What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
54 Comments
- MjrParanoid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29Nice, lets go after google or Yahoo when a user uses them to search for and find pirated content, or to find the next torrentspy site.
In fact maybe we can sue the maker of the keyboard that enabled that user type their query.
Heck, lets just sue the schools for making people literate enough compose the search string.
Or maybe we take a different route and sue Al Gore for making such an evil Internet!
After all, it certainly isn't fault of those abusing the system. - SuperSloth, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22Not on better content, that's for sure! Then people might actually *want* to buy their products.
- Nik420, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Loser pays all court costs in Canada. People don't sue very often up here.
- Sirocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Not necessarily. The judge may rule that the loser takes all court costs... and this frequently happens.
- cyborgO, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20Give'm hell! Rich thieves.
- fgiDangeresque, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16With pockets as deep as theirs, I am sure they will will find a way to cause us trouble. Watch them spend more money lobbying individuals in the government, or spending money on _something_.
/me wonders how they could better spend their money?? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14You people forget the rule of law does not apply to the MPAA.
Someone must put their foot down and I am that foot! - dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8This is less of a news story, and more of a "he said, she said." I dugg it, but only because I hate the MPAA and the RIAA, but there is little to no actual useful information in this article.
- Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Maybe THAT'S why their profits are down - in addition to the bad movies, they're spending way too much money on lobbying.
- randomjohn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Thanks for the direct link to the motion to dismiss. What a poorly drafted document that is. I'm a tech lawyer, so I read and draft these things all day, and his style is just awful, he doesn't cite any of the right cases, he doesn't have any sort of structure, he meanders from poorly made point to irrelevant commentary, etc.
Too bad torrentspy doesn't have better counsel. Maybe I'll volunteer to do it pro bono... - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I modded down the parent because his reasoning is flawed. In the first paragraph he states "it'll be legal in all respects as long as you DON'T SAY "this can be used to download all and any music you want, for free." In the second he claims they are guilty--not because they *SAID* you can use their service to find pirated content--but merely because you *CAN* find illegal content. This is EXACTLY the kind of distinction the Supreme Court decision was trying to create. Providing a search engine for files is legal. If you ADVERTISE your service as a way to get copyrighted material for free then you're in violation of the law.
While it is possible that Torrent Spy is guilty of illegally advertising their site, that is not the argument the comment made and in fact the poster contradicts himself. Then he calls the rest of us idiots. Flawed logic and ill conceived personal attacks are a surefire recipe for getting -digged. - rebrad, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10What do you want from shrill promoters that don't know the meaning of work and have no redeeming skills.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Here's a copy of the actual motion to dismiss: http://www.torrentfreak.com.nyud.net:8090/files/torrentspyvsmpaa.pdf
Torrentspy says the MPAA should sue google because they're a better search engine ;)
And they're right, try the filetype torrent command.
http://torrentfreak.com/torrentspy-tells-the-mpaa-to-sue-google/ - MjrParanoid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5ROFL!
Nice!
Please, remind where that reference comes from. - maxmojo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Here is your future internet, as controlled not by the people, but Industry fatcats.
1. You pay for a fiber link from your telco/cable provider, that gives you amazing speeds to the 'exclusive' services they provide. Your ISP will only gauruntee fast access to their services, anything else can be accessed, but the data will be so degraded that you can not use it reliably. They may block sites, that they see as 'degrading the customer experience.'
2. You will be provided with access to a vast albeit substandard bitrate library of movies, and television shows, for additional premium charges. - enforcerpsu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yes, but what else can they do. They are absolutely right. They are just a search engine. Thats it. Its up to the people to decide what they put out there.
- g30ph, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11"THE STREETS WILL FLOW WITH THE BLOOD OF THE NON-BELIEVERS!"
-Beavis - JaytB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Man, I have to say that I'm happy to live in Belgium if I read all these stories about the MPAA.
Here's an article I stumbled on a couple of days ago:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060124-6036.html
Seems the MPAA isn't always following their own rules or maybe I just don't get the all we'll-sue-you-for-using-technology thing. - geekee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"and if the industry is worried about people putting up torrents that infringe on copyrights, it should go after those actually responsible, rather than the search engines."
People on /. used to say this all the time, until they actually started doing it. Then they got all pissed off that they were suing people for illegal activity. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@expensix: I just blocked you for flooding, I hope others do the same.
- miles32, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3THey dont provide the information they just act as a community site where certain people get together and exchange random seuqunces of 1's an 0's that may or may not resemble something that could be paid for.
- EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How can you say that these torrents sites aren't "advertising" piracy when they provide information on how to access a limitless source of copyrighted material?
I'm still trying to figure out how you're concluding that creating a search engine which allows people to search for copyrighted material is the same thing as "advertising" piracy. By that definition ANY search engine would be guilty. The Supreme Court doesn't speak in metaphors-- When they say a defendent is guilty of infringement if they advertise their service as a means of obtaining copyrighted material that is EXACTLY what they mean. "Get Kazaa and download the latest hit music and movies for free!" "Napster--Unlimited Metallica, no charge!" It's absurd to conclude that because many of the files Torrent Spy indexes ultimately link to copyrighted material they are guilty of ADVERTISING their service to obtain such material. - eobrieniv, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i too upped you, but ot because i agree with you. you are right in the aspect that from the untrained eye they are aiding the distribution of copyrighted material.....but..
they are NOT linking to copyrighted material. those torrents do not contain copyrighted material. they are simply a tracker. the MPAA and RIAA do not own any part of that torrent, so legally they have no right to sue. just my .02... - MephistoX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Stop bitching about the title.
Its the article that matters anyway.
Good for torrent spy. Someone needs to stand up to the oppressive MPAA and RIAA. They're not above the law, no matter what those corporate executives think. - jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Also, a quick but important point. The MPAA can reinterpret the ruling however they want. They can pretend that the Supreme Court said that everyone has to give them $30,000 every year, and that's just fine and legal for them to do. It's called an opinion. The important part is that no one has to listen to, or abide by, their opinion.
- vokiel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The argument is uneducated and perfectly trollish. If I see it your way, then a radio signal can be used to transmit/receive songs without consent of the author and then that makes the manufacturer of the radio transmitter liable.
Go home and get a clue... Sorry for the flame, but I am tired of hearing this kind of BS around. - Killerah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's good to see TorrentSpy being educated and not just letting MPAA have their way with the law. Only problem is that once TorrentSpy wins this MPAA will probably start suing/scaring people into submission. But I don't download that much stuff anyway so it doesn't bother me that much. Dugg.
- TylerDurden0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Funny, the two industries are losing so much cheddar but they spend like hell in courtrooms and on Capitol Hill. Kinda makes you wonder if membership rates are going up around this bitch.
This is like suing gun shows for people being killed in drive-bys. - BSpolice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Great story, but stop linking to that site. When 3 out of 4 links lead to one of their own stories, it gets hard to read it all.
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And everytime they do it, they lose credibility and money. Eventually they'll lose enough of both to make them stop.
They already lost once. - oddball, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I AM ABOVE THE LAW!
- xravenx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm glad that Torrent Spy has stood up for their selves. It's about time someone stands up to the MPAA. All the RIAA and MPAA is out to due to to eliminate search engines even though they we're not the original people who posted the torrents to be found through a search engine. In all there's no real way to catch every person but they shouldn't be so bitchy about copyrighted material when it's happening everywhere on the net.
- jmholloway, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Good for them! I just listened to a lecture on digital copyright in my CHI class and we learned exactly what the grokster case stood for. Im glad someone is standing up for their rights.
Good work, carry on. :) - enforcerpsu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Props to torrent spy for fighting this. Sorry about dp. Comments seem to be delayed.
- kidlinux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Vokiel, in the scenario you present, the manufacturer of the radio equipment would be the same as the manufacturer of the bittorrent software. We've already established that the software producers are not liable for piracy if they don't advertise their software as something which may be used to pirate copyrighted material. Guaranteed if radio equipment manufacturers advertised their equipment for illegal uses, they'd find themselves in hot water.
- jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, there is a fine line between service providers and content providers, should be interesting.
- camiller, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2mjrparanoid: The "I am that foot" reference is a line that Dean Wormer says in the movie Animal House.
- joxrox22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0MPAA and the RIAA CEOs are all in denial. They should go after the government for creating the net and opening it for public use. Yes, "public use" and stop harassing people (part of the public) for their god given right of using it. MPAA and RIAA should know that this is not piracy and to call it that is discriminating and offensive since everyone doesn't go around acting like one (Yarrr matey). Music has been copied since Mozart's time because the poor are not privileged to hearing music performed by composers under patronage. So, maids copy music sheets and take them to pubs for public performances. So in a way it's tradition to copy something. To try and break a human tradition is breaking against human karma and ***** will soon come down - people will revolt and most often in violent terms. Somebody who has knowledge and the skill for massive destruction (like a navy seal guy) is going get pissed off by either the MPAA or the RIAA and hell will be unleashed. Heh- wouldn't that make a great movie to download.
- jmnormand, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1was thinking the same thing. im sure google and yahoo have a team of laywers watchin this one. thinks the mpaa might be wise to tread a bit softer in this domain, not that wisdom as ever stoped them before...
- jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Don't give any ideas damn it. Alot of people are already suing google, successfully too.
- Tetra, on 10/12/2007, -10/+10If you ask me, this is the fault of the media industry in the first place. In their rush to quickly obsolete whatever content they produce and encourage users to consume more and more, they're confronted with P2P technology obsoleting their technology even faster. The circle is now complete.
http://bsalert.com/ - kickingbear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The MPAA, much like the RIAA, really do not have a clue. I truly feel that CD sales (high as they are) have not gone down even with p2p services still out there alive and kicking. The same is true of DVD sales. I mean look at the number of collections that are out there for sale. (Sopranos, Beavis + Butthead, etc...)
Piracy is a gimmick to scare consumers into staying. This includes the use of our court system. What will truly kill RIAA and MPAA is when consumers finally "get it" and start to vote with their dollars, and get their content in other ways. BY DOWNLOADING it. You will see new business models develop over the next 2 years that I feel will really put a hurtin to these guys. So let them play their court games. The CANNOT finance thousands of court cases a year forever. And the more other companies challenge them on their suits, the more independent, and small companies will flourish. - toddncl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wonder why they are not throwing this at the biggest torrent search engine out there, Google - filetype:torrent
Ah.. but they prefer the little fish, or children. - LoungeActx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2It sounds to me that torrentspy is just passing the buck onto the user of their services. In order to get off the hook they are basically saying it's not their fault, it's our users fault. This strategy may get them off the hook, but it just targets the users and participants of torrentspy which inevitably will destroy their business model.
- Jams, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3/me thinks you are an avid irc user :)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Whatever your feelings on this...what a ***** title.
Stop posting something as if it was a legal ruling and then put "torrent spy climas" or whatever.
Totally lame. Go work fo the ***** Enquirer. Actually, not even. That headline is worse than the Enquirer. WE are talking the worst of the worst supermarket checkout tabloids here. - wthulhu, on 08/29/2009, -6/+2A prefectly valid argument, sadly people have downscored you simply because they dont agree with you. Rather than edifying themselves or considering the facts of the case they prefer to pretend you comment doesnt exist.
- expensix, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4I just blocked tetra for spamming. I hope others will do the same.
- kidlinux, on 10/12/2007, -15/+9Wow, everyone here is just blindly siding with TorrentSpy?
As far as I can tell, the Supreme Court ruling in question here applies to the designers of bittorrent software. That is, you can design the software, advertise it all you want, and it'll be legal in all respects as long as you don't say "this can be used to download all and any music you want, for free." (ie: it can be used to pirate copyrighted material.)
This doesn't apply to tracker sites. Like it or not, those "search engines" are aiding, abetting, and facilitating piracy by providing access to copyrighted material.
How can you say that these torrents sites aren't "advertising" piracy when they provide information on how to access a limitless source of copyrighted material?
Are you people out of your minds?? - expensix, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2I just blocked tetra for spamming.
Note: The Digg comment system definately has some bugs that need to be worked out. Sorry for the double reply. -
Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is