TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

The Moral Battle Between Pirates and Copyright Lobbyists

In a recent interview, Harvard Professor Yochai Benkler raises some serious concerns surrounding the MegaUpload bust.

One question raised by the professor, which may not have been entertained by many prior to the wide public opposition to SOPA, is of whether the lobbyist companies currently reaping the benefits of increasingly harsher copyright enforcement confer a strong moral cause for government interference of free market innovation. When a Harvard Professor of Entrepreneurial Legal Studies raises these concerns, perhaps it is time we stop and consider this.

I have to say that, given the limited time he had to work with, I am very impressed with Prof. Benkler’s ability to address many important issues surrounding the MegaUpload case in such a succinct manner. Lack of due process. The legal targeting of an entire industry and the effect that has on the free market. While these topics are deserving of in depth scrutiny on their own, it was the moral issue raised at the end that caught my attention.

Now, I don’t generally like to argue morals because they tend to get a bit sticky with each party holding fast to whichever beliefs they identified themselves as before any debate even begins. How do you decide whose morals are right and whose are wrong?

megaDo you go by the majority rule? As Benkler stated:

“The moral authority of the networked public is on a different plane than the moral authority of lobbyist companies and that’s an enormous power to be reckoned with.”

This is clearly reflected by the 71% of recently polled Americans who feel that censorship is a far worse threat to society than piracy. The millions of people who contacted their government officials in protest of SOPA censorship was so overwhelming, I nearly took for granted that it needs mention.

Something else struck me about this moral when he gave his closing statement.

“It’s critically important that this new political force be focused on what will build a network that supports the industry in its legitimate needs, not in it’s overstated fears of piracy, for which there is no real data.”

This is something that had occurred to me only recently. If all practical reasons or perceived “bogey man” type threats surrounding the word “piracy” are discounted, then there is not much left to look at other than the moral cause for such extreme legal action. Is there even a moral basis to be found here? Is there a moral excuse for an open legal attack on a rather young industry which had found a popular niche in the marketplace?

Unfortunately, this is not something I can argue for because no matter how hard I try to play devil’s advocate for the legal authorities involved, I can not see a moral motive behind their willingness to take such extreme action on behalf of copyright lobbyists. It is really difficult for one to see anything beyond greed or ignorance as the underlying motive here. Please, I challenge you to raise some moral support for the general attack on innovation by these lobbyists. Just give me one moral argument that has not already been completely refuted. Those of us who have paid close attention to these issues just can’t spend any more time explaining why file-sharing does not equal theft.

There is no strong practical or moral argument to justify the tremendous money and resources that go into preventing innovative companies from settling their own business conflicts with the established industry in a civil (not criminal) court of law. That said, Prof. Benkler is right. It is time to focus on what is best for society as a whole. Granted, that includes even the lobbyists who insist that we drag them kicking and screaming toward progress.

It’s not that we hate you, lobbyists. It’s just that, you know, things have been kind of rough for the rest of us lately and we could really use new industries, jobs and the many benefits that the internet actually offers us in spite of you. It is a great time to take a look at the solutions and benefits that lie in wait for us all. This type of progress is inevitable and the rest of the world has a moral duty to see it meet our common needs instead of waiting around for the industry to keep up.

This is a guest post from Ryan Smith, aka Green Pirate.

This post is from the News Bits section of TorrentFreak where we present stories from around the web in a concise summary format. Full TorrentFreak articles can be found here. If you have a tip please let us know. News Bits have their very own RSS feed
  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

    FIRST!

    • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

      sorry @VeryNice + @Alyssa …….. I had to.

      • Mr. Putin

        “This comment was flagged for review.” WTF, who did that?! He posted it on his own article… yet it’s flagged as spam? The world thesedays -_-

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

          haha successful troll did it.

        • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

          Post again ;)

          Unfortunatelly I got here after the trolls =/

  • VeryNice

    Second!

  • Alyssa Blindy

    Third?
    Looks like this thing is inviting the Anons and Murdocks out there. It seems as if the writer wants to see a new argument brought up by them. This is quite interesting, I must say.

  • Anonymous

    the problem with politics is that nowadays facts are disregarded and ignorance is celebrated (that’s why politicians say things like “there is no global warming” or “tax cuts for the rich create jobs”)

    of course there is no moral ground for the actions of the lobbyists, but they are the ones writing the checks for the politicians, so whatever they are saying is taken as gospel

    • JaredLeeLoughner

      You need to get to the root of the problem.
      Facts are discarded, ignorance is celebrated,but the reason so is a lack of retribution.
      They are not scared of us. They are untouchable.
      Signing a petition or voting, never worked in the first place.
      The agendas imposed on us are from the hand of god, not the political parties themselves.
      They are inert.
      Devoid of common consensus, they lack the opinions until their opinions are set by advisers, bankers, economists, military henchmen, murderers and billionaires.
      The forceful hand of god as it were.
      They don’t fear the courts, mutiny, or revenge from the peasant class.
      The game is rigged. We are not all equal.
      Except……….. in death.
      The great leveler.
      The ultimate democracy.
      Should I ever ‘cast my vote’ it will cost more than just my life.
      A cranium is a cranium is a cranium.
      Now we’re fucking equal eh Mr Cameron?

      There is no moral battle.
      Every politician is a corrupt heartless fuck.
      Hope lies in the proles, if anger.

    • Trashman057

      Tax cuts for the wealthy do create jobs or did you skip Econ 101?. Global warming is a farce meant to increase Liberal control and influence.

      • Jensantanna

        @Trashman057. Econ 101 doesn’t consider history. Trickle down economics doesn’t work and didn’t pan out. My parents have it better than I ever will due to a union job, good wages, and opportunity. In the 50s and 60s, the wealthy paid more in taxes and the difference between top earners and bottom was much closer. Sure, you can argue that some people are so genius they deserve $10 mil salaries and million dollar bonuses, but they don’t create jobs with that money – they sock it away, often outside the US.

        Also, believe what you want about global warming – but if you don’t think we should have policy around it and innovate around it – we’ll be left in the dust (perhaps literally if you are wrong) while the rest of the world innovates, creates jobs and works for a cleaner local environment. What’s wrong with clean energy? It is created at home, doesn’t pollute, no war, no smog, new innovation. What the heck – who cares if there is human influence on the climate – let’s just run with it and make cool stuff. Sheesh!

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

          I agree except for one thing – trickle-down economics does work. When the rich are pissing on you, it trickles right down.

      • http://twitter.com/erikqj Erik Q.J.

        Whether tax cuts for the wealthy create jobs, depends entirely on how the tax cuts are structured. High taxes for the wealthy can also create jobs, again depending on the structure. The key is to “reward” job creation, and “punish” passive investments and destructive behaviour.

        However, the extremely wealthy aren’t the only job creators. Small businesses are great job creators. Like all business, they depend on infrastructure and other public goods and services. Unlike big business, they don’t have the clout to make sure that they get serviced, no matter what. If the service is in short supply, small business will loose out.

        The middle class and small business owners simply can’t afford to pay for public services both for the super wealthy and for themselves. The middle class and small business (the biggest job creators) are subsidizing the super wealthy, providing more than they receive, and receiving less than they need. This isn’t new, it’s just more visible in bad times.

        So, the question becomes: What creates more jobs, tax cuts for the wealthy, or having the wealthy pay their fair share, allowing the small businesses and regular people to get back on their feet, and stay on them? Choosing the poorer alternative will, for all practical purposes, kill jobs.

        Global warming…

        Never mind what the “Liberals” say. Instead, have a look at what the insurance companies say. They aren’t annoyingly liberal, are they?

        What they are, is a big industry that will be among the first and hardest hit during climate change. They have spent huge resources on research, analysis and risk assessment, and they are deeply worried. They have already detected shifts in the number, types and sizes of the damages and injuries in insurance claims, affirming pessimistic climate models and forecasts. As a statistical sample, insurance claims is huge and world wide, and would be stupid to ignore.

        So, like I said: You don’t trust the “The Liberal Elite”? Fine. Trust the free market experts on comprehensive real world risk assessment. Or, perhaps… Does this mean that The Free Market has become “Liberal Elite”, and thus no longer can be trusted by you and your like?

  • http://twitter.com/Pigfarmer44 Simon Bee

    Nice piece Ryan.

    I do however think that your argument is a tad one-sided. I agree with most of what you have written, but to imply that ‘they’ have no moral argument for their position is wrong. It’s just the same as if they said it about our arguments.

    morally, I don’t want to see a single creator being disadvantaged by online sharing, but it happens. I don’t want retailers to go out of business, especially the small, local, independent shops that always provided interesting and hard to find products.

    To me, sharing is fine as long as the creators have already been paid. So for instance, I believe that it is more morally acceptable to download an album from the 70s or 80s than it is to download a pre-release of an album by a new up’n'coming artist.

    This acceptance of different moral levels for different products makes the whole downloading thing a minefield. This is why we need a global copyright re-think, and a legal digital distribution system that covers all the bases, offers all the products, and is affordable and easy to pay for.

    • http://profiles.google.com/steveaustin1971 Michael Langford

      The middlemen that were pushing SOPA go out of their way to not pay the artists. If you think that this is about the artists you are sadly mistaken. When several of the artists did a pro-Megaupload video, the industry jerks filed FALSE takedown notices and had the video pulled. Twice. They deserve to go out of business, by any means necessary.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

      You and I and many so-called “pirates” share the same sentiment toward wanting to support the content creator. Are these lobbyists motivated by the same desire to support artists? Their actions don’t seem to reflect this.

      You are very correct about the need to support content creators. I reject the premise that file-sharing puts content creators at a disadvantage, simply because I have not seen any sound indication of this. There is evidence indicating that file-sharing helps content creators, but I have yet to see any opposition to that which holds up to any scrutiny by peer review.

      Opinions against file-sharing are usually based on a genuine moral sense, but if you really wish to support artists then I believe it is best to discover the ways in which file-sharing does that. If file-sharing helps content creators gain exposure and increase sales, don’t we have a moral obligation to allow their content to be shared by fans?

      I would be very upset if I was told that TorrentFreak could not share this article because of some rights issue, even tho it has my full approval as a content creator. :)

      • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

        Lazyness. Most of us, pirates (as in file sharers) or not are lazy to actually analyze studies or data presented and give them proper interpretation. Make no mistake, I do that more than I’d like to and I follow proper scrutiny more than most people do. And with the amount of information we are fed everyday it’s just natural, we have our lives to live and time is scarce.

        The problem is when you legislate based on data without scrutiny either because you are lazy or because you are paid to swallow the data without proper analyzis. And if you (Ryan) worked with statistics you know one can make any set of data scream whatever you can imagine. See Hollywood accounting where smashing successful movies just break even. So you can twist the numbers to your liking and the lazy/paid ones will just swallow it and smile.

    • Anonymous

      Any moral stance that the “American” entertainment industry (or should I say anti-American entertainment industry) might have had once has been completely trashed by their blatantly false information that they used to lie to the parts of Congress they did not attempt to buy outright.

      Sure, copying something that has a price put on it is not ethically sound. There are far far worse things ethically speaking. The MPAA, RIAA and others have completely debased themselves and any attempt to seize the moral high ground now is just yet another attempt at deception.

    • Roundcat

      The thing is we do have a legal digital distribution system, but the problems lie within the restrictions that are implemented with it. i.e. a digital copy of a certain movie can only be download between a set amount of times after jumping through a number of hoops, and only being able to put it on certain number of devices a certain amount of times.This is a realistic scenario I face whenever I try to obtain media through “legal” means. [prime examples of this would be universals digital distribution policy]. When obtaining goods through questionable means is easier than going through the legal hubs, people are going to opt for the more convenient. I guarantee though if the means of obtaining something legally is easier and less restrictive than pirating, people will be more willing to go through the legal route.

      • Anonymous

        i agree. I don’t listen to much new music anymore, and the stuff I do listen to I already own. I am also not a big fan of any of the new programming that is out for TV now. But I have to say that if Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, and redbox were not around, I would probably be using bit-torrent all the time.

        • http://twitter.com/Spartanessa Steph Hogan

          So like every other country’s citizens that have the internet but not any of those services? AKA “the major pirating countries”.

    • Guest

      “I don’t want to see a single creator being disadvantaged by online sharing, but it happens.”

      Really? It happens? Where is the proof for this? Where is it?

      Since there has never been any evidence produced to date that creators are being disadvantaged and retailers are closing their doors due to online sharing, I don’t think it actually happens.

      I think it’s completely fictitious.

      And I think the copyright industry made up this fictitious story as a spurious justification for its actions. That would sure explain the mysterious lack of any proof backing it up. Ever.

      I dare anyone to prove me wrong on this.

      • Anonymous

        hmm how about bethesda losing millions of dollars because of the what was it 40 million+ downloads of skyrim within the first 48 hours of games release?? while this may not result in them laying people off, it CAN very much hinder their budget for future releases.

        • Guest

          Advertizing could have paid for it all

        • http://twitter.com/erikqj Erik Q.J.

          Would all of those downloads have translated into sales? Of course not!
          Did some of those downloads result in a subsequent sale? Of course!

          What it sums up to, gain or loss for Bethesda, is impossible to say without doing serious research. What can be said, though, is this: Certainly, if they’re so confident in their claim of loosing huge amounts on file sharing, the industry must have funded plenty of research to prove it. Where is this research? Why has nothing substantial been published to support industry claims?

          Based on this suspicious behaviour from the industry, I’m willing to proceed on the assumption that they have attempted to prove their theory, and failed miserably. If they want me to believe differently, that’s easily accomplished: Publish peer-reviewed research, complete with underlying data. Without copy protection, and without trying to get paid for it.

    • Socrates

      There is a reason you don’t see artists lining up to defend SOPA, PIPA, ACTA. What’s harming them is not “piracy,” but their corporate overlords who cheat and defraud them at every turn. Corporations have killed their own business with their myopic greed and bully business tactics, and rather than fix it or evolve, they are rent-seeking. Using artists as a pr shield to mask the stench of their egregious behavior is just another low by these corporations.

      • Guest

        Socrates hit the nail on the head!

    • Doug

      Interestingly, if the copyright lobby hadn’t paid Congress to increase the length of copyrights, music from the 70s and 80s would be in the public domain by now and downloading older material wouldn’t be an issue. The copyright lobby thinks it’s entitled to permanent copyrights, and for the government to build them an airtight shield against infringement regardless of the side effects.

      • Guest

        How I hate the pathetic lenght of copyright!

    • Joaovictorpd

      Actually, the new upcoming artists were born in the age of free sharing and massive uncompetitive piracy. They are totally adapted to the current ways of media industry, and the free sharing doesn’t affect their business projections, because it is already in the projections! Artists nowadays earn not from selling discs, downloads, or other shareable products, but from concert profits and advertising.

    • Guest

      Dude How many times do you want to p[ay me to build you a house or install a door or a kitchen cabinet?HuH? The work I do gets me paid one time only!I don`t go home and get paid again for work I did on your house again and again after the job was finished.I cant believe nobody sees that I should get paid everytime you open and close a door or window that I installed a year or so ago.
      What I am saying is the band should get paid for the live show like at MSG or the colisium.They pull in millions at these shows as do the movies at the boX office. But when they make a cd or dvd they get paid when they aren`t working.I dont know about you but when I dont work I get no pay.So why are we paying these people when they aren`t working.the cd and dvd should be used as a business card like my card that says “Hammer for Hire”.To get your intrest but would you pay me for my business card? The amount of money going intofighting piracy is getting all the wrong people rich and is a bigger waste than if we didnt have these copyright laws at all.
      A Fair Days Work for a Fair Days Pay

  • Gordon Harrison

    Lobbying is a huge problem that undermines the democratic process, distorts reasoned debate, as does the lobbying organisations giving money to politicians. It is legitimate to lobby the legislators, but it should all be in public view and recorded, not behind closed doors. We need to know who is asking for what, and why.

    Donations to political parties, by anyone, corporate or individual should be outlawed. Political campaigning should be funded by a strictly limited amount of public money. By the way, I’m a UK citizen, I reckon concerns about governance and transparency are little different from those in the US.

    It might have been a more interesting debate if the questioner had asked for moral arguments in support of copyright for the people, not the lobbyists or corporate powers.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

      Without a clear moral position in favor of lobbying for strict copyright laws, there is nothing to debate. Pirates maintain the moral high ground, in my humble opinion.

    • me

      Lets just call lobbying what it really is, bribery.

  • Pingback: === popurls.com === popular today

  • Andrew

    “It’s not that we hate you, lobbyists.”

    Actually, yes we do!
    Anybody who cares for democracy rejects the modern lobbying industry. It exists solely to further the interests of the already rich and powerful by influencing politicians to a far greater degree than what any normal person or organisation can.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

      Perhaps it would have been more accurately stated that there is room for an entertainment industry to thrive in a business model that does not depend on persecuting so-called pirates for sharing files. :)

    • Bayshore_park

      Lobbying should just be called hat it really is, bribery.

  • cornedbeefkellyosborne

    I rank piracy alongside eating meat on the moral scale.

    (Not a vegetarian – bacon FTW)

    • chameleon

      “I rank piracy alongside eating meat on the moral scale.”

      Most people do it themselves, most consider it normal, yet there are some freaks who are completely against it and try to convince everyone they can that it’s evil and force their opinion down other people’s throats by any means necessary?

      That’s at least how I usually interpret the vegans/vegetarians (as the freaks mentioned above). I know.. generalization and all, but a lot of them do actually try to convince everyone they can no matter what it takes or how much of a jerk/freak that makes them look like..

    • fevredream

      This is a pretty horrible comparison. The difference here is that the American meat industry literally harms its own workers, the environment, the people who eat the meat, and billions and billions of animals. I’m not even a vegetarian, but any research into this subject will show you that this isn’t really debatable. Whether you care about that is up to you, of course.

      The “harm” caused by internet file-sharing is, however, completely debatable and is far from confirmed, and is about “intellectual” rights perceived potential loss of money rather than the obvious harm done to animals, the Earth, and humans themselves that the meat industry produces. The lobbyists’ spurious claims against file sharing are in no way comparable to the vastly more valid claims of those who find the meat industry appalling.

    • Anonymous

      What is “FTW”?

  • Speak

    I do not agree about putting censorship and piracy in the same category. That is a dangerous game. Piracy is not a threat to anybody but a handful of companies. Censorship is a threat to the whole society.

    • Camro

      And, in reality, piracy is not even a substantive threat to those companies.

  • http://twitter.com/andywattbulb andywatt

    Who the f*ck are these other 29%ters?

    • Anonymous

      brainwashed Fox “News” viewers

  • Pingback: | Kalex's Tome

  • Pingback: The Moral Battle Between Pirates and Copyright Lobbyists. | No Agenda Report

  • Doug

    Copyright is a matter of practicality, not morality. People used to freely copy inventions, songs, engineering techniques, whatever they wanted to. This behavior went on for thousands of years and was known as “the spread of civilization” — hardly a bad thing. Copyright laws were enacted to promote the publishing industry by banning behavior that used to be perfectly normal and acceptable. The entertainment industry as spent a lot of money turning the support of copyright into a moral crusade, but to the opposition it’s really just a matter of adapting our rules to new technology. There are plenty of rabid hot-heads on both sides, but the rational argument against laws like SOPA is that they will do more harm than good. We should want our laws to do more good than harm, at least I do.

  • Wynnefox

    Not that I disagree, Censorship is far worse then piracy, but I’m curious on who did the pole.

  • Michael sömnes

    I’d like to point out the moral implications of considering how piracy, or filesharing in general, has opened up a whole new creative brand of business opportunities.
    You just need to be smart enough to see them, instead of clinging to old ways, adapt to modernisation. Apple did, they’re doing pretty good as far as I know.

    Let’s take a look at the evolution of the internet…

    1. Information sharing. People have the means to get smarter.
    2. Piracy…people figure out how to share things with friends (May or may not lead to more sales, or a friend tired of accepting crap songs/movies/information)
    3. Downloading mp3′s.. Oh look, a business opportunity!
    4. Oh, I know. Let’s make an mp3 player and call it iPod! Huge profit.
    5. Oh, video piracy? Let’s make something called iPad. Huge profit.

    Can you even imagine how much profit this has generated?
    Imagine artists getting a cut out of that!
    Anyway, imagine these lobbyists being the very same people, making profit in a controlled way, whichever turn of events occur, instead of the actual creator.

    Cut the middlehands, we’ve got a whole internet to spread our information, artistry and services, we don’t need a record company any more except for marketing purposes which can in clever ways be achieved single-handedly.

    But then again, a country founded upon bribery (read: lobbyism) will retain it’s corruption behind curtains for as long as it wants.

  • Anon

    Why is this news? 100% would vote in support of free groceries if they could.

    • Reasoned Mind

      I would DOWNLOAD free groceries

    • http://twitter.com/erikqj Erik Q.J.

      I wouldn’t. The farmer should get paid for his own honest work, as should everyone else. I would, however, vote in favour of the freedom to copy and share groceries. You know, like farmers do. Or like Jesus did with the five loaves and two fish.

      Of course, with patents on life forms, Jesus would end up in prison if those loaves contained genetically modified grain. I guess he’d better steer clear of the US & countries with similar patent laws…

  • Anonymous

    Help get Lamar Smith (father of SOPA) packing: http://www.sheriffmackforcongress.com

  • Anonymous

    copyright was originally created when the world expanded to the point that artists could no longer be “commissioned” for work. In other words, It was more fashionable to own a copy of the mona lisa, that to have your own portrait painted. It was at that point in history (not the mona lisa, but the concept of people wanting more than one copy of something) that the original copyright laws were invented.

    We need new copyright laws that actually pertain to the technology and types of content we are creating today. We all need to understand that the laws that were enacted 200 years ago to protect painters and writers are no longer applicable. That does not mean just keep extending the copyright, it means re-defining what copyright is.

    we also need to understand that in 200 years from now, they will probably need to be redefined again.

  • Shawn
  • Anonymous

    Gotta just love the bought and paid for politicians!
    pc-privacy.tk

    • Guest

      Gotta hate the spam!

  • sh7dow

    Good post Ryan!

  • Deathnote101

    File sharing need not be under constant government scrutiny because people still purchase the product. I can listen to songs for free on youtube, but still buy them on Itunes to listen to on my Itouch. Sometimes I watch movies online for free, but that doesn’t mean I don’t go out and buy a DVD for a movie I love. The only file sharing that needs to be stopped is pirating for profit.

    • Guest

      The problem is they (MAFIAA) don’t listen. They don’t care if you download and still give them money. They want CONTROL and MORE MONEY.

  • Noah2gunner

    I would like to say that honestly piracy is not what its made out to be because when you really take it appart the majority of the things that are pirated are things that we wouldnt normally purchase. e.g. i will torrent music to put on my ipod but the majority of it ends up being music i rarely listen to or just want to try out. When there is music by artists i want to support i will go out and buy their album or whatever. If pirating actually stopped i wouldnt go out and buy the music i ussually torrent i just wouldnt bother getting it at all.

  • Guest

    My two cents from the other side.

    I used to be the executive editor for a well-known and respected lawbook publishing company. We sold stotutory lawbooks and related nonfiction works about laws and their enforcement to lawyers, judges, and police agencies across the United States.

    Curious, isn’t it, that almost all of our software was pirated and/or distributed illegally across too many computers? Our IT specialist was well-paid and kept his mouth shut.

    Also, I followed the orders of the company owners and under-reported sales to all of the authors of the nonfiction works. Those poor bastards got screwed out of at least half of their royalties. (Since the records only existed on my compter, once I changed them there was no recovery of the actual figures.)

    Why did I stay silent? Because I was complicit, and would have lost my job just before being scapegoated by the boss and arrested.

    I am happy to say that this sordid tale is in my past, but I very much doubt it is any different now in that company–or across the music industry.

    Do you really think that they actually pay the creators full worth for their creations? If so, you are extremely gullible. I was there, I know the other side of the story, and I got the hell out.

    Thr artists/creators are not to blame, and that should not even be the argument. They are victims of the corporate greed/need for profit/capitalist system (choose one), as are we.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

      Thank you for the story. It is sad to see that a content creator’s work is exploited to pay an IP enforcer without any benefit to the artist.

      I want to say that there is protection in place for whistle blowers in cases of blatant fraud like this. It is unfortunate that many people are not aware of the rights afforded them by the Dept. of Labor. Definitely worth getting familiarized with if you sense something isn’t right at the work place. (This is in the US)

      http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/whistle.htm

  • Run4u

    Just because something is lawful, that does not automaticaly make it good or right. This is always most obvious in hindsight.Witches where burnt alive at the stake.Homosexual individuals were criminal from birth in most countries two generations ago. Forced sterilizations were legion only one generation ago in countries we consider “civilized”. In retrospect, this is pure evil, even if it was the law at the time.
    Anybody who thinks that the future won’t think similarly of today’s laws is delusional. There are still many examples of evil going down in the name of the LAW, today.
    The minority get to control the majority, for reasons that only help the minority.

    • Ocfad

      I never heard it put so clearly Run4u, do you mind if i quote you ?

      • Run4u

        U R welcom.

  • Mwhahaha

    So how many people have to ask these types of things before anyone in power pays any attn to these points?

  • Pingback: Piracy and Copyright | Hiko the stingray

  • Pingback: GREEN PIRATE » Blog Archive » Reader Appreciation Time – 5,000 Green Pirate Visitors

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

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

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.