No, I don't say it's "ok", not in the way you mean. I also do say that you, and in fact NOONE, has the right to say it's NOT "ok" for TPB to follow the law in their own country. Again, you might as well rail at the Swedish government, or the US government, for that matter, for allowing exposure of this type of material to their respective public(s). You won't get anywhere; this is a very old argument, indeed.

Don't you see? It's those very photos of Nazi evil, the Oklahoma City bombing, the victims of Hiroshima/Nagasaki, and so on ad nauseam that MUST be seen! Hell, no, the events they show aren't ok, but showing the world what happened is not only "ok", it's damn well necessary. Similar arguments, in fact, have been raised against exposure of all of my examples: "It's too painful for the victims and/or their families", or "Only perverts/sadists/fill-in-the-psychosis-here would look at this material", and just about all the other arguments against the pictures' distribution I've seen here.

Ignoring evil never, ever, EVER makes it go away, but people always seem to insist on trying. You have to learn from it, so it doesn't happen again!

As for the father's pain, well, damn, that's got to be well-nigh unbearable. But guess what? I've also seen parents who WANTED this type of material to be seen - MADD is a great example - to hopefully teach the public-at-large more about their pain, and possibly to get them to avoid it themselves. Are THEY wrong for doing so? Were they perverts or evil sadists, to show me those rather sickening photos of dead children, mangled in car wrecks..? I may question their methods (I sure did at the time o.o ) but I do NOT question their motives.

In response to an earlier post: I wouldn't LIKE seeing pictures of my dead children, parents, or any other relative(s) posted in such a way at all, but I also put my money where my mouth is: I WILL NOT ABRIDGE LEGAL SPEECH, PERIOD, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT CAN POSSIBLY SERVE A USEFUL PURPOSE FOR SOCIETY. If a picture of my mom after an autopsy helps ONE other person, it's damn well worth it. If some other creepy f*ck gets off on it at the same time, well, there's people who get off on mud, poo, animals, shoes, dead people, and just about everything else known to Man... That doesn't make the information itself "evil" or "bad". If it IS bad, then SHOES are bad, and mud, and so on. It's not the information, it's what you do with it.

And how the hell would you know someone viewing the content was so perverse anyway? Worrying about the mere possibility is pretty damn futile. It's also possible I might be hit in the head by a meteor in the next 5 minutes! Nothing I can do about that either. >.>

This just came to mind.
It have been proven to me now that it is legal to obtain this information. And it must be obtained with a small fee and through the proper government channels. So I am now dumbfounded at how this information is not being removed since it would be illegal for anyone to now download those pictures and posses them without going through the proper government channels to obtain them.

So now we have a different situation.
Someone has bought the photos through the proper channel and has now posted them in a torrent for others to download and not properly pay for the photos through the correct government channels. Deeming the photos being downloaded Illegal.

Am I wrong?
Am I right?

A whole new set of issues.

"for a small fee to cover costs, from the government itself. "

*Snort* Completely wrong. The information, again, is in the public domain. The fee the Swedish government charges is merely to cover copying and postage, nothing more. You ARE NOT "buying" the information, just the service that supplies it.

A good comparison is the procedure every city/town hall in the US uses: For all information they contain, they charge a small fee - to cover administrative expenses - to supply you a copy, even though it ALL is in the public domain. This is true of real estate information (who owns which plat, and suchlike), utility runs for construction companies (so they don't dig up a water line, say), copies of books from the city's law library (to determine municipal code) and so on. Re-publishing such information on your own dime is quite legal, hence the term "public domain". You can't copyright arrest records, land plats, utility runs, census data, or anything of the sort, for many excellent reasons.

In fact, just about everything produced by the US government - in this case, I'm reasonably certain but not sure Swedish law is completely congruent, I didn't ask this question specifically - that isn't labelled "Secret" or above, under executive privelege, or certain other very specific cases, is public domain. That's exactly what the Freedom of Information Act is all about (for the US)! This is more or less true of most reasonably democratic societies around the world.

Need another example? The Congressional Record is not only gigantic and unwieldy (and expensive as hell), it's also completely legal to re-publish any or all of it in whatever format you desire. If it wasn't it would be illegal to retransmit anything any Congresscritter said while in session, considering it's recorded in the Congressional Record!

Edit --> Rogue "is" - lol.

Thank you for the information.

You're quite welcome.

I agree with a lot of points on both sides to this argument, I personally do not want to see pictures of this sort, BUT it is in the public domain and those that want to view them should be allowed to.
As far as taking them down because of the family wishes, or because it shows dead children? well then we have to get rid of all the Egyptian displays in all the museums across the globe then, because they display the same thing, or any such display that shows the remains of the dead, BUT those are allowed to enrich our knowledge and understanding of the past. It really depends on personal choice of what you find distasteful, morally objectional, or ugly. your views don't represent mine or some one else's necessarily, I don't agree with the tone of the response the PB gave when asked to take them down, it was insensitive, but i do agree with the right he has to keep the torrent up. That's what free speech is, the right to say or express what you want even if it offends someone.

Why do most of you don't understand that just because something is legal doesn't mean you have to do it? As long as whatever TPB is tracking doesn't cause any personal harm I don't mind, but in this case, by express wishes from the parents, I think it's not about being legal, but about to respect.

Actually I don't know what need the parents had to download the torrent, but still I do understand their point and in my opinion TPB should have taken the torrent down.

Originally posted by patrick_:

---

Why do most of you don't understand that just because something is legal doesn't mean you have to do it? ............ in this case, by express wishes from the parents, I think it's not about being legal, but about to respect.

---

exactly.

i'm out. this one can be debated forever...........

just one more thing:

Quote:

---

I also do say that you, and in fact NOONE, has the right to say it's NOT "ok" for TPB to follow the law in their own country

---

but i can say what i want ! it's my opinion! and freedom of speech man!

pfffffff! ...... . . ... . . .

I like The Pirate Bay. I come there daily to find the torrents I need. However, the way they are acting, they will be brought down sooner or later. And they will go down hard.

And posting pictures of dead children has nothing to do with freedom of speech. If you say it is, you're also saying that child pornography should be allowed.

Quote:

---

this time for refusing to take down a user-uploaded torrent that includes autopsy pictures of two toddlers that were murdered in Arboga earlier this year.

---

Could be used for educational purposes, like medical students and such? Oh well, they can do what they want. I got a question for you guys, should the courts or lawyers here in the United States be sued, or get into any trouble for showing pictures of bloody deaths scenes? Including people hung, stabbed, shot in the face, heads cut off. Happens all the time in court cases. People see death all the time. They aren't hurting anyone - if you don't like it, don't download it!

Sounds more like the people who had control of the pictures in the first place should be investigated. Sucks for the parents to have to go through this, but the world is a cruel place.

---

If you don't want to see the pics, don't d/l them. Emails containing pics of damaged/injured/dead people have been circulating for years, now someone uploads a torrent and everyone cracks! Personally I'm more offended by those emails containing pictures of cats with silly captions.

With any luck the surrounding furore will out the killers.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

Again, those pictures are already in the public domain, and can be acquired for a nominal fee to cover postage/copying of the material directly from the Swedish government.

---

Its one thing to have pictures as public domain, its another to advertise it.

Originally posted by fionah:

---

don't you think the parents have suffered enough??

we cannot comprehend unless we have been there...

---

+1 million

You live in a country that you may leave at any time then you are agreeing to abide to the laws of said country. You elected to take part in said countries practices. This particular country allows this type of information to be released for a nominal fee or however they do it then talk to them about it. It's not up to the Pirate Bay to police their business due to feelings of visitors of said site. You don't like it then don't partake in it's rules/regulations/laws. Simple.

Originally posted by daddymo:

---

If you don't want to see the pics, don't d/l them. Emails containing pics of damaged/injured/dead people have been circulating for years, now someone uploads a torrent and everyone cracks! Personally I'm more offended by those emails containing pictures of cats with silly captions.

With any luck the surrounding furore will out the killers.

---

LMFAO - exactly!

---

Dragula69-

The pirate bay took the right action because of what the pirate bay represents. I am sure there is a lot of stuff on the pirate bay that would not meet your approval. This one made the news.

I admit this sucks for the family and I would hate this to happen to anyone but it did and they will deal. A cold thing to say but it is true.

If you disagree with the pirate bay on this one, you truly never supported them, you justed wanted a well known place with a lot of quality music and movie torrents. Period. They are just as bad (or good to some people) for having torrents of music, videos, etc as they are for this autopsy information.

So draw your line in the sand, you are entitled to. I respect that and your opinion. But please respect mine and others as well, even if it might disagree with yours. :-)

---

well said, well said

Let them do what they want. Can you stop it no! Voice your opinon writing a full paragraph but its not going to change a thing

I agree with those who believe it is appropriate for people to be allowed to distribute public records or public domain material freely.

As much as I feel for the child's parents, and I do, I would be offended if TPB started censoring public material.

TPB was clearly insensitive in their emphatic response to that person. I fault them for that. It would have been much better if they had been kind and said they understand why they would want it taken down, but as a public service organization, it is not their role to censor public information or freedom of expression.

I don't see why this episode would pose any kind of threat to TPB, though, as the author seems to infer.

i don't doubt that all this is heart breaking for some people in respect to the children. My query is that if it is so upsetting then why does the father keep participating? He certainly is NOT protecting the children's memory. In fact, if the whole schemozzle is so upsetting then why does anyone keep getting involved by this repeated picking of the scab?

Read this article called "Pirate Bay Boycotts Press after Public Witch-Hunt" from TorrentFreak.

It explains the Pirate Bays stance more clearly than any article I have read.

Originally posted by earthasa:

---

I agree with those who believe it is appropriate for people to be allowed to distribute public records or public domain material freely.

As much as I feel for the child's parents, and I do, I would be offended if TPB started censoring public material.

TPB was clearly insensitive in their emphatic response to that person. I fault them for that. It would have been much better if they had been kind and said they understand why they would want it taken down, but as a public service organization, it is not their role to censor public information or freedom of expression.

I don't see why this episode would pose any kind of threat to TPB, though, as the author seems to infer.

---

Exactly.

In addition, "advertising" the availability of public records isn't the problem. In fact, too few people are aware that they have the right to these records! This lack of public knowledge about such things is a great part of why the Bush administration's refusal of legal FOI requests is easily swept under the rug in the US. I'm sure similar behavior only benefits the tyrants in ANY country.

No matter the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the peanut gallery, in the final analysis, the pictures are legal, the torrent is legal, and they're not coming off TPB until the torrent dies of old age. If they somehow were forced to do so, I WOULD HOST THE DAMN IMAGES MYSELF. I refuse to let this type of "soft" censorship win, any more than any other type.

Similar types of censorship/ban arguments have been raised against Huckleberry Finn, for heavens' sake, because it uses the word "n*gger". ANyone who argues Samuel Clemens (AKA "Mark Twain") meant that word in a bigoted manner is a fool. It was a lesson ABOUT bigotry..!

Don't you see that this is yet another ploy for the anti p2p companies to "educate" you that p2p is in fact evil and steeling and their way to compare it to child pornography in order to have a worthy case to be used to take down The Pirate Bay. Don't be fooled.

Fact 1 The music industry is doing away with DRM by being beaten into submission. Examples are: Napster, Rhapsody, SpiralFrog (With AEM read more about my ideas about AEM and you'll see how the industry is using my idea), iTunes with its iTunes plus (Charging more for non DRM meterial unlike Amazon and Napster)

Fact 2: Pepsi is giving away FREE Mp3's on amazon by using pepsi points. This can be a great way to pay the artists and to help keep America clean. I've used the codes myself to redo my music collection as I've lost tons of music when my Alienware was struck by lightning. you'll be surprised at the number of Pepsi caps you'll find and I just put the codes into my portable organizer and when I get home I have 100's of FREE songs waiting for me to Download.

Fact 3: Check out IMDB as there offering FREE media streaming.

TPB is simply taking on the take all and share it all concept. Yes I'm a Pirate as well and damn proud of it. Too many companies want to get rich quick and if it takes screwing over a widow, elderly person, or 12 yr old child then so be it according to these companies. Don't even fall prey to this anti p2p article. Rejoice in the fact that TPB stood proud and firm and didn't cave in like a whining baby bitch boy.

goddam.. looks like we won the "freedom of information" argument here at least.

keep it up lads. it's our vision of the future not the corporate scumbags ideal future we need to win next.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170086

when you buy something do you own it?.. is the rental aspect clearly labelled?

/me listens to Pulp - I Spy... my theme song ripped from my vinyl.. and they say that is illegal too.. watch out.. soon you will have to pay to breathe because some scumbag business will patent the act of sucking in air.... oooo.. /me heads off to USA patent office applications.

grey cats are the coolest.. next time I want to be a grey cat.

---