AfterDawn: Tech news

Sweden's Pirate Party condemns Pirate Bay verdict as 'gross injustice'

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 17 Apr 2009 20:58 User comments (17)

Sweden's Pirate Party condemns Pirate Bay verdict as 'gross injustice' Sweden's Pirate Party was setup to attempt to reform laws in the country around copyright and patents in the digital era. Rickard Falkvinge, leader of The Pirate Party had some strong words to utter today when the four founders of the Pirate Bay were found guilty and sentenced to a year in jail. They were also ordered to pay a $4.5 million fine. Falkvinge dismissed the trial, and called the verdict "a gross injustice".
"This wasn't a criminal trial, it was a political trial. It is just gross beyond description that you can jail four people for providing infrastructure. There is a lot of anger in Sweden right now. File-sharing is an institution here and while I can't encourage people to break copyright law, I'm not following it and I don't agree with it," Falkvinge said.

He continued: "Today's events make file-sharing a hot political issue and we're going to take this to the European Parliament." Of course, the four defendants plan already to appeal the decision, confident that in the end they will be found not guilty of all charges under Swedish laws.

Previous Next  

17 user comments

117.4.2009 21:37

really? the "pirate party" doesnt like the verdict? i never woulda guessed, lol.

217.4.2009 22:05

Meh I'd like to see what they are making off TPB it alone will tell me they are not quite innocent...

317.4.2009 22:57

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Meh I'd like to see what they are making off TPB it alone will tell me they are not quite innocent...
Arrrgh... We Just be stealin from thar bigerrr Fish landlubberrr.

417.4.2009 22:59

Those guys have MILLIONS stashed far away from the gubermints grasp.

517.4.2009 23:06

Originally posted by windsong:
Those guys have MILLIONS stashed far away from the gubermints grasp.
Gubermints are good i like the Cinnamon flavored ones, they got the biggest kick to em

617.4.2009 23:07

Thank you to Dela and all the others who post the news articles. It seems to be feast or famine and we are all now feasting. I have used the Pirate Bay a few times and do see them as providing a similar service as Google and other search engines. The main gripe I have is that they do receive income from pornographic adverts on their pages. Don't get me wrong! I like my porn as much as anybody, but it is not common practice in the search engine business.

717.4.2009 23:14

Originally posted by Run4two:
Thank you to Dela and all the others who post the news articles. It seems to be feast or famine and we are all now feasting. I have used the Pirate Bay a few times and do see them as providing a similar service as Google and other search engines. The main gripe I have is that they do receive income from pornographic adverts on their pages. Don't get me wrong! I like my porn as much as anybody, but it is not common practice in the search engine business.
No, Your Right Google generates billion's on there Adverts,even doing it against the law ever heard of the Google bot.

i wish we still lived in the day where there where No Search Engines.

817.4.2009 23:20

Quote:
Originally posted by Run4two:
Thank you to Dela and all the others who post the news articles. It seems to be feast or famine and we are all now feasting. I have used the Pirate Bay a few times and do see them as providing a similar service as Google and other search engines. The main gripe I have is that they do receive income from pornographic adverts on their pages. Don't get me wrong! I like my porn as much as anybody, but it is not common practice in the search engine business.
No, Your Right Google generates billion's on there Adverts,even doing it against the law ever heard of the Google bot.

i wish we still lived in the day where there where No Search Engines.
But google is for general information that's 2 or 3 tiers away from the media in question, the torrent tracker is 1 tier away from it with a exclusive focus on files.

That's the difference IMO, they are profiting off showing the files where as google is profiting off showing links to palaces that sell the "files" talk about them and torrent palaces.

The are like bootleggers but the trouble is the media mafia wants to much so until they allow real free non profit based "distribution" I'll side against the suits ALL THE TIME.

918.4.2009 2:53

you can search torrents at google.com

they should go after google next

1018.4.2009 5:27
pphoenix
Inactive

There was a mention of the pirate party on BBC news 24 (UK) that described them as an "ultra right wing extremist political party", "with possible links to terrorist organisations" that was "possibly" funded by the pirate bay.

All in all the BBC just told everyone in the UK where to go and how to download free content, well done guys!

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 18 Apr 2009 @ 5:27

1118.4.2009 16:24

Originally posted by pphoenix:
There was a mention of the pirate party on BBC news 24 (UK) that described them as an "ultra right wing extremist political party", "with possible links to terrorist organisations" that was "possibly" funded by the pirate bay.

All in all the BBC just told everyone in the UK where to go and how to download free content, well done guys!
You really need to explain that because I watched the BBC 24 reports yesterday ( which included a history and personal interview with Mr Sunde ) and at no time did they mention the words "extremists" or "terrorist" or "ultra" or anything like it - they described it as a website that was very popular that gave people the information needed to lead them to another place where they could download files - they even mentioned the fact that no files at all were held on The Pirate Bay Servers.

1218.4.2009 17:24
atomicxl
Inactive

Quote:
The are like bootleggers but the trouble is the media mafia wants to much so until they allow real free non profit based "distribution" I'll side against the suits ALL THE TIME.
This already exist. If you or anybody wants to release YOUR product for free and allow it to be distributed as you want, that's totally legal.

The issue is when you take the product of someone else and completely remove their right to distribute their product as they wish. What you call for is the basic destruction of copyrights.

What is the difference between profit based and non profit based distribution? Lets say that there are three people in a room. One guy made a product and is selling it. Another guy has taken that product without permission, made bootleg copies and is selling it. Another person has taken the product without permission, made copies and is giving it away. How is any of that protecting the rights of the person who made the product? How is any of that fair to the person who made it?

If creators want to give away their distribution rights, I think that's totally fair and cool and whatever. But I don't think it's fair for some third party to come in and dictate that EVERYONE MUST do this and to advocate (and feel it's their right as a consumer) to destroy someone else's distribution right.

1318.4.2009 17:42

Quote:

This already exist. If you or anybody wants to release YOUR product for free and allow it to be distributed as you want, that's totally legal.

The issue is when you take the product of someone else and completely remove their right to distribute their product as they wish. What you call for is the basic destruction of copyrights.

What is the difference between profit based and non profit based distribution? Lets say that there are three people in a room. One guy made a product and is selling it. Another guy has taken that product without permission, made bootleg copies and is selling it. Another person has taken the product without permission, made copies and is giving it away. How is any of that protecting the rights of the person who made the product? How is any of that fair to the person who made it?

If creators want to give away their distribution rights, I think that's totally fair and cool and whatever. But I don't think it's fair for some third party to come in and dictate that EVERYONE MUST do this and to advocate (and feel it's their right as a consumer) to destroy someone else's distribution right.
And when you sign with a label, you make less than a quarter of the profits.

with the label or with the P2P ether way is blatant highway robbery.

even ackmed the Tech support makes more per phone call, than these So called artist.

The only thing the label provides is instant success 2 million dollar sign up. when you do that you are owned by the labels you have no rights over what happens to your product.

Real Artist can survive without labels.

1419.4.2009 0:24

Now we would need a party like this in all of the western countries. This seems to be the most effective at what they are doing. Hope they can bring some change.

1519.4.2009 2:29

if the market is opened up enough to allow distribution to the entire planet then artists will no longer need record labels to get tiny percentages and can independantly produce and distribute their music themselves with little to no middle men taking their profits.

physical format of any medium be it dvd or cd is a dying art. the sooner everyone realises this the sooner everyone can get onto minimal charge high quality digital distribution. the artists gets less then a dollar per cd atm. ild rather pay $2 to the artists for the entire album then $15-$20 so most can go to distribution and record labels.

get on board and lets get away from this old world mentality that has kept us subserviant to these corporate masters. 1

1619.4.2009 3:02

Quote:
Originally posted by windsong:
Those guys have MILLIONS stashed far away from the gubermints grasp.
Gubermints are good i like the Cinnamon flavored ones, they got the biggest kick to em
Yes, I also hear (not speaking from personal exp mind you) that they make great suppositories. You should try it!

1724.4.2009 10:31

I agree in principle with the notion that copyright owners should expect some reward for their intellectual property, but this must be tempered with their responsibility also.
For years the record companies have been putting out sub-standard product, remember pre-recorded tapes that sounded as though they had been recorded through a cushion? vinyl discs so bad you missed chunks of music, because they used low-grade reconstituted vinyl?

Now they are trying to charge the same cost for downloads as the cost of many CDs, they have no manufacturing or distribution overheads, no raw material costs, no packaging or printing costs and once the music is on a server there is little or no maintenance to be done and they still want to charge the same! Sheer profiteering!

Their responsibility is to be fair to those who wish to avail themselves of the intellectual property, not to rip them off. Now that there is a way for the music-loving pubic to fight back via such sites as Pirate Bay, the record companies resort to threats of the worst kind, we know that record companies are not particularly intelligent, ( any idiot can run a company with a monopoly) otherwise they would have seen this coming and done something about it, but threatening your customers (who you have been ripping off for years) is not the brightest move if they want to earn their respect or any degree of loyalty, if they made the music available at a realistic price, which reflects the fact that they have little or no overhead once the music is produced, (some of the music and films being downloaded has been around for years and they have already got their costs back) and accounted for the mechanical royalties only, sites like Pirate Bay would never have existed, but their usual greed has led them to believe they could carry on as they did in the past and predictably they are now bleating like sheep about their losses, which are not even realistic, but based upon their perceived worth in line with the hard-copy products. They have truly lost the plot and frankly they deserve everything they get.

Had they had a true sense of responsibility to their (former) customers instead of seeing them as monopoly fodder, when the technology became available to stick it to them, had they been reasonable, most people would have continued to buy from them, after the threats of prosecution, and most believe they cannot even cope with the levels of usage, their customers are now getting their own back.

So when Sir Paul McCartney says "if you get on a bus you expect to pay for the ride" he is correct, what you don't expect to pay for is some imaginary concept that lets the bus company charge what it likes, which bears no relation to the costs involved even allowing for a reasonable profit.
They seem to forget the simple process of supply and demand and by their previous actions,they have made the downloading of music for little or nothing a reality, brought about by their lack of foresight and their avarice.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive