×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

TPB Files Police Complaint Against CPIAC for Copying Website

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 years ago | from the this-is-gonna-be-good dept.

Piracy 268

Last week, a Finnish anti-piracy agency copied the CSS and HTML of The Pirate Bay. Today, TPB announced that they have filed a police report and are preparing to sue for copyright infringement: "The Pirate Bay, the world’s largest site for cultural diversity and file sharing, has today (Monday 2013-02-18) reported a suspected crime to the Finnish police. The suspected criminals are the Finnish anti-piracy organization CIAPC (locally known as TTVK). The reason is that CIAPC have copied files from which The Pirate Bay is built, to produce a fraudulent parody site. While The Pirate Bay may have a positive view on copying, it will not stand by and watch copyright enforcing organizations disrespect copyright." The Pirate Bay is also arguing that parody laws do not apply thanks to recent legal precedent.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Oh this will go well. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940071)

I'm sure the Pirate Bay won't come out of this looking like dicks.

Re:Oh this will go well. (0)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 2 years ago | (#42940201)

The Pirate Bay, the world’s largest site for cultural diversity

Is there some sort of citation for that, or do they just think it sounds good?

Re:Oh this will go well. (1)

terbeaux (2579575) | about 2 years ago | (#42940335)

Being a very large site they often make outrageous and unfounded claims like "The Galaxy's Largest BitTorrent Site."

I think it is hilarious if not true as well.

Did you see the documentary? http://youtu.be/eTOKXCEwo_8 [youtu.be]

You started it... (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 2 years ago | (#42940483)

Miss Universe...
Tssk!

mirror (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940083)

Mirror, for those who cannot access thepiratebay.se.

http://malaysiabay.org/blog/227 [malaysiabay.org]

Pirate a pirate (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940087)

Let me get this right... TPB are suing, cause someone pirated their design??

Right...

Re:Pirate a pirate (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940147)

You are an idiot if you don't understand the whole statement they are making by this. In particular, it's important to note that the webcode in question IS copyrighted by TPB. Furthermore, TPB does not host anything which they do not have the copyright for.

It is not like TPB is suing to make money - it is simply a political statement, and a very good one at that. I hope they go far with this, because it really is completely legit and fair.

Re: Pirate a pirate (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940427)

You're an asshat. Check out the little 'copy me icon' (whatever the hell it's called) on the bottom of TPB's site. That pretty much is a free lunch. What the CIAPC is stupid and ironic, but I don't think it's a crime with a "go ahead, take one" sign plastered on TBP.

Re: Pirate a pirate (2)

thaylin (555395) | about 2 years ago | (#42940673)

It could be said that they want you to copy the look feel and what they do, no steal the source code.

Re: Pirate a pirate (1)

cheater512 (783349) | about 2 years ago | (#42940933)

Its not technically a legal licence unlike say Creative Commons.

Re:Pirate a pirate (5, Informative)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | about 2 years ago | (#42940167)

Exactly.

TPB (which does not host any pirated material whatsoever) had their copyrighted site design stolen by a group that has been lobbying the government to put people in jail (for longer terms than rape or murder) for copying copyright material.

The copyright lobby group is now trying to say "no no, it's parody" but they've been lobbying hard to get parody removed from the list of exemptions and have recently succeeded.

Thus, TPB is attempting to hoist them on their own petard.

Re:Pirate a pirate (5, Interesting)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#42940243)

The copyright lobby group is now trying to say "no no, it's parody" but they've been lobbying hard to get parody removed from the list of exemptions and have recently succeeded.

Microsoft wouldn't be happy if you used a pirated copy of Microsoft Word to write a parody of Harry Potter. These guys try to create a parody of a website, not a parody of someone's CSS code.

Re:Pirate a pirate (5, Interesting)

dragon-file (2241656) | about 2 years ago | (#42940375)

Actually, Bill gates doesn't mind a little piracy. "Although the world's largest software maker spends millions of dollars annually to combat illegal copying and distribution of its products, critics allege -- and Microsoft acknowledges -- that piracy sometimes helps the company establish itself in emerging markets and fend off threats from free open-source programs." http://articles.latimes.com/2006/apr/09/business/fi-micropiracy9 [latimes.com]

Re:Pirate a pirate (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940417)

From http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130218/10364722017/pirate-bays-lawsuit-against-anti-piracy-group-more-about-exposing-double-standards-enforcement.shtml

TPB has now said that it has reported the parody CIAPC site to the Economic Crime Unit. Why? Well, it appears the whole thing is really about exposing the double standard by Finnish law enforcement. You see, recently, Finnish prosecutors went after a parody site by Finnish "software developer, researcher and internet activist" Matti Nikki. So, TPB, is noting that it just wants to see the law applied equally (by which it means, showing how farcical the law is, knowing that law enforcement will never prosecute this):

        “In a similar case, the prosecution and the Helsinki Court of Appeals have found that a parody site can violate the moral rights of the original author. Changing the logo or making slight edits to the text are not enough to remove this liability,” they informed the police.

The Finnish EFF supported this claim, explaining to TorrentFreak (in the link above) that seeing how prosecutors reacted would be quite telling:

        “It’s interesting to see, how the police reacts to Pirate Bay’s demands. On facts the case is indeed very similar to Matti Nikki’s case, in which the prosecutor decided to bring the charges on behalf of Save the Children.

        “The law should be the same for everyone so now the objectivity of the Finnish police is going to be tested. Anyway as others have already pointed out, even if Pirate Bay loses the case, it’s a victory for their cause.”

So, while others were mocking, it appears there was a much more serious thought process going on here. One of the following possibilities are likely to occur:

        Finnish prosecutors do absolutely nothing, thus exposing their complete double standard in enforcing the law.
        A lawsuit happens, and TPB "loses" the case, as it's an obvious parody situation which should be allowed -- and thus, TPB reinforces the protections for parody.
        A lawsuit happens TPB actually wins the case, which most people would equally recognize as preposterous after seeing the initial press coverage of the story.

It's looking like this was, yet again, a more clever move than many gave them credit for initially.

Re:Pirate a pirate (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 2 years ago | (#42940685)

The site doesn't belong to law enforcement. It's just a regular "registered organisation". Anyone can register one, it costs about 100EUR to do so.

What happened is that this organisation filed a crime report with police alongside evidence which police (that is actually law enforcement organisation) investigated.

TPB Claim of Infringement Against CIAPC is Valid (5, Informative)

cpaglee (665238) | about 2 years ago | (#42940985)

Making a parody site may be 'fair use', but actually copying CSS and HTML is infringement. If CIAPC wants to create a parody site they can write their own HTML and CSS to mimic TPB look and feel. Actually copying CSS and HTML is a violation of copyright which 'fair use' will technically not protect.

Re:Pirate a pirate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940871)

It's hoist them with their own petard. A petard is a device similar to a hand grenade so the explosion could propel the bearer into the air if the bearer dropped it or the target threw it back at the original bearer.

Re:Pirate a pirate (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940961)

'Stolen'? Nonsense.

Reality requires a transfer of possession for theft to have occurred. Copying a site design is not theft. It is simply a copy of an idea which is something that does not exist in reality and thus is not property, but instead is an abstraction that describes something in reality(in this case an arrangement of data on a server). To steal the design of a site, they would have to deprive the owner of the actual thing which the idea of the site design describes. This would require taking actual property(be it the server itself or somehow messing with the data arrangement on the server but then it wouldn't be so much a matter of transfer of property so much as destruction of it).

Whatever the moral implications, let us at least speak correctly and precisely about the immediate actions, the facts. In doing so, perhaps it will help us draw more truthful conclusions. I would never defend government institutions(all of which by definition steal and worse on a daily basis) but I do not tolerate misidentification and conflation of ethical actions; that leads to acceptance of evil(or condemnation of virtue).

Re:Pirate a pirate (0)

FlyingGuy (989135) | about 2 years ago | (#42941365)

FUCK those asshats.

It must suck really hard when karma comes around to fuck you in the ass.

Re:Pirate a pirate (4, Insightful)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | about 2 years ago | (#42941301)

Calling yourself a pirate does not make you a pirate.

Pirating from one who calls themselves a pirate, does make you a pirate.

Hah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940091)

Brilliant.

Re:Hah. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940157)

Glad someone gets it. Do people really not understand that this is intentional irony? TPB is making a mockery of the system, not protecting IP...

Re:Hah. (2)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 2 years ago | (#42940283)

At this point in the game, it's throwing fuel in the fire, the only unique thing is it's coming from the other side of the fire for once. The copyright system is broken, and I'm sure at least part of tpb's meaningfulness is proving that.

Could make for an interesting precedent (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940111)

If CIAPC uses the copyrighted material, wouldn't that legitimize what TPB is doing ;-)

Interesting.

Hypocrisy (-1, Troll)

AmazingRuss (555076) | about 2 years ago | (#42940115)

... now from both sides.

Re:Hypocrisy (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940177)

How? One side is hosting copyrighted content and the other is not. Furthermore, one is a commercial entity, and the other is only making a hilarious political statement. Sorry, but I only see hypocrisy from one side.

Re:Hypocrisy (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940239)

Only if you ignore the part where TPB knowingly facilities millions of people to download illegal content. Even if what they're doing is legal, you have to be fucking retarded to not see the hypocrisy here.

Re:Hypocrisy (5, Insightful)

fredprado (2569351) | about 2 years ago | (#42940537)

They "facilitate" copyright infringement, which is not a crime in most countries unless it is done for money, about as much as Google or any search engine. The fact is copyright is an obsolete system that has to go, and it will go because people don't want it any more, and that is not Piratebay's fault or any entity's fault. The blame is on the system that cannot possibly work anymore.

Re:Hypocrisy (1, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42940817)

And who do you think will publish content in this idealist future copyright-free world? Or do you think that the general public will be truly satisfied with unending ads, unwanted porn popups, spam, and amateur cat videos?

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940947)

And who do you think will publish content in this idealist future copyright-free world?

I see what you did there. Well, news flash Mr Dinosaur. The services of you and your brethren of publishing companies are no longer required. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42940993)

Self-publication is still publishing.

My question stands.

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42941161)

Self-publication is still publishing.

My question stands.

Did anybody pay you to write the publication quoted here?

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940959)

To be fair, it seems that the general public are not wholly satisfied with copyright law.

Re:Hypocrisy (1)

Dodgy G33za (1669772) | about 2 years ago | (#42940971)

Where there is a market, someone will invent a mechanism.

Before copyright there were patrons of the arts for the high end stuff, and people throwing coins at traveling musicians and story tellers at the low end. The former can quite easily be replicated today, with governments and crowdsourced funding also playing a role. The latter still exists today, with bands doing gigs, book readings by the author etc.

And do not underestimate the power of user generated content. YouTube has grown very fat and happy on it.

Re:Hypocrisy (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42941029)

Before copyright, the time, expense, and effort involved in making copies of works tended to be adequate to provide a sufficient measure of exclusivity for the patrons who would commission the works. Now, copying can be done with a push of a button, so the same checks and balances no longer apply. As for user-generated content, sure... some big companies will probably make a living off of it, like youtube. At least with copyright intact, a smalltime content maker has an equal chance of being seen, and an assurance that nobody else is going to take credit for what they did (or do you think that plagiarism would even have any meaning without copyright?)

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940977)

Arguing for copyright and accusing GP is not seeing the bigger picture, while not seeing the bigger picture yourself.

Hypocrisy is right.

Re:Hypocrisy (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42941119)

The question stands. If current status self-published content is any indication, how in the world does anybody think that the absence of copyright will actually result in anything other than just an unending deluge of self-published shit?0

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940607)

Intentional, blatant hypocrisy, with a political motive, is properly called satire. TPB is not trying for subtle humor, it is going for mockery and using the courts to demonstrate the absurdity of the situation. This is truly popcorn munching worthy fun.

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940311)

Yes but seeing as they already got some of tpb members in prison for long sentences its only fair.

Re:Hypocrisy (3, Interesting)

sg_oneill (159032) | about 2 years ago | (#42940893)

Its not hypocrisy, its forcing them to live by the rules they themselves created. By doing this they expose the rotten double standard of copyright laws.

Imagine if the powerful had to live by the rules they created. No more police violence because the police could not mug people, no more wars Because murder would be illegal for the powerful too, no more bank shenanigans because the bankers could not burglarize people anymore. So many ills in society over.

So lets make the bastards follow their own rules I say.

Re:Hypocrisy (2)

AmazingRuss (555076) | about 2 years ago | (#42940935)

The pirate bay wants to make them follow the rules, when the TPB exists only because of the rules they don't follow?

It's hypocrisy. You can't see it because TPB is on "your" side.

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42941063)

It's mainly hilarious to use the same laws these idiots lobbied for against them in an effort to show them how flawed their reasoning is. That won't work even if they did lose, of course, because these people are thick-headed freedom-haters.

Re:Hypocrisy (1)

cffrost (885375) | about 2 years ago | (#42941265)

The pirate bay wants to make them follow the rules, when the TPB exists only because of the rules they don't follow?

Which rules is TPB not following?

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42941287)

The ones about intellectual property, that they are also suing about?

Moooom~ she hit me! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940121)

Hopefully commentors will understand it isn't TPB which is being hypocritical here.

"Well did you hit her first?"

Kopimi (0)

master5o1 (1068594) | about 2 years ago | (#42940127)

Problem, Kopimi?

Re:Kopimi (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940353)

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=kopimi

Re:Kopimi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940451)

let's try a definition from the site tpb links to...

kopimi (copyme), symbol showing that you want to be copied.

(emphasis theirs)

Re:Kopimi (1)

thaylin (555395) | about 2 years ago | (#42940699)

Coppied, as in taking the look feel and other aspects, or have your code stolen?

Re:Kopimi (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 years ago | (#42941019)

or in the literal sense: taking an exact copy of the hosted files.

Re:Kopimi (2)

swilde23 (874551) | about 2 years ago | (#42940743)

I can't figure out what they mean by putting the kopimi link on their pages.

Is it only supposed to apply to the data that the torrents contain (in the sense that a torrent contains actual torrenty data, and the instructions for how to get other data)?

Win-Win (5, Insightful)

Niterios (2700835) | about 2 years ago | (#42940155)

If they lose, they prove a point: copyright laws are only in favor of a few. If they win, they expand their list of successful trolling.

Re:Win-Win (4, Insightful)

Fluffeh (1273756) | about 2 years ago | (#42940189)

Either way, it makes for an interesting play. It will be interesting to see how this plays out - is it really the same set of rules that everyone has to play by, or do those rules only apply if a big corp says they do...

Re:Win-Win (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42941009)

Here's what I got.

If you play the game interestingly it can make for an interesting game. Will the game be interesting? that's up to the players. Some players think they can play by their own rules but can they? We'll have to play to find out.

Interesting.

Re:Win-Win (5, Informative)

MoronGames (632186) | about 2 years ago | (#42940203)

If they lose, they prove a point: copyright laws are only in favor of a few. If they win, they expand their list of successful trolling.

Exactly this. I'd be willing to bet that everyone on TPB side of this complaint knows that it is ridiculous, but, win or lose, they will prove a point.

Re:Win-Win (5, Interesting)

Omnifarious (11933) | about 2 years ago | (#42940539)

Yes, the people complaining about the hypocrisy of TPB here are really missing the point. This isn't hypocrisy, it's high satire with the legal system playing the straight man. It's brilliant.

Re:Lose-Lose (0)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 2 years ago | (#42940319)

If they win the case can be used as a reference agaisnt them in hollywood as lawyers quote rulings from other cases as laws of God. If they lose they lose enforcement of tradement and copyright.

All I have to say is karma got them back. I find it personally hypocritical for a slashdotter to pirate software while getting paid writting software from paying customers and then getting angry at GPL copyright violations.

You can't have it both ways? If people decided to pay for Photoshop then Gimp would be more powerfull and used and same is true iwth LibreOffice. We only create monopolies on standards in the process and I bet Aldus Photostyler and Paint shop pro would still exist if piracy was not there as well as WordPefect.

Re:Lose-Lose (5, Insightful)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#42940803)

I find it personally hypocritical for a slashdotter to pirate software while getting paid writting software from paying customers and then getting angry at GPL copyright violations.

GPL deserves equal treatment under the law. If and when the law goes away, GPL will no longer need to exist.

Re:Win-Win (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 years ago | (#42941027)

If they lose, they may just show that putting a link on your website saying you want to be copied makes it legal to copy it.

But bits are bits (-1, Troll)

alen (225700) | about 2 years ago | (#42940159)

No one stole anything from tpb and information wants to be free

It's just bits on a hard drive and just math and physics

And all said.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940161)

And all said, HAHA! ( in a Nelson voice, pointing at CPICA)

Missed opportunity to take the high road (0)

poity (465672) | about 2 years ago | (#42940169)

Now they've sunk to the level they've worked to raise others above.
Should have just release a statement saying "We're glad they've had a change of heart and have come to embrace our perspective of sharing, and hope others will follow."

Re:Missed opportunity to take the high road (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940259)

That statement would have had no effect whatsoever except amongst the minority of readers of sites like slashdot. The CPIAC would simply have ignored them and gone on with business as usual.

Filing a formal police complaint forces the organisation to show up to court and explain themselves in front of a judge. There are now legal consequences to their ignoring the statement; up to and including jail. Their responses will be on public court records where they can be used against them in future cases; their hypocrisy will be on display for all to see.

Moreover, a potential court case draws more widespread attention as it will be covered by a much greater spread of media outlets.

They are taking this opportunity to publicly embaress the organisation and expose the hypocrisy they represent. They are grabbing this opportunity with both hands and running with it. Releasing a smug, toothless statement that makes nerds feel good but does nothing to advance their cause would have been the real missed opportunity here.

Re:Missed opportunity to take the high road (0)

PRMan (959735) | about 2 years ago | (#42940329)

Where are my mod points? MOD this guy up as Insightful!

Re:Missed opportunity to take the high road (1)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about 2 years ago | (#42940475)

Damn PR Man, you're good!

Your mod fu is far greater than mine.

Re:Missed opportunity to take the high road (2)

Type44Q (1233630) | about 2 years ago | (#42940715)

That statement would have had no effect whatsoever except amongst the minority of readers of sites like slashdot.

Me thinks you greatly underestimate the size of the "tech aware" community...

Re:Missed opportunity to take the high road (1)

Type44Q (1233630) | about 2 years ago | (#42940781)

Oops, I misunderstood; apologies! :)

Couldn't be better (5, Insightful)

folderol (1965326) | about 2 years ago | (#42940205)

I'm astonished at how many people right across the technology forums don't seem to get what an amazing opportunity has been handed to The Pirate Bay... on a plate! They would be absolute fools to not make the most of this, and really rub the copyright lobby's noses in their own poo.

Talking about them being hypocritical is nonsense. They are rolling on the floor laughing while they poke at CPIAC with the very laws that were being used against them. I reckon this will just run and run, and I'll thoroughly enjoy it.

Re:Couldn't be better (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 2 years ago | (#42940327)

So they win and courts use it as a reference for stronger copyright and trademark protection which will then be used agaisn't them later on. Nice

Re:Couldn't be better (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940659)

Actually, the joy here is that, off hand, I can't think of any argument that CPIAC could raise in their defense which will not later weaken their own efforts/assertions.

Furthemore, should the try to defend themselves against this, it will provide AMPLE opportunity to use the things that they've already said in court against them, which is pretty substantially amusing from a purely kharmic perspective.

Short of CPIAC saying, "you're absolutely right, we're guilty as hell, please fine the ever-living-shit out of us!", any statement/argument that they make can only weaken them when they attempt to prosecute their agenda against others down the road.

-AC

Re:Couldn't be better (0)

c0lo (1497653) | about 2 years ago | (#42941105)

They are rolling on the floor laughing

[Citation needed].
No, it's not trolling, just a terse way to suggest there could be massive +Informative mods for any links to pages in which TPB actually mocks CPIAC.

Missing the point (5, Informative)

Agent.Nihilist (1228864) | about 2 years ago | (#42940233)

If you first though is hypocrisy, you've missed the point.
If you believe a tool or process is broken, and have advocated about how it needs to change, then using said tool to directly illustrate how broken something is is far from hypocrisy. In this case they are using it to highlight the hypocrisy of the groups promoting high levels/draconian enforcement of copyright.

There is also the issue of actual content theft. Not the MPAA/RIAA's so called theft, where a distribution control is being breached, but taking content developed by another and claiming it as your own. You know, the thing copyright was actually invented for.
Remember, even the Pirate Party doesn't call for a total abolition of copyright, just a reform to more reasonable terms instead of multiple lifetimes.

Re:Missing the point (5, Insightful)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#42940867)

Copyright was invented to control distribution and restrict "unauthorized" use of the printing press. The issue of plagiarism was the bait and hook. Some copyright laws of the past ignored the issue of authorship entirely. The law is designed to protect publishers, not the creators.

Brilliant! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940255)

If TPB does nothing, TTVK can claim that TPB doesn't care about copyright, thus showing some form of guilt. If TPB complains, it shows their hypocrisy, and TTVK can claim innocence just as TPB did.

What TTVK doesn't consider, is that TPB really has nothing of value to lose. Not even face. Honestly, their reputation can only improve if anything. By going through with the complaint, TPB is really just getting more media coverage and keeping their name persistent in the mainstream media. TTVK is still pushing its same agenda, which TPB can continue to highlight as morons, and point out the flaws in their existence.

It's win-win for TPB any way you slice this, and TTVK should have known better.

Don't you need physical presence to sue? (0)

Hentes (2461350) | about 2 years ago | (#42940325)

AFAIK the people behind Piratebay have escaped to avoid prison, how can they sue when they aren't there?

Re:Don't you need physical presence to sue? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940459)

Well, You know quite wrong. Carl Lundström has served his sentence and Gottfrid Swartholm is serving his. Gottfrid, maybe better known as anakata is the man who has written the TPB software. The other two are as far as I know still at large however.
Besides, I think it is perfectly legal for a legal entity like TPB to sue and only have lawyers or other representatives appear i court.

Re:Don't you need physical presence to sue? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940493)

Just like the Coorp that just stole data from them? Pepsico, Coke, GM, Ford are coorps where no one will go to jail (Just ask the Firestone victims families)...now go steal some they're company secrets and attempt to sell them!!!

Like we say in the hoooood...it's not WHAT you steal; but WHOM you steal it from...LOL

Security for Costs (1)

Turminder Xuss (2726733) | about 2 years ago | (#42940355)

If Finnish procedure is anything like Australian procedure then TTVK might apply to require TPB to provide security for costs. TPB would have to disclose its financials, there could be interesting argument over the sustainability of its business model.

Re:Security for Costs (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940465)

I don't know how this ends up working out but there are some interesting prior cases against file sharers in Finland that might or might not apply.

In general, Finnish courts have accepted the inflated "theoretical loss of income" figures from content providers in the past lawsuits. There have been couple of larger cases with a BitTorrent site and a DirectConnect hub where the administrators of those services had to pay 800 000 and 680 000 euros for damages for "making available" copyrighted works and distributing them. The administrators were held accountable for all the distribution of files in those cases.

So how many copies of those files has TTVK distributed already? Just multiply that with some suitable number of euros for damages.

Re:Security for Costs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940637)

Finnish procedure is nothing like Australian procedure. Finland uses a Civil Law system, roughly derived from the Napoleonic Code. Australia uses a Common Law system inherited from England.

Re:Security for Costs (1)

Turminder Xuss (2726733) | about 2 years ago | (#42940777)

Yup, you're quite correct and this multijurisdictional costs report published by Lovells in 2010 [chrysostomides.com] says you can't seek security for costs or get interim costs awards in Finland.

Slight problem (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940379)

One slight problem with this complaint is that here in Finland the law is actually pretty sane. If TPB sues someone for copying their css files, what they can win is the value of those files. We are not the USA, you can't win zillions of dollars in damages due to the simple fact that those damages do not exist. You can only win actual real world damages. For some css files you might get a hundred bucks. When TPB's lawyers explain the facts of life to their clients this silliness goes away in a heartbeat. The end result is that the TBP kiddies get to pay a couple of thousand bucks to their lawyers for explaining this to them. Great job shooting yourselves in the foot, idiots.

Re:Slight problem (2)

TENTH SHOW JAM (599239) | about 2 years ago | (#42940899)

-$1000 in lawyer costs.
+$100,000 in free publicity across the tech media.
Balance sheet still looking good...

Kopimi... no? (5, Interesting)

The Raven (30575) | about 2 years ago | (#42940389)

I don't understand, actually. TPB proudly displays the anti-copyright symbol (Kopimi [kopimi.com] ), so are they not explicitly granting permission to use their HTML and CSS? While the CIAPC are dicks, it seems hypocritical to grant permission to copy only when they like the person.

Re:Kopimi... no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940675)

Just checked .. yup... that could be a problem for TPB - it could be considered as granting permission for all content. Darn.

Re:Kopimi... no? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42941023)

Nice job weakly supporting a position, almost as an attempt to discredit it...o wait, try again lolololololol

GOOD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940415)

Good for them. Turn about is fair play.

Fair Use (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 years ago | (#42940445)

"fraudulent parody site" -> sounds like fair use to me.

Re:Fair Use (4, Informative)

LilWolf (847434) | about 2 years ago | (#42940545)

There was recently a case in Finland where a person made a parody of a site that offered the opportunity to report childporn sites to an organisation that would then forward them to the police. The organisation sued said person and won. What the copyright organisation is doing here is no different from that so under Finnish law they could be in hot water.

Re:Fair Use (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 years ago | (#42940723)

Except it does not contain child porn, so it is very different in practice.

Re:Fair Use (2)

LilWolf (847434) | about 2 years ago | (#42940855)

Neither did the parody site. All it did was mimic the layout of the organisations site and change some texts used there(Save the Children turned into Save the Paedophiles etc. Clear parodies and certainly no child porn.)

That's essentially what the copyright organisation is doing here. They mimicked TPB appearance, changed some graphics and texts and where links lead to.

Re:Fair Use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940587)

It should be, but CPIAC has been pushing to remove "parody" from the idea of fair use. This is the irony.

Re:Fair Use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940707)

Even if CPIAC hadn't (mostly successfully) sought to end Parody as a Fair-Use, they didn't parody the CSS, they parody'd the site. The unauthorized use/distribution of the separate, Copyrighted, CSS file is a blatant violation of several of the tenets of their religion^H^H^H^H^H^H^Haison d'etre... and, not co-incidently, also the law.

-AC

Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940627)

Value of your css file: $100.
Bill from your lawyers for explaining it's not worth paying $50,000 in legal fees to go to trial for a $100 dispute: $5,000.
Idiots.

Re:Idiots (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940785)

Except they aren't filing in America (so it won't cost the soul of their first-born) and aren't doing it for financial reasons you myopic shit.

Re:Idiots (2)

TENTH SHOW JAM (599239) | about 2 years ago | (#42940915)

Free publicity :$BIGNUM
$BIGNUM - $LawyerlyChat = Nice dividend.

Cultural Diversity? (4, Funny)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 years ago | (#42940657)

ROFLMAO

the world’s largest site for cultural diversity

How is hosting torrents for copyrighted material cultural diversity? I tried to download "Debbie Does Dallas" and the )(*@)(# file was subtitled in Swedish! What good is that? Is that what they mean by "cultural diversity?"

Re:Cultural Diversity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42940823)

its one example dumbass

Re:Cultural Diversity? (1)

Turminder Xuss (2726733) | about 2 years ago | (#42940851)

Well that sucks. Without the dialog in the subtitles you've got no chance of knowing whats going on.

Re:Cultural Diversity? (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 years ago | (#42941071)

So how was "Debbie gör Dallas"?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?