If you enable theft without being a thief, you might not be a pirate, but you’re an accessory to the crime, and you’ll pay a fine or spend quality time in a penitentiary.

You have no inalienable right to steal, but that habit is best cured by hanging.

That makes no sense at all. Just because Google indexes more than torrent sites doesn’t mean they don’t also index torrent sites. I think the main point trying to be made is that Google doesn’t filter so why should torrent indexers filter. Also it is logical to also conclude that if indexing certain torrents is considered aiding in copyright infringement for the torrent indexer why would it not for Google? They index the same information.

Posters are only saying Google is doing wrong if the torrent indexer is doing wrong. The point being missed is that neither is doing wrong.

seems people aren’t getting smarter at all, why should google be called a torrent search service. It’s a fucking search engine, search for phrases and it gives you result. good and bad, both pron sites etc. It doesn’t state that we “index torrent sites for you” jeez. What you dig is what you get. Google shouldn’t even be put into this.

A torrent search service does the job of searching torrents specifically. Tired of talking now.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/8461879.stm

To explain the mysterious disappearance of Reasoned Mind, one might note that when he stopped posting, neostyles, who was not posting much, started posting more…

;)

Google hyperlinks. Torrents are hyperlinks. Same thing.

So please please please point out the legal difference.

I suggest that this is better than being seen to be actually dumb.

The case seems to going in favour of Mr Ellis and unless there is something new or unknown in the pipeline to come its pretty clear there is no case to answer here and we can expect to enjoy the fruits of his succes by trouncing the copyright despots in as many media outlets as we can find, that should be what is occuring now, get planning folks.

Oh, and whatever happened to Reasoned Mind? He kinda dissapeared…(though I don’t read every article, so I may be wrong)

Yeah, neo got slammed pretty hard by the posts after yours as well. Must suck to be proven to be a moron to the entire world. If I were him I would never mention his troll name outside cyber-space, just too embarrassing.

No point asking neo.troll anything. He was proven illiterate 2 stories ago: http://torrentfreak.com/oink-was-started-to-improve-elliss-programming-skills-100112/#comment-632949

Oink never linked directly to the uploader either!

It is NOT the same as Google. Oink (privately) created, hosted and advertised .torrent files specifically linked to ripped versions of copyrighted music.

Google only indexes already existing .torrent files from public sites and doesn’t link directly to the uploader. Google never indexed any Oink .torrent files.

Ellis was out to make money, he wasn’t running a philanthropic service for impoverished music lovers or striking a blow against the evils of the music industry.

If he is found not guilty it will be because he didn’t technically break the laws he sailed so desperately close to but it’s plain to see he made an awful lot of money off the backs of the record companies. Is that fraud? In spirit, yes, in law, possibly not.

Sophistry, sophistry, all is sophistry.

No, you did indeed get 2 invites for your first donation. Any invites after that were gained by your ratio.

They have the money and brains to defend and defeat you!

When that case fails, you’ll have no-one to go after.

This case isn’t over yet…

He is technically (for all you can’t grasp the technical concept) running a service that is the SAME as Google.

Search for something that is copyright material and you’ll definitely come across loads.

Hypocrites!

I find it interesting, because it can’t possibly be related to the Oink site itself whatsoever and must be a personal activity Ellis continued outside of his admin work with Oink.

Unless he was advertising, for profit (either profiting from the advertising of, or actual sale of) copyrighted works. If he was counterfeiting copyrighted works and selling those counterfeit copies for profit, then THAT can be considered conspiracy to defraud.

If he just ran a site hosting torrent files/database then he was merely facilitating a search service very much like Google. Technical fact… sorry neotroll… nice try though.

Obvious troll is obvious

However the plus side for IFPI is that no actual crime has to be proved.

You can conspire w/someone to off your spouse and be convicted without it really happening.

Its bullshit law but legal.

You help people when you can and it’s called doing something for the common good, whether you see it or not, we are all in the same boat. If you fall off the boat and I don’t try to help you how can I expect anybody to try and help me when I fall off.

@45 Jan 14, 2010 at 10:06 by \\.neo.styles|sSG
Copyright law is an international legal concept. Nice try though.

It’s because of words like these that some people in this world maintain the views they have about the U.S. You do not tell people what to do in their own countries and homes. It pisses people off.

@50 Jan 14, 2010 at 12:38 by BIOS

When you march 5% of a countries population outside the parliament house and demand that an outdated law be changed, for those hours, no amount of money can silence the peoples voice. Our greatest power lays in our numbers.

QFT!

This is going to look like fuking Disneyland once ACTA hits.

They have the money to change the law, get the Gov’t to agree with their agenda, and so on.

You’ll need all the luck you can get. Even when you are not committing anything illegal according to the current law, the MAFIAAs will always find a way to get at you.

We need to unite and support each other.

Obvious trolls are obvious.

Copyright law regarding media is becoming meaningless and will continue to meaning nothing as long as the internet and humans exist.

Say or think whatever you want. You are part of the obsolete mentality that is the media corporations. Your extinction is imminent.

Besides, why don’t you tell everyone what it is that you fear most? Share with us why the corporations have meetings with lawmakers behind closed doors and why they don’t want anyone to know? I know what you and the corporations are so afraid.

Pathetic.

Somebody owes me a couple kb in bandwidth -_-

I don’t think what Ellis did was a crime. To commit a crime, one must break the law. There are laws for everything and if your actions do not go against them, you are not breaking the law.

I’m sure he condoned piracy, but so do I. Even if I were to announce publicly that I believe piracy is fantastic and should be practiced daily, I am not breaking the law.

Why isn’t Microsoft getting nailed for allowing people to use their operating system to steal data.

Because people are using these tools how they want, and the people providing these tools can’t possibly be held responsible. Big media is so desperate to get some heads on pikes as a warning they will take what they can get. There is virtually no legitimate way to catch a file-sharer. So what happens? They go for the guy making it possible. Not Bill Gates, not the creators of uTorrent, Ellis (among all the others of course).

This bullshit where the little guy gets screwed over by Jack offs in suits has got to end.

@10 I couldn’t agree with you more. The only issue is that the people with the real money do not share the same philosophy. Their money will always (hopefully it will end but idk) give them the advantage.

@trolls
Do you work ? for a boss ? unemployed ? Unreason seems to have time to visit all p2p sites as stated by others a few times.

Since when did the actual .torrent files violate copyright? Please show me what in the contents of a .torrent file is protected by copyright…

Perhaps the violations are using the .torrent files to obtain copyrighted information – but it is not the sites that host the .torrents that do this!

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrent_file
A torrent file is a bencoded dictionary with the following keys:

announce – the URL of the tracker
info – this maps to a dictionary whose keys are dependant on whether one or more than one files are being shared:
name – suggested file/directory name where the file(s) is/are to be saved
piece length – number of bytes per piece. This is commonly 218 = 256KB.
pieces – the concatenation of the SHA-1′s of each piece. As SHA-1 returns a 160-bit hash, pieces will be a string whose length is a multiple of 160-bits.
And exactly one of length (corresponds to when only one file is being shared) or files (corresponds to when multiple files are being shared):

length – size of the file (in bytes)
files – a list of dictionaries (each dictionary corresponds to a file) with the following keys:
path – a list of strings corresponding to subdirectory names, the last of which is the actual file name
length – size of the file (in bytes)
All strings must be UTF-8 encoded.

Extensions to BitTorrent define more keys.

Please show me which part of this is in violation of copyright..

Did you even read the article? Is Oink charged with any copyright offences? No, and do you know why that is? Because he didn’t commit any. The world stretches futher than the United States and not everyone has induce laws. Take your blinkers off

Actually there isnt much of a difference as every torrent site im a member of displays a disclaimer on their site too…

“Disclaimer: None of the files shown here are actually hosted on this server. The links are provided solely by this site’s users. The administrator of this site cannot be held
responsible for what its users post, or any other actions of its users. You may not use this site to distribute or download any material when you do not have the legal rights to do so. It is your
own responsibility to adhere to these terms. ”

All 10 of the private and public trackers im a member of display this disclaimer on their homepage…

Oink no more encouraged copyright infringement than Apple or Microsoft does by use of their operating systems to obtain unauthorized content. The only difference is Apple/Microsofts software license agreement states that they are not responsible for how users use their software.

Are you high? They were giving away torrents for copyrighted material.

http://cpj.org/2010/01/media-group-ceo-shot-dead-in-cyprus.php

Get over it.

If anyone chooses to hide or not, it’s really none of your business. We can all choose to do exactly what we want with or without your approval.

And this is why, piracy is a right and not a privilege. Get over it.

Oink no more encouraged copyright infringement than Apple or Microsoft does by use of their operating systems to obtain unauthorized content. The only difference is Apple/Microsofts software license agreement states that they are not responsible for how users use their software.

By that logic, I hereby state that piracy is a right, not a privilege. Just because I’ve made it so means that is so.

Try again.

I am personally surprised he had so much in his bank account but then i guess it shows he wasnt spending it (…maybe). Alot of people donated to the site, and it usually went over so that could be a reason but the trail will tell.

I am surprised no one picked up on the donated money for invites bit in the mirror. Donation on oink like many sites, got you nothing but a thank you, the only way to get invites was to seed. I wish the news would do some research and actually report facts, the initial story had a lot of misinformation in it when it first came out as well.

Obvious troll is obvious.

I like how modern law can call people who operated in the broad daylight “a conspiracy” if it suits the needs of big companies.

Ahh yes, again I forgot that black is white…

Financial bribes is something not to be taken unlikely these days, even in a judicial system.

@4 fsd, what goes on in courtrooms these days is not because people running bt sites are actually guilty, but because it’s really hard for a copyright company to prove that millions of torrents actually contain infringing content. This requires that they download all of these files, prepare reports and submit proper DMCA notices. This is near to impossible! Thus they try to cut of the head of the technology, which are these admins, even if this very act represents a crime against these people.

What next?… like I said above? Should we get out guns and actually kill those corporate f**kers?

I don’t see any other way, as reason is below bribes!