we can also organize and catch up.
  
  One thing I am sure of though is that should a death happen then the situation could well escalate quickly when there are many very frustrated and annoyed people around.
  - UncleSo(vietunion)
    
    Prison sentences are legalised violence. It is the violent power of the state being wielded on behalf of private corporations.
- UIGUIGU
  
  I bet you really are an FBI instigator. Another Judas with explosives!
Fgf

This is getting out of control now
Guest

If he did it and they search his hard drives and find all records of all that and all the uploaded files then he’s very lost.
And they’ll never agree to having to show mathematical proof of piracy’s damage, mostly because if they did then piracy wouldn’t seem like a threat at all and they need it to be a threat to pass new anti privacy laws.
Anonymous

Well we can only say thanks to Stainless for all these thousands of uploads.

What I find most interesting though is that no serious person would upload from their own connection. Such loading is the job of couriers who have the simple job of FXP-like copying files between high speed servers. If that applies to Stainless then I doubt he was even much aware of what he copied when it is just queue files and start the transfer. He would be aware of some titles obviously.

The most interesting part is any affiliate programme when him loading popular files on to some cyberlockers can prove quite rewarding in the money sense.

We will have to see if he lives up to his nickname in terms if any of this shit can stick to Stainless. I say thanks anyway when many of us could have benefited.

Anyway way to go our problem copyright cartels when you took out one courier and there are thousands more of those around and I am sure one hundred more could take his place tomorrow.
- Tania
  
  ”The most interesting part is any affiliate programme when him loading
  popular files on to some cyberlockers can prove quite rewarding in the
  money sense.”
  
  indeed, prob made tons of $
Guest

walk the plank ya scurvy dog! aaarrrgghhhh!
Uhlik

Hi, thx for sharing this story, the world should know.
Just one thing, he was Known as Nerez and all his rips and releases contains NEREZ in its name, i think that he deserve for keeping his official nickname untranslated.
Pingback: Major Cyberlocker Movie Pirate Faces 5 Years In Prison | Best Seedbox
Weokethwe

Just wanted to tell you this:

In Finland you can get multiple years in prison for copyright infringement, but
the usual sentence for raping a child is conditional sentence.

Our country is total shit.
- Uhlik
  
  trust me, its not just your country…
- Anonymous
  
  All the laws care about is money. Theft, fraud, infringement, money laundering, embellishment, blackmail etc.
  
  Go home and beat your spouse and they will only say “please don’t do that again” meaning “please beat your spouse more quietly when we don’t like these call outs and paperwork”.
  - http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell
    
    Pretty much. I know quite a few police officers who say that when a significant other is beaten that they ‘asked for it’. Which is true about 1/3rd of the time, but nowhere near all of the time like they make it out to be.
- pitch pine
  
  the copy-write cartels are scum, yes.
  
  someone who rapes a child is probably mentally defective. prison terms won’t improve them.
  making copyrighted movies, etc available for download over the Internet in light of these affiliate programs is just making a profit off someone else’s hard labour.
  - mister
    
    People that are
    uploading copyrighted material online do not all make a profit out of it. Most
    of them don’t. They just share. And I don’t believe we should prohibit people
    from sharing info, do you?
    
    I do agree however music
    and movie investors sometimes lose money when somebody steals the original copy
    and put’s it out there (online). But when it’s out there it’s out there. You
    should not punish people for sharing, it a basic human trait and right.
  - Patrick Chenier
    
    You grimey piece of shit. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. You might as well defend the devil himself.
- http://rationaldreaming.com/ Mike
  
  I call BS on that one. Where’s your evidence that child rapists are mostly getting suspended sentences in Finland. There is a law that covers something called “coercive sexual conduct” (without violence) where the typical punishment is light, but that does not apply to the rape of children.
  
  You can be outraged at sentences for copyright infringement without trotting out nonsense like this.
- Patrick Chenier
  
  And you risk getting raped in jail. No fuck, pedophiles, rapists, murderers, even serial killers for fuck sake have more chances in life than a copyright infringer has once accused.
Guest

“Major Cyberlocker Movie Pirate Faces 5 Years In Prison”

Ok, fine. What if the citizen say that if he is convicted they are going to kill Kary Sherman and Chris Dodd in retaliation? At this age they are going to die soon anyway, so this is not a big deal. I am sure that will cool this corporate criminals off.

They are attacking the citizen who have the right to defend themselves. Don’t they??
Pingback: Notrackingme | Proxy » Blog Archive » Major Cyberlocker Movie Pirate Faces 5 Years In Prison
townie2

what value do you put on a movie? one million dollars? ten? a life? remember MaVen?
http://torrentfreak.com/canadian-movie-pirate-%E2%80%98maven%E2%80%99-dies-of-drug-overdose-100406/
this is just so wrong for tv shows and movies.
usa sucks

uncle sam, you are a fucking american moron
Why

Anyone know of a good torrent site like Mininova was. I want a site that’s quite popular and has a ”uploaded today” page. One that isn’t just spammed up. Any ideas? I want re upload old torrents and rare torrents so i need a ”uploaded today page’ so a lot of people see them.. thanks guys
- Darkhog
  
  TPB?
  - Why
    
    Ner its not the same. Mininova worked so great because millions of people saw the start page which listed the most popular torrents. If you got in that list you would get thousands of downloads in just a few hours. which then made the torrent stronger, alot stronger… thats what i need… otherwise noone sees the torrents and alot less people download. i want mininova back
Anonymous

everyone knows that the figures put out by the entertainment industries are complete bollocks! everyone that is, except the governments and the courts. they are so worried about having their ‘incentives’ stopped they go along with the bollocks. i dont hold out much hope for this guy but perhaps the court will insist on definitive evidence and the Pirate Party can give aid to him, so at least the ruling is sensible
Anonymous

This guy’s a citizen of the Czech Republic, right?
Isn’t the wonder that he’s facing five years in prison in the Czech Republic for uploading Hollywood movies?

Reminds me of the American and European Pharmaceautical Industry’s struggle to internationally criminalize Brazil’s and India’s rampant copying as “Generics” blockbuster Meds necessary for treatment of AIDS, Diabetes, Hypertension and other high impact front line diseases.

I’m not saying that the Moral distance between Private Profit and Social Need was here adequately resolved; but, I don’t remember the Brazilian or Indian governments throwing Brazilian and Indian Citizens in jail for making generic substitutes available to their populations in violation of Western Patents.

I can understand that private companies want consumers to pay, and perhaps pay dearly; but, what does the Czech Republic want?
- Why
  
  What does the Czech Republic want? I really don’t know but maybe the US has threatened them or maybe a few people Czech government are gaining something from these fascist laws…
- Tania
  
  key here is he used us servers aka mafiaa country not that they don’t think they own the world anyway
Andrew Lee

Wait just a goddamn second..

“MASSAPEQUA, N.Y. — One of the world’s most prolific bootleggers of
Hollywood DVDs loves his morning farina. He has spent eight years
churning out hundreds of thousands of copies of “The Hangover,” “Gran Torino” and other first-run movies from his small Long Island apartment to ship overseas.”

Guess it does not count as long as you send it to soldiers.

“He has not kept an official count but estimates that he topped 80,000
discs a year during his heyday in 2007 and 2008, making his total more
than 300,000 since he began in 2004. Postage of about $11 a box, and the
blank discs themselves, would suggest a personal outlay of over
$30,000.”

300k lmao all I can think of is. LIKE A BOSS

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/27/nyregion/at-92-movie-bootlegger-is-soldiers-hero.html?_r=2

http://torrentfreak.com/92-year-old-veteran-pirates-movies-to-help-soldiers120427/
- Anonymous
  
  And he is my hero !!! WW2 Veteran who copies movies and DVD’s and then mails them to our troops overseas.And yes he is 92 years old.
  Fuck the MAFIAA !
  Support & Buy INDIE
Anonymous

In some ways piracy is helping Hollywood. People have gotten so fed up with paying a lot of money to go to the theaterand the movie is garbage that they stopped going. But when DL’ing picked up, so did attendance and profit at the theaters. People were able to see if the movie was good enough to be seen at the theater.
I remember theaters were barren for some time. But the increase in ticket sales at the theaters also coincided with reports I was reading about the increase in DL’ing.
Coincidence? I think not. I think they go hand in hand.
As for the piracy of DVD’s… perhaps if Hollywood stopped going out of their way to making movies not easily available when out on DVD, that type of piracy would slow down. Hollywood’s silent partnership and illegal backroom deals with Blockbuster Video and Hollywood Video put all the mom and pop video stores out of business. Then Netflix showed up and stuck it to Blockbuster Video and Hollywood Video, now Hollywood is standing up for their business partners and not allowing Netflix and the few other video rental services to have most movies within 30 to 60 days after the movie is released, so that their business partners at Blockbuster Video have the monopoly on new releases.
If you really want to stick to Hollywood and let them know your distaste in their practices…. stop going to the theater all together, and do not rent anything from Blockbuster Video. Wait for the film to be available through NetFlix or RedBox. That’s what I’m doing, and I’m enjoying giving Hollywood the middle finger.
- townie2
  
  even better, watch them for free legally on Crackle :-)
ANONYMOUS

…And this is what happens when you go on the “sharing is caring” motto. Even if it is for non-profit. No one actually gives a sh*t about you and your uploads as long as you get the files (as a downloader/leech).

Bye stainless.
- http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell
  
  Only in your opinion. There are a lot of us saying that these prosecutions are way disparate considering that some MURDERERS don’t get 5 years in prison.
  - ANONYMOUS
    
    As much as I agree that this guy should not be prosecuted, let’s face it. Reality is different.
    
    All the ones that downloaded his uploads, all the ones that just “forgot” to say thanks, all the ones that couldn’t care less about him after the download was completed, will not recall his nickname nor will have any sympathy that this guy is facing time behind locked doors.
    
    I’m pointing out that people are egoistic, selfish and could not care less as long as it doesn’t happen to them.
    
    You think people have sympathy for KDC? The only thing they care about is that his service comes up again so they can download. No one feels the pain that KDC & his family is going through. Extradition….Only a term a few knows about, and fewer who gives a sh*t unless it is themselves.
- pitch pine
  
  lol, true dat!
fee

The 29-year-old should say there was a MISTAKE with the upload. It was actually a list of free indie movies but the mouse and computer somehow puts on an error. It’s been fixed ever since. Remember to always use the word “MISTAKE” and everything will be fine.Eg. The Kimdotcom arrest was a MISTAKE
- Waseihou
  
  In the Czech Republic country all what is needed is to deny to answer any questions and then police has very hard time prove anything because IP!=person. But sometimes it happens that people does not know this and I’m not sure if in this case they did not entered his room while he was uploading something, then policemen could testify as witnesses at the court. And two or more witnesses are enough, even when other evidence was missing, that’s how it works. As for now downloading is legal so he can probably avoid most of charges as long as he is successful at denying he was really the uploader, that’s what we don’t really know, maybe they have wrong person. If it was him, than he made serious mistake not to encrypt, now forensic analyis CAN tell if he was probably the one who grabbed first and uploaded.
Pooplop

Poo poo plop plop
- Buf
  
  Hi there where’s your mummy?
- Buf
  
  Hi there where’s your mummy?
Anonymous

I’m sure he’s sitting there thinking “was it worth it to share all this stuff for internet anons, um no i feel kinda stupid now”
- Anonymous
  
  You mean the same way the civil rights protestors in the american south and south Africa must have thought “Was it worth getting beaten for a number of guys I don’t even know”?
  
  Or for that matter, when ANYONE at all has been abused by “authority” for communicating that which authority found to be objectionable.
  
  There will always be idiots who think freedom of speech ought to be restricted to pre-moderated information. That doesn’t mean sane minds should go down that particular road. Which begs the question in which state your mind is.
  - pitch pine
    
    wait, where does civil rights in the us south come into a discussion of copy-write infringement?
    - GGA
      
      Shut up MPAA toolbag.
- Anonymous
  
  I’ll even head off your next comment. Yes, when making copies of media files brings a harder sentence than what manslaughter can bring, the situation has indeed become fully comparable to the abuses of the legal system which took place in the US south in the 50′s.
  - Anonymous
    
    The penalties for copyright infringement may appear harsh to you but they are ultimately a deterrent.
    
    And there’s a very simple way of avoiding them.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “The penalties for copyright infringement may appear harsh to you..”
      
      He did not mentioned if they appeared harsh to him, so why do you respond to an argument not put forward? That’s called a straw-man, which is a logical fallacy and a dishonest attempt at avoiding the actual argument put forward.
      
      He brought attention to the fact that they are harsher than penalties for crimes that actually harms society, human beings and life in a very real way, unlike copyright infringement, which can never hurt anything else than weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market, and possibly the goal with copyright, which neither in no way is more important than human beings and life, to which he compared harm to.
      
      > “..but they are ultimately a deterrent”
      
      Which obviously doesn’t work, so the penalties you advocate are by definition meaningless as deterrents, and had you studied the history of copyright you would have known that even the death penalty did not stop people from performing copyright infringement.
      
      But more important than deterrent is that the punishment must ultimately display proportionality against the crime, which is a human right, something that the penalties against copyright infringements in no way display.
      
      As you have displayed many times before, human rights is not something that you consider at all relevant or important when it’s balanced against protecting legislative monopolies and the profit of weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market.
      
      > “And there’s a very simple way of avoiding them.”
      
      In other words, follow the law, which is meaningless circular reasoning and an imbecile argument only used by fascists and those that can’t produce any actual sustainable arguments.
    - Anonymous
      
      “He did not mentioned if they appeared harsh to him, so why do you respond to an argument not put forward?”
      
      It’s obvious that they appear harsh to him, otherwise why even compare ?
      
      “unlike copyright infringement, which can never hurt anything else than weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market”
      
      Why are you commenting on something that you know nothing about, you don’t create anything. Wheres is your experience exactly ? Have you earned your living online through its various changes and witnessed how the internet has altered over time for those creating media (i’ll leave that open ended for you) ?
      
      “Which obviously doesn’t work”
      
      Have you talked to people that have been caught downloading/uploading and have either paid a fine or been sentanced for a copyright related infringment and talked to them about how it’s effected their downloading/uploading ?
      
      “so the penalties you advocate are by definition meaningless as deterrents, and had you studied the history of copyright you would have known that even the death penalty did not stop people from performing copyright infringement.”
      
      I’m aware that the death penalty was a punishment for copyright infringement and I’m aware that there was still copyright infringement. That doesn’t mean that society would function better if every law was thrown out of the window, just because a percentage of people are willing to break them.
      
      “But more important than deterrent is that the punishment must ultimately display proportionality against the crime, which is a human right, something that the penalties against copyright infringements in no way display.”
      
      In your opinion.
      
      “As you have displayed many times before, human rights is not something that you consider at all relevant or important when it’s balanced against protecting legislative monopolies and the profit of weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market.”
      
      You’re making things up now.
      
      “In other words, follow the law, which is meaningless circular reasoning and an imbecile argument only used by fascists and those that can’t produce any actual sustainable arguments.”
      
      Fine break the law, there are options. Options with consequences naturally (like always).
    - Fredrika
      
      > “It’s obvious that they appear harsh to him, otherwise why even compare ?”
      
      To demonstrate that they are disproportionate compared to other crimes, crimes that are far worse, and that this indicates that the justice system has gone out the window, mirroring some historical disproportionate penalties. I know you avoided responding to what he actually wrote, but you did at least read it?
      
      > “Why are you commenting on something that you know nothing about..”
      
      What exactly is it that you believe i know nothing about? I stated the fact that copyright infringement can only hurt weak failed monopoly holders, as in entrepreneurs, that can’t handle themselves on the free market, which is a fact.
      
      > “..you don’t create anything.”
      
      What i do is something that you know exactly nothing about.
      
      > “Wheres is your experience exactly ?”
      
      That has no relevance whatsoever to the discussed topics or the stated claims.
      
      > “Have you earned your living online through its various changes and witnessed how the internet has altered over time for those creating media..”
      
      Now you suddenly corroborated my claim, that the only thing possibly getting hurt from copyright infringements is the profit of weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market, which is exactly the party you just described.
      
      Weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market has always been hurt from the free market effects. This is nothing new or something unique for creators of intellectual works.
      
      > “Have you talked to people that have been caught downloading/uploading and have either paid a fine or been sentanced for a copyright related infringment and talked to them about how it’s effected their downloading/uploading ?”
      
      Previously you talked about deterring effects, which would be relevant to those hundreds of millions of people that have not been caught, but now all of a sudden you drop that failed argument and instead focus on a few thousands that have been caught?
      
      You can’t even follow your own argumentative thread.
      
      > “That doesn’t mean that society would function better if every law was thrown out of the window, just because a percentage of people are willing to break them.”
      
      Which no one has suggested and which is not the topic discussed. Another dishonest use of a straw-man argument from you.
      
      The discussion is not about every law in existence, or a law which a percentage disobeys, it’s about legislative monopolies that intrudes into peoples property rights, a rare type of law that puts the free market out of order, a type of law that has always been extremely ignored among the public, and a law that large parts of earth’s population disobey, and that has almost no acceptance among the public’s legal consciousness.
      
      In combination with the fact that no scientific verifiable evidence exists that supports the thesis that non-profit use of intellectual works hurts neither society, creators, culture, the goal with copyright or the culture industry’s current record revenues, it most certainly means that this particular meaningless and unsustainable prohibition in law should be thrown out the window.
      
      > “In your opinion.”
      
      In every sane persons opinion an intrusion into a legislative monopoly is not proportionately addressed if it’s treated more harshly than manslaughter, unless you seriously argue that copyright infringements and some weak failed entrepreneurs making less money due to the free market effects is equally or more serious than the termination of human life and manslaughter?
      
      And no, actually not just mine and every sane persons opinion, also according to the rules of law and the human rights, which clearly says that for a prohibition in law to be legitimate, there must be verifiable documented evidence that supports the thesis that there exists a problem in the first place, that must be legally addressed, and that is not the case with the copyright monopoly.
      
      > “You’re making things up now.”
      
      I most certainly am not, would you like me to quote you from several instances over the last six months, were you have been crystal clear that you advocate and applaud censorship of free speech and fully legal sites, and violation of the human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information? Or instances where you advocate reversed burden of proof, which is also a violation of human rights?
      
      I remember every single discussion we’ve had and every claim you made, and you most certainly has done exactly that, claimed that protecting legislative monopolies and the profit of weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market, is something that shouldn’t be hindered by human rights.
      
      > “Fine break the law, there are options. Options with consequences naturally (like always).”
      
      Yes, there are many options, some were the consequence is that you become untouchable from the law when it comes to addressing copyright infringements. And is does not change the fact that your meaningless argument of follow the law is nothing other than circular reasoning and not an argument at all, which brings us back to the beginning of it all, and that SDM’s point stands, and that your weak attempt at avoiding commenting on his actual point failed, as usual.
    - Anonymous
      
      “To demonstrate that they are disproportionate compared to other crimes, crimes that are far worse, and that this indicates that the justice system has gone out the window, mirroring some historical disproportionate penalties. I know you avoided responding to what he actually wrote, but you did at least read it?”
      
      Of course I read it. In order to compare, there would need to be a much better comparrison between the two different crimes and sentances, which didn’t happen. Being sensationlist doesn’t make a persons “dissproportinate sentance” claim valid in the least.
      
      “What exactly is it that you believe i know nothing about? I stated the fact that copyright infringement can only hurt weak failed monopoly holders, as in entrepreneurs, that can’t handle themselves on the free market, which is a fact.”
      
      You know nothing about creating digital media and operating a business in the online marketplace with said media so your broad stroke statement is meaningless.
      
      “What i do is something that you know exactly nothing about.”
      
      Agreed. I do not know what it is you do. I certainly know what you don’t do and can make an educated guess on what you do. And ultimately, I’m the only person I need to satisfy in that regard.
      
      “Now you suddenly corroborated my claim, that the only thing possibly getting hurt from copyright infringements is the profit of weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market, which is exactly the party you just described.
      
      Weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market has always been hurt from the free market effects. This is nothing new or something unique for creators of intellectual works.”
      
      Your use of “Weak failed entrepreneurs” is missleading at best. Another broad stroked claim that you can’t back up. Protecting copyrights does not make an entity weak or failed.
      
      “Previously you talked about deterring effects, which would be relevant to those hundreds of millions of people that have not been caught, but now all of a sudden you drop that failed argument and instead focus on a few thousands that have been caught?”
      
      I haven’t dropped an argument I’ve simply asked another question. One which you aren’t very well qualified to comment on since you sit in a Quarterbacks armchair.
      
      “Which no one has suggested and which is not the topic discussed. Another dishonest use of a straw-man argument from you.”
      
      You said “Which obviously doesn’t work, so the penalties you advocate are by definition meaningless as deterrents, and had you studied the history of copyright you would have known that even the death penalty did not stop people from performing copyright infringement.”
      
      I said I was aware of this. And I assumed you would understand the point that even though those penalties do not exist today and the penalties that do exist might appear harsh to some people, that doesn’t mean that those penalties are dissproportionate or meaningless, even if some continue to risk the consequences.
      
      “a rare type of law that puts the free market out of order”
      
      In your opinon, others are going to argue that piracy also puts the Free market out of order in addition to other damages.
      
      “a type of law that has always been extremely ignored among the public’
      
      By a percentage of the public, certainly not all. And that wouldn’t surprise anyone. The nature of a percentage of the populous (when there is a high reward vs low consequence situations) will naturally swing their moral compass to reward.
      
      “and a law that large parts of earth’s population disobey, and that has almost no acceptance among the public’s legal consciousness, or a law which a percentage disobeys”
      
      see above ;)….incidntally, there are many laws that at one point or another large parts of the earths population ignore and that some of them will argue also have dissproportinate penalties. That doesn’t make it true simply because they were one of a small percent that were caught.
      
      “In every sane persons opinion”
      
      still your opinion.
      
      “an intrusion into a legislative monopoly is not proportionately addressed if it’s treated more harshly than manslaughter”
      
      It isn’t treated more harshly than manslaughter, thats a false statement.
      
      And no, actually not just mine and every sane persons opinion, also according to the rules of law and the human rights, which clearly says that for a prohibition in law to be legitimate, there must be verifiable documented evidence that supports the thesis that there exists a problem in the first place, that must be legally addressed, and that is not the case with the copyright monopoly.
      
      Here we go again with the “if I say *sane* it proves my point more” statement. Its still your opinion, like it or not.
      
      “I most certainly am not, would you like me to quote you from several instances over the last six months, were you have been crystal clear that you advocate and applaud censorship of free speech and fully legal sites, and violation of the human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information? Or instances where you advocate reversed burden of proof, which is also a violation of human rights?
      
      I remember every single discussion we’ve had and every claim you made, and you most certainly has done exactly that, claimed that protecting legislative monopolies and the profit of weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market, is something that shouldn’t be hindered by human rights.”
      
      We don’t agree on what constitutes free speech, let alone anything else. So drag up what you like, we’ll still disagree.
      
      “Yes, there are many options, some were the consequence is that you become untouchable from the law when it comes to addressing copyright infringements. And is does not change the fact that your meaningless argument of follow the law is nothing other than circular reasoning and not an argument at all, which brings us back to the beginning of it all, and that SDM’s point stands, and that your weak attempt at avoiding commenting on his actual point failed, as usual.”
      
      What point ? Comparing civil rights abuses to copyright infringement sentances is asinine. of course, you’ll disagree.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “In order to compare, there would need to be a much better comparrison between the two different crimes and sentances, which didn’t happen.”
      
      SDM based his claim on the well known fact that after almost 15 years of filesharing and online infringements exists no evidence to support the thesis that online piracy causes any harm to neither society, creators, culture, the goal with copyright or the culture industry’s current record revenues. Manslaughter most certainly causes harm.
      
      When one crime that no one can prove causes any harm, in sentenced in the same range as with individuals committing manslaughter, the point is indeed valid, and the comparison stands, there is no proportionality regarding the punishments for piracy.
      
      > “You know nothing about creating digital media and operating a business in the online marketplace with said media..”
      
      Something that you know nothing about, and again, my eventual knowledge of that has no relevance whatsoever to anything regarding this discussion.
      
      My initial claim however stands exactly as it was written, piracy can cause harm to nothing other than weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market. The fact that a weak failed entrepreneur that can’t handle himself on the free market makes less revenues does not equal that society, human beings and life has been caused harm. The free market effect is not considered harm by any definition.
      
      > “I certainly know what you don’t do..”
      
      No, you most certainly do not. The fact that i previously responded in the way that i did to your question if i create did not mean that i didn’t create, i only meant that since what i do has no relevance whatsoever to this discussion, i will not comment on it.
      
      > “Your use of “Weak failed entrepreneurs” is missleading at best.”
      
      An entrepreneur that can’t handle himself on the free market without a legislative monopoly is by definition a weak failed entrepreneur. A strong successful entrepreneur needs no monopoly, he can compete on the free market and still succeed regardless of competition.
      
      > “Protecting copyrights does not make an entity weak or failed.”
      
      It most certainly does. A strong successful entrepreneur would not care about free market effect of piracy. He would succeed anyway, regardless of the competition from piracy. Only weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market would try to oppose the free market effect of piracy.
      
      > “I haven’t dropped an argument I’ve simply asked another question.”
      
      Because you could no longer respond to the initial line of reasoning. The deterring effects you spoke of in your initial claim simply does not exist.
      
      > “One which you aren’t very well qualified to comment on since you sit in a Quarterbacks armchair.”
      
      The punishments for copyright infringements has no deterring effects on online piracy, this is something anyone can corroborate easily regardless of what type of chair one resides in, by simply looking at the facts that online piracy continuous to grow by each day, despite ten years of allegedly deterring punishments.
      
      If the punishments actually had deterring effects piracy would have decreased for each day over the last ten years.
      
      > “I said I was aware of this. And I assumed you would understand the point that even though those penalties do not exist today and the penalties that do exist might appear harsh to some people, that doesn’t mean that those penalties are dissproportionate or meaningless, even if some continue to risk the consequences.”
      
      That was not what the straw-man argument was about, now was it? Is was the following argument that was a straw-man:
      
      “That doesn’t mean that society would function better if every law was thrown out of the window, just because a percentage of people are willing to break them”
      
      Nor have i ever argued that today’s penalties are harsh, disproportionate or meaningless because some, as in hundreds of millions of people, continue to risk the consequences. That’s again another straw-man argument you out forward.
      
      > “In your opinon..”
      
      No. Legislative monopolies are indeed a rare type of law, and they by definition put the free market out of order, because that’s the only thing legislative monopolies does.
      
      > “..others are going to argue that piracy also puts the Free market out of order..”
      
      Well, then they would be idiots, not understading that there exists no free market when legislative monopolies decide which entrepreneurs that are allowed to even enter the market in the first place. Piracy can not put something out of order when it doesn’t exists in the first place.
      
      > “..in addition to other damages.”
      
      Alleged damages, that no one has been able to prove.
      
      > “By a percentage of the public, certainly not all.”
      
      Those legislative monopolies that intrude into people’s private property rights are indeed a type of law that has always been ignored by large percentages of the public. I have not claimed that they were ignored by everyone.
      
      > “And that wouldn’t surprise anyone. The nature of a percentage of the populous (when there is a high reward vs low consequence situations) will naturally swing their moral compass to reward.”
      
      You seem confused. People’s moral is not decided by what the law says, or the risk for getting caught. You seem to have no understanding whatsoever for the concept of morality. The reason people feel it’s morally acceptable to disregard legislative monopolies that intrudes into their property, is because it’s their property in the first place. People to not need to morally justify why they should be able to do as they wish with their property, that they already own.
      
      The only thing that needs justification is the prohibition in law, so the two things that people weigh against each other is not high reward vs low consequence , but the natural right to use people’s own property so that it benefits them vs an intrusion into their property that hasn’t been successfully justified.
      
      Obviously people’s moral compass will tell them that it’s acceptable do as they wish with their own property in that scenario, regardless of what the law says.
      
      > “….incidntally, there are many laws that at one point or another large parts of the earths population ignore and that some of them will argue also have dissproportinate penalties.”
      
      This discussion is not about laws in general, this discussion is about a rare type of law as in legislative monopolies that intrudes into people private property. Such rare laws has never been widely accepted and they have almost always had disproportionate punishments.
      
      > “That doesn’t make it true simply because they were one of a small percent that were caught.”
      
      Nor have a ever claimed that the penalties against piracy are disproportionate for any of those reasons. That’s another dishonest straw-man argument of yours.
      
      > “still your opinion.”
      
      No, most certainly not. There are well established psychological guidelines in society that decides whether or not someone is sane, and someone who believes that piracy and intrusions into legislative monopolies should be addressed in the same range as manslaughter and the extinction of human life most certainly is not sane. Ask any psychologist.
      
      > It isn’t treated more harshly than manslaughter, thats a false statement.”
      
      Which was not a statement i’ve made. Another straw-man.
      
      > “Here we go again with the “if I say *sane* it proves my point more” statement. Its still your opinion, like it or not.”
      
      Again you completely avoid responding to what i actually wrote. No, it’s not my opinion. There are clear rules for legislation and intrusions into human rights, that parts of the copyright monopoly and it’s punishments does not follow today.
      
      > “We don’t agree on what constitutes free speech..”
      
      I have never put forward my opinion on what constitutes free speech? What constitutes free speech is something that’s well documented in several constitutions, and in none of them are there exceptions that says the it isn’t free speech if the information transferred should happen to be information that either can be used to manufacture copies of copyrighted works(as with filesharing), or help you find out where you can find such information(as with torrent sites).
      
      So the problem here isn’t that you and i don’t agree(which is something you know nothing about since i rarely reveal any personal opinions), the problem is that you don’t agree with what free speech actually is, according to several constitutions.
      
      Operating a fully legal site as Pirate Bay offering information that people wish to spread is free speech. Transference of information in private communication describing patterns of people’s own physical property(as P2P-filesharing), is free speech.
      
      As i said, you have been crystal clear that you advocate and applaud censorship of free speech and fully legal sites such as Pirate Bay, and violation of the human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information.
      
      So i’m not making anything up when i say that human rights is not something that you consider at all relevant or important when it’s balanced against protecting legislative monopolies and the profit of weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market
      
      > “What point ? Comparing civil rights abuses to copyright infringement sentances is asinine.”
      
      It is not, when abusing of civil rights is the currently used method to stop piracy, as in violation of free speech through censorship of fully legal websites, and dismantlements of the human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information.
- pitch pine
  
  i hope he is!
dave mave

herpderp
and nothing of value was damaged
Frankgaf4433

Quick draft guide to maximize plausible deniability when uploading to a file hosting site:

Prerequisites:

Zoom’s File and image uploader (z-o-o-m.eu)

A wireless router with internet access and WEP encryption

A spare computer with wireless access card running Windows either as primary or virtualized OS.

Good friend or other party willing to swear under oath when you aren’t at home.

(1) Perform a hard reset of the router and purge all router logs and memory.

(2) Change the wireless authentication on the router to a weak WEP key.

(3) Change the mac address, hostname and computername of the spare computer to something random.

(4) Connect from the computer to the wireless router with the WEP key.

(5) Schedule File and image uploader to start uploads when you aren’t at home.

(6) Visit a friend or other party in order to get a good alibi.

Don’t tell the friend or other party what you are up to. It might come back to bite you if he/she is threatened or promised a plea bargain.

(7) If you ever get sued or questioned ask for the date and time of the alleged copyright violation.

Tell the interested party that you couldn’t have done it and show your alibi and demand evidence.

If the other party doesn’t believe you, offer a complete forensic inventory of your computer at the other party’s expense.

(8) Destroy or wipe all data on the uploading computer after each upload.

File and image uploader creates a log file which must be securely wiped everytime.

(9) Hand over your clean computer to the forensics investigator.

(10) When the forensics inventory turns up nothing, explain that your wireless access point might have been compromised.

We have now raised sufficient doubt as to render any further investigation uneconomical.

Please add details to make this guide better.

All this is only my preliminary observations.
Pingback: El mayor juicio por infracción de copyright en la República Checa
Pingback: Un pirata checo podría acabar en la cárcel | The Inquirer ES
Andycapp

The movie and music industry have been hated for a long time, all there actions over the years trying to get people to pay multiple times for the same thing , producing rubbish and getting people to watch that rubbish then refusing to refund ticket prices when people complain. Creating release windows and region restrictions and denying people the right to use there purchased goods as they want to, like transferring a movie or music to a different player. Then they have sued and imprisoned people for sharing with others and taken old ladies to court for downloading things they declare they have not downloaded.They want to take a person from there own country and try them in America for doing something legal in there own country. (and are succeeding) . They have sued young kids and the elderly just for linking to something.
Well there distribution chain, the lifeblood of there business, the way they have controlled what when and where people view there product has been broken, anyone can distribute a movie now , anyone can upload and share a movie or music. there monopoly has been destroyed and we have the power now, not them. I will never purchase a plastic disk again , i will never pay for my music again. I will never support a group that has manipulated there statistics to steal from people.

The only thing i will ever do is go to the theater when the prices are low, early sat morning etc. They want a fight well i am one of those hundreds of thousands that will fight them by withholding my money by not buying there products online or in shops , I don’t care how cheap it is. or how much they lie about people losing there jobs. They had a monopoly in the market and abused that monopoly, now that monopoly is being removed by the greater population and it is time for payback.
This great figurehead in the sharing community will only encourage more people like myself to upload whatever i can , when there are millions of people uploading one person going to jail for 6 months will not stop them from sharing , it will only encourage them to hide there actions from the thieves who are the Riaa, and encourage more people to fill the gap left behind.
Pingback: Un pirata checo podría acabar en la cárcel | GRS
djnforce9

…and here is yet another martyr just for spreading our culture to everyone. If the industry was losing as much as they claim, they would probably be bankrupt by now.
Anon

Free speech thrives on the internet in spite of piracy advocates comparing the unlawful duplication and distribution of copyrighted merchandise with the act of typing out your thoughts and publishing them where other people can see and read and consider them. If you work to retain the freedom of the latter, you’d better work to curtail the unlawful behavior of the former.
- Fredrika
  
  > “Free speech thrives on the internet in spite of piracy advocates comparing the unlawful duplication and distribution of copyrighted merchandise with the act of typing out your thoughts and publishing them where other people can see and read and consider them.”
  
  Can you please point out were it says that free speech or the human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information is limited and doesn’t cover the publishing and transference of information that happens to describe patterns of physical property(owned by the person transferring the information), that eventually will turn into intellectual works when properly decoded?
  
  Let me help you with that one, no you cant, because it doesn’t. It’s a well known fact that the copyright monopoly does not precedes free speech and the human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information. So the comparison stands, but your objection and disrespect for free speech and the human rights does not. Nothing new there though.
  
  > “If you work to retain the freedom of the latter, you’d better work to curtail the unlawful behavior of the former.”
  
  No, there’s a better way, simply dismantle the relevant parts of the copyright monopoly, and make sure it is no longer made up of illegitimate legislation(such as they use in dictatorships), something you often advocate, in your desperate attempts at protecting weak failed entrepreneurs that can’t handle themselves on the free market.
  
  I know you don’t follow politics very closely, but the worlds strongest economy which the US has to bow down to, the EU, is currently looking into that. A rather natural turn of events for the last days of the copyright monopoly, since the pirates has formed political parties in over 60 countries in the world, been elected into several governing assemblies, and gaining more momentum every weak in the EU.
  
  Are you gonna join in on the celebration party this Sunday when the pirates are again elected into another governing assembly, this time the biggest state in the biggest economical country in the EU?
http://profile.yahoo.com/4G2UB2ULJSWGMWBQN2JHH2LN6M Darrell

what Gerald replied I cant believe that you can earn $9315 in a few weeks on the internet. did you read this web link (Click on menu Home more information) http://goo.gl/t8wC3
Anonymous

Where’s the evidence that even a single one of those downloaders would have purchased if they couldn’t download it for free?…

Where is the evidence of ACTUAL LOSSES rather than the arbitrary figure of perceived losses based upon an assumption that has been demonstrably shown to be erroneous?

That’s right, there isn’t any evidence and the circumstantial evidence that does exist does not support the assumptions made by the industry (assumptions that naive and corrupt judges alike seem to believe.)
A40

I’d just like to point out that the user’s nickname was ‘NEREZ’ in all caps, which then translates to ‘Stainless’ (Steel). The uploader was a very popular user on the (in)famous Czech forum http://www.warforum.cz.
Demen33

how did he get caught exactly?
http://profile.yahoo.com/LNRNT7XCESEFTW6VCQIXI5J4AA Fleming

like Willie responded I am impressed that a mom can make $8305 in 1 month on the internet. did you look at this site (Click on menu Home more information) http://goo.gl/6w3Rs
Guest

Average market price multiplied by 3? So that’s how they got those absurd figures.

I would be willing to bet money that no more than 10% of the total number of downloads are lost sales. I can say for a fact that 99.9% of everything I’ve ever downloaded has been something that I wouldn’t have bought anyway and I download files on a frequent basis. Yes, I might have bought a few games that I downloaded if they hadn’t been available. I also might still buy DVDs (although I only ever bought a few of them) if everything wasn’t already available for download. I quit going to the movie theater altogether after what the MPAA did to MegaUpload and I won’t ever give Hollywood another penny, whether they shut down all piracy or not. I was never a customer of the RIAA’s clients and I will never buy that trash (I won’t even download it).

A large portion of the piracy market consists of people downloading TV shows from other countries (that aren’t available in their country) and people streaming or downloading sports events that aren’t available on TV. I’ve downloaded very few movies over the years and I mostly outraged with the MPAA because it now takes 3 times as long as it used to (sometimes even more) for me to download things that aren’t available at all “legally” in my country. Why am I going to go to the movies a few times a year and financially support the MPAA’s clients after what Crook Dodd’s organization did to MegaUpload and the other fast file hosts? I now look forward to the day when Hollywood goes out of business altogether. They aren’t getting another dime from me.
Pingback: Major Cyberlocker Movie Pirate Faces 5 Years In Prison « Hackton – Latest file sharing news and gossip
Patrick Chenier

What a fucked up system. Since you decide to infringe copyright material it gives your attackers the right to put you to jail where you can get raped by Bob. Whatever happens in jail, it’s sure to destroy your life.
ihlim

The should lower the price of blu-ray discs and dvds if they want me to stop downloading. if not, neverrrr! In my country a mission impossible bluray is the same price as my internet bill. So, pay or download? oops, let me rephrase that, pirate.
Pingback: Major Cyberlocker Movie Pirate Faces 5 Years In Prison | Mediafire Search Engine
Pingback: Latest Rapidshare File Search News | Rapid Share
Pingback: El mayor juicio por infraccion de copyright en la Republica Checa

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Major Cyberlocker Movie Pirate Faces 5 Years In Prison

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

NewsBits

The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

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

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