Comments on: Music Industry Set For Civil Action Against OiNK

By: OiNK sigue acosado por la industria multimedia | Guías Informáticas

OiNK sigue acosado por la industria multimedia | Guías Informáticas — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:25:24 +0000

[...] que esta gente no se conforma con lo que los jueces digan, y explicó, muy al estilo Corleone, que “buscarán otros caminos” para castigar a Ellis. Parece que Ellis aún tendrá que pelear en la vía [...]

By: gameloo.info

gameloo.info — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:00:24 +0000

So will the site be continued?

By: Predator

Predator — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:35:14 +0000

IFPI? Le’ts kill them all!

By: hypoc

hypoc — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 14:03:04 +0000

They won’t give it back to the artists.

By: Bad MoJo

Bad MoJo — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:19:08 +0000

IFPI says it is considering civil action, and is committed to reclaiming the money donated to the site in order to give it back to the artists.

Yeah sure, anyone that believes this has a raisin for a brain.

By: Quartz

Quartz — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 09:02:47 +0000

I believe in the US/UK court systems its called declaring the evidence “inadmissable” as it was obtained illegally or by deception.

By: Quartz

Quartz — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 08:59:26 +0000

You all seem to have missed the obvious here, how can the IFPI bring a case when they have no evidence as all the evidence gathered from mr ellis for the criminal trail is now null and void for any future trail as he was found not guilty of the criminal charge levied at him that the “evidence” was obtained for, this means that such evidence cannot be used for just any purpose by anyone and thus under the law they have no right to steal the content of his drives or financial data thus his lawyer only needs to point out how they have no evidence besides hearsay for them to lose any case once again.

By: Chris Crocker

Chris Crocker — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 04:36:28 +0000

LEAVE ALAN ELLIS ALONE!!! I’M SERIOUS!!

By: jon

jon — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 00:53:36 +0000

now that the case has been won take your money out and sell valuables dont own anything .store your money with trustworthy family till after the cival case finished. blood out of stone .no monies for the capitalists fck im

By: Borderliner

Borderliner — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:38:02 +0000

There’s actually a chance that if copyright infrightment would become a criminal matter then this would help pirates. Of course, that police is automatically involved and a real prisontime could be the outcome is not good, but think about it – in criminal cases the *accuser* has to prove his case, not the accused on like by civil matters. MPAA&friends won’t have a case in a criminal court with those shady methods and nonexistant proof that they currently use…

By: A Non

A Non — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:01:18 +0000

If the IFPI get their way and Ellis pays them the 200 grand then what happens when the other people whose files may have been shared come asking for money? (i refer to the ebooks, computer software, and e-learning videos which were also allegedly linked to)

John Kennedy = FAIL

By: TerribleTony

TerribleTony — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:21:43 +0000

Equine Industry will fail. Sorry.

By: Diggler

Diggler — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:07:28 +0000

Absolute nightmare these industries….hope they all rot. If anyone from the companies concerned is listening…
You just lost another customer.
I swear to God, I’ll never ‘buy’ another product from you. Bullies and pervayers of overpriced products. Beware: I may be a trendsetter!

By: Essence

Essence — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:19:57 +0000

“just bring a counter suit
and mention the 6 billion they owe the artists in Canada

yup haven’t been paying them since 1980
so why should oink admin pay anything”

HAHAHA yea no kidding; I completely agree. This money isnt going towards the artists..soeone just wants some green

By: Después de haber sido declarado inocente, quieren seguir llevando a la corte al administrador de OiNK [EN]

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:39:23 +0000

[...] Después de haber sido declarado inocente, quieren seguir llevando a la corte al administrador de Oi… torrentfreak.com/music-industry-set-for-civil-action-against… por Tanatos hace 2 segundos [...]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:28:45 +0000

“everyone in today’s music industry is gay ”

If it was just that that would be Ok but they are not gay they are pederasts and we must obliterate them.

By: prodigydancer

prodigydancer — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:50:24 +0000

This is called extortion.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:20:39 +0000

The Kopyright Kartels keep trotting out the lie that he made x amount of money and that he was therefore profiting from copyright infringement.

If you follow their logic, non-profit companies who take in large amounts of money, use that money to pay their staff and invest in the company and its infrastructure are actually profit-making companies.

The money was used to pay the expenses of hosting and bandwidth. The large amount mentioned was the sum total of years of such monies and not a huge pot sitting there.

What’s that line ‘if you tell a lie often enough, people will beleive it’?

The Copyright Industry is lying through its teeth again and again.

Why have they always done this?

By: Links 22/1/2010: London Stock Exchange on Road to GNU/Linux, Btrfs vs EXT4 on Linux 2.6.33 | Boycott Novell

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:53:07 +0000

[...] Music Industry Set For Civil Action Against OiNK Alan Ellis, the ex-admin of the OiNK BitTorrent tracker, was cleared of Conspiracy to Defraud by jury of his peers last week. But now it seems that as one battle ends, another begins. IFPI says it is considering civil action, and is committed to reclaiming the money donated to the site in order to give it back to the artists. [...]

By: One More Gadget Blog » Acquittal holder tracker OiNK – the weakness of UK laws

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:36:21 +0000

[...] TorrentFreak Tags: OiNK | [...]

By: Ifpi ancora guai per Oink

Ifpi ancora guai per Oink — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:04:52 +0000

[...] parte avversa, invece, evidentemente inviperita dalle decisioni del tribunale, ha rilasciato dichiarazioni, dicendo anche che ha intenzione di continuare a perseguire Ellis civilmente, in [...]

By: Después de haber sido declarado inocente, quieren seguir llevando a la corte al administrador de OiNK | ALT1040

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:28:44 +0000

[...] de IFPI, John Kennedy, reveló que el veredicto que dio el jurado no fue el fin y explicó que “buscarán otros caminos” para castigar a Ellis y ahora están considerando seriamente en llevarlo a la corte [...]

By: M-RES

M-RES — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:17:52 +0000

“I get the impression that they purposely charged him in the criminal court for fraud expecting an aquital to try to force the British govt into changing the laws to make filesharing/copyright infringement a criminl offense. Knowing full well that the next step would be a civil case for compensation.”

No, they aren’t FORCING the government to do anything. The Crown Prosecution Service (not the government) decided to bring this to trial. They have a duty to oversee the evidence prior to pursuing a case in the criminal courts to make sure they have a chance of winning. If there’s insufficient evidence then they generally will not press the charges.

If anything this shows that IFPI weren’t really behind this. It’s far more likely that the judicial system at the behest of certain law lords (I’m not mentioning any names *cough* MANDY *cough*) brought this case, possibly for the reasons you mentioned – to raise the public profile of pirating and potentially scare others away. That is, unless IFPI truly have extra-judicial powers.

By: Rog

Rog — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:56:51 +0000

The IFPI and BPI can blow me.

By: BlackBeard

BlackBeard — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:53:33 +0000

Alan did nothing wrong. He is innocent of these false charges. Music was shared among users. No one was charged anything. They willingly donated money because they liked the site. Keeping any website running costs money. As the court recently ruled Alan was quite unaware that some of the users were choosing to share copyrighted material. Not directly his fault. Justice was served. The music industry should not be able to steal donations meant to keep the site running.

By: riaa is deceit

riaa is deceit — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:06:55 +0000

to all you troll(ers), martin, no style, reasoned mind, and whatever else you called yourselves wake up and check out the deception, thievery, con, and illegal activity of riaa from this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CVLiMw8_00

By: Guest

Guest — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:07:08 +0000

So IFPI wants to give donated money back to the artists. Although I really welcome IFPI’s sudden change of policy to actually give money to artists, I wonder why it has to be money that artists apparently donated to OiNK themselves. I especially wonder why they have to sue poor Mr Ellis over this again. If the artists want donated money back, I’m sure Mr Ellis will return it.

Mr Kennedy, I have an even better idea: why don’t you ask your members to pay their associated artists a fair share of their media sales revenue? And while you’re at it, apoligise to the artists, the public and especially people such as Mr Ellis and the (former) operators of The Pirate Bay for IFPI’s despicable behaviour in the past decade.

By: Dizzy

Dizzy — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:03:26 +0000

i meant, what money goes where, sorry…

By: Dizzy

Dizzy — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:02:37 +0000

“IFPI says it is considering civil action, and is committed to reclaiming the money donated to the site in order to give it back to the artists.”

hahaha, i seem to remember this wasn’t really happening all that much cause of the enormous “problems” deciding what goes what… maybe they should first handle that part before actually claiming money.

By: Unauthorized Content Consumer

Unauthorized Content Consumer — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 09:18:00 +0000

Only the record companies are allowed to exploit and rip off artists. The levies they collect on behalf of the artists goes to the executives and the lawyers, and no one has any evidence that the artists receive a single penny of it.

I’m sure the trolls find this acceptable and make excuses for the media corporations and will condone their practices. Why? Because they are affiliated with the media corporations.

By: Whatever

Whatever — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:11:10 +0000

@57 Reasonable Mindless
Are you inviting me to download a movie ? Did you download it ? Do your masters agree it is ok to download that movie (i assume it is a movie) ?

I guess you do, because i have not seen it and would have to download it to find out what you are referring to. I am ofcourse not going to pay money just to find out what the hell you are whining about. Actually i dont even feel the urge to take the time to download it but its good to know you are sharing too.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:59:25 +0000

A Donation is a donation. Regardless what the site’s possible intentions are, the donations were given directly to Alan, not as payment for services rendered, but so he can keep his website up. The content of the site isn’t really in question because again, its not payment for services. To try and link “donations” with that is a stretch.

For example, recently Linkin Park joined up with about 9 other bands/artists and released a joint album on the internet called “Donate to Download for Haiti”. The album was freely given out with no attachments and no requirement to donate. What are the record companies going to do? Sue them for not going through their labels to release this music? I mean hell these companies go after pirates and what these artists did was went straight towards the pirates with this one. Cut the record labels out of the picture already!

By: InterWebz

InterWebz — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:34:17 +0000

Yes all the money stolen from the poor artists! Now who else is getting sued for not giving the owed money to artists???

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:19:47 +0000

Why is it, that whenever I think of Reasoned Mind, I see that Record Label guy from Alvin and the Chipmunks. A real twat. Sadly, they really are like that in the music industry.

By: Reasoned Mind

Reasoned Mind — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:16:38 +0000

So what if i’m gay, everyone in today’s music industry is gay except for bands etc that make it the hard way through pub gigs etc. All else are gay, and we have cocaine and orgy parties all the time with the money we make from music.

By: Pax

Pax — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:13:32 +0000

God I can’t wait for the younger Generations to become Judges, so they can tell lobby groups to STFU and stop bitching like a little school girl.

By: Yatti420

Yatti420 — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:28:28 +0000

Seems like a threat from the IFPI.. They could end up paying Ellis money if the case goes badly.. I doubt the will file..

By: Reasoned Mind

Reasoned Mind — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:12:34 +0000

If you’re happy and you know it that I’m a troll Yeehaw

If you’re happy and you know I troll for a fee Yeehaw

If you’re happy and you know it and you really want to show it if you’re happy and that I’m trolling for a fee. OiNK OiNK

By: Reasoned Mind

Reasoned Mind — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 05:59:41 +0000

#69 #70
Nice try impersonators

#77
Where’s the self confession that I’m gay?

… or am I?

By: Brain

Brain — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 05:58:10 +0000

shame to Alan Ellis.
Filling your pockets with “so called” donations
Its the same as selling warez or illegal CD’s/Dvd’s
It means:
If i donate $50 ,i can download 50gigs
its the same as handling stolen goods

By: Reasoned Mind

Reasoned Mind — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 05:51:25 +0000

Com on

Make love not war

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 04:53:53 +0000

What do you call a thousand dead lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? A good start! This is what I think of those scummy leech lawyers.

By: kelly

kelly — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 04:16:43 +0000

this is gonna be even bigger fail for corporate mafiaa. the donations weren’t in any way connected with music/copyrighted content. let them sue and it’s gonna be even bigger fail than the first case.

By: Surys

Surys — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 04:15:00 +0000

Q: Was the money a contribution to the artists or to the site?

A: The site.

—

Q: If donations are taken and used for something other than the intended purpose and specifically against the wishes of the donators, what do we call this?

A: FRAUD/THEFT/etc

—

The IFPI are trying to defraud the donators. What the donators donated for was forcibly ceased, forced against Ellis’s will at the behest of the IFPI.

That is despite the fact that what he had done has not been ruled as unlawful or illegal.

Now they are trying to steal the donator’s donations (which should really be returned to the donators if not used for it’s intended purposes)

The IFPI are trying STEAL money… they deserve every bit of malice, spite and savagery thrown in their direction.

Another thing..

The IFPI have no idea, nor do they have any interest in knowing which artists had their tracks downloaded.

How can they possibly make the money go to the effected artists?

THEY CANNOT… THEREFORE THEY ARE LYING.

And before Retarded Mind or Neocon Styles wish to interrupt… the theft comparison isn’t even close… intellectual property would have to be bought for it to count as a loss… taken by those that had no intention of buying equates to the loss/theft/displacement of $0 necessarily… but money is money… so STFU before you even start with your lame BS attempts to draw parallels between piracy and this blatant IFPI fraud.

By: Mr Taxpayer

Mr Taxpayer — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 04:12:41 +0000

I am a UK citizen and a taxpayer. I do not file share.

I want to know how much the total cost of the Police investigation was, the total cost of the CPS cost to prosecute Ellis and, given that both were instigated at the urging of the BPI and both failed, what the BPI is doing to pay back me, the taxpayer the money I have sweated for.

I don’t work 6 days a week 12 hours a day so some mega rich corporations can save themselves the expense of a civil trial by first “having a go” at a criminal one that I pay for. The fact that they are now going to go fo round 2 using their own money after wasting mine first is repugnant. They should have gone that route the first time if at all.

I want my money. GIVE ME MY MONEY. (in the voice of Vinnie Jones).

By: Obedient

Obedient — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 04:04:32 +0000

“…..there is a commitment by the industry to retrieve the money the users of OiNK donated to the site, and give it to the artists whose music was shared there……”
If the money is to be taken back, I say it should go back to the people who donated it in the first place.
IFPI and the MAFIAA should not be allowed to make one cent out of this. And NO, those leeches are not for the artists either.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:49:31 +0000

What do want to bet that the artists will not get anything from the IFPI if they were to recover the ‘donations’ from OiNK?

The laywers and the labels themselves will get all of it.

And what percentage of the money from the 17,000+ settlement demands the RIAA sent to people using Kazaa have their artists gotten? 0%. The same with the judgements against Joel Tannenbaum and Jammie Thomas.

By: Reasoned Mind

Reasoned Mind — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 02:46:53 +0000

I am trolling for a fee for as long as it last.

Trolling, trolling, trolling!

Each time I write “trolling” I get $1.

OK! Ready?

Trolling, trolling, trolling,Trolling, trolling, trolling,Trolling, trolling, trolling,Trolling, trolling, trolling,Trolling, trolling. . .

By: Reasoned Mind

Reasoned Mind — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 02:45:35 +0000

I am trolling.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 02:44:10 +0000

I am going to kill them all.