Movie streaming site shut down...

Dave!

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2195407,00.html

One of the world's most-used pirate film websites has been closed after providing links to illegal versions of major Hollywood hits and TV shows.

The first closure of a major UK-based pirate site was also accompanied by raids and an arrest, the anti-piracy group Federation Against Copyright Theft (Fact) said today.

A 26-year-old man from Cheltenham was arrested on Thursday in connection with offences relating to the facilitation of copyright infringement on the internet, Fact said.

Dunno where the last thread went....

Anyways, anyone know what he could be charged with? Or is this just to scare other such site owners into stopping?

humbert

There was another thread on this that vanished very recently(or I'm going bonkers). I'm curious as to why though.

Dave!

humbert wrote: »

There was another thread on this that vanished very recently(or I'm going bonkers). I'm curious as to why though.

Me too... Coulda been cos the address was mentioned, so I didn't do that this time.

RuggieBear

because people are linking to other "illegal" sites.


It's bonkers that a mere hoster got shut down but if people are going to say on here that they download and then link to other similar sites then boards could potentially face a similar issue.

Tigger

humbert wrote: »

There was another thread on this that vanished very recently(or I'm going bonkers). I'm curious as to why though.

i'm gonna say that it was zapped with the illegal content skick and that

i'm not gonna post on this one anymore :eek:

daniel3982

wheres my thread gone :'-(

Booooooooooooooooooooooo

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

quickly brothers, to the conspiracy theories forum!

those damn jews are at it again

humbert

RuggieBear wrote: »

because people are linking to other "illegal" sites.


It's bonkers that a mere hoster got shut down but if people are going to say on here that they download and then link to other similar sites then boards could potentially face a similar issue.

Well that makes sense but editing a few posts and adding a warning as to what is and isn't permitted would have worked too IMO.

This is quite a significant precedent in the UK I think. Where does that leave torrent sites??

mawk

poor guy. hope he doesnt get too slapped.

maybe the 35bazillion users will donate him some money to pay for his legal fees or somesuch

An Citeog

According to what I've read in the legal disclaimer on the aformentioned site, they really thought they'd found a legal loophole. Guess it wasn't to be and the music/movie industry will continue to fight a losing battle rather than embracing and manipulating technology for its own gains. For every site that's shut down there's another one popping straight back up.

Karoma

The fact that the last thread was deleted should have been a clue in itself.
Do not link to any sites or be daft enough to state that you use them or torrents, etc. to download copyright material. (It's a grey area, but one which we'd rather not venture into.)

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

it's still ok to rag on the jews though, right?

Karoma

Mordeth wrote: »

it's still ok to rag on the jews though, right?

Always. Just don't forget the Roma.

Basq

Useless site anyways.. good riddance!

How anyone could watch low quality streaming content in a 320 x 240 window for 45 minutes is beyond me?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

because we're not all nazi's for quality?

Dave!

basquille wrote: »

Useless site anyways.. good riddance!

How anyone could watch low quality streaming content in a 320 x 240 window for 45 minutes is beyond me?

They're not all like that. The site linked to episodes of the Wire that were DivX quality and could be watched on full screen.

Of course, one could always go to the source, but meh........

humbert

basquille wrote: »

Useless site anyways.. good riddance!

How anyone could watch low quality streaming content in a 320 x 240 window for 45 minutes is beyond me?

Yeah, the sites that use flash videos are awful but divx content is very watchable and requires very modest bandwidth.

humbert

I wonder if any lawyer types could shed light on where this puts torrent sites? Like the site in question they do not host material but they do facilitate copyright theft.

Personally I don't think torrent sites should be held accountable as they are not breaching copyright laws, in much the same way I don't think the writers of file sharing software should be held accountable, and the same goes for boards in that they shouldn't be held accountable for what it's member post.

I vaguely recall reading about some law being passed by the European Parliament giving agencies like FACT more powers.

Faith

There was another site like the one closed that was threatened with lots of lawsuits from big companies like Fox for linking to copyright material. They took an awful lot of stuff down following that.

Sites like YouTube host copyright material, but do remove it if it's reported to them. I think they've got themselves covered with disclaimers and T&Cs stating that copyrighted material will not be hosted, and will be deleted. However, the sites that link to the material are technically facilitating copyright infringement.

An Citeog

humbert wrote: »

I wonder if any lawyer types could shed light on where this puts torrent sites? Like the site in question they do not host material but they do facilitate copyright theft.

Personally I don't think torrent sites should be held accountable as they are not breaching copyright laws, in much the same way I don't think the writers of file sharing software should be held accountable, and the same goes for boards in that they shouldn't be held accountable for what it's member post.

I vaguely recall reading about some law being passed by the European Parliament giving agencies like FACT more powers.

Theoretically they shouldn't but it's still an offence to facilitate copyright infringement. It's a lot easier for the authorities to go after the sites (eg. Napster, Boards, the particular site in question) than it is to go after individual users. The logic behind it is that if they stop the supply, they'll somehow put an end to file sharing. It doesn't work like that though.

Red Alert

Theoretically sites like that are no more illegal than telling someone on a bus where they can get a rip of a DVD without actually providing it to them. IMHO the 'industry' has overstepped the mark on this one and the police/whoever have shown themselves to have no more ethics than the cat in shutting down a non-illegal site.

Sully

I enjoyed the site, but I never used it much. I think the owner of this site honestly thought it was perfectly legal so continued on with it. I dont see the problem with viewing the videos online - you couldnt directly download them and its not like the quality was perfect!

EDIT: From the sites FAQ (Google Cache version) on October 19th (guess it was only just taken down)

Is this site legal? Don't make me call my lawyer.
We provide links, nothing is wrong with that.

Nick_oliveri

Couldn't be more disgusted at this. $ > Morals.

eirebhoy

I have a site bookmarked that provides links to anything and everything. All the files are on rapidshare and uploaded by different people. Who's breaking the law?

Dave!

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

Couldn't be more disgusted at this. $ > Morals.

Morals eh?

I'm not sure that the owner of the site was taking any moral stance by starting it. It was a commercial venture no doubt. There's nothing moral about copyright theft (and I don't say this from a high-horse, since I have been known to take part in said).

Caliden

Awwww man, that's where I used to go for my weekly heroes fix. They usually had it faster than if I downloaded it from a torrent.

onechewy

Sorry, but if you're hosting a site like that.. you're a silly billy, cause in times lke these, the authorities are tryin to make a bit of noise.

Question though, I overheard two dudes braggin that torrents are basically untraceable.. is that true? Aplogies if this gets locked, but I'm just honestly wondering, I don't use them myself. I still love the whole buzz of buyin me some choons in the shop!

uglyjohn

this is all very mysterious.... can someone please mention somethig distinctive about the site.

Terry

The site provided links to copyrighted material.
Now it doesn't.

ian_m

Thats a pity. I don't see why there should be a problem with linking. Why don't they arrest all of the Internet service providers for having illegal traffic in their infrastructure?

No doubt someone somewhere will find another way around things.

Nick_oliveri

DaveMcG wrote:

It was a commercial venture no doubt.

Well he was making money off it then it was stupid. If the revenue from the google spnsored ads was paying for the server that hosted the links then i dont see a problem.

Yes he was a silly billy but i dont see how this is illegal. Hes been arrested, they went for the middleman.

Careful now lads. You know them copywrited images some of ye have in yer sigs or avatars, and some of ye on your bebo/myspace?

$750 a song
$750 an image?

Its nearly the same thing. The one thing i dont condone is having them movies linked. That was really stupid. In the article you can see they mentioned movies specifically, such as Ratatouille, hinting at the possibility that it was pixar or some such producer that put in the complaint/pushed for action.

Im not starting an arguement about TV piracy, but if i missed an episode of father ted and caught the end of it on tv3, then thought to meself, i might as well watch in bad quality on tvlinks and catch the missed funnays, who am i hurting? The advertisers? I dont pay attention to those ridiculous ads, who does? I dont want cillit bang/the lynx attraction/ a tracker mortgage.

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

dobsdave

The Scientist wrote: »

Yeah, the thought is horrifying to say the least. :rolleyes:

Yes shudder the thought, especially those of us working away from home in non-english speaking countries.
Yes I would much rather go for a nice long walk in the freezing rain.:(

Cunny-Funt

You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!
:mad::mad:

FruitLover

basquille wrote: »

How anyone could watch low quality streaming content in a 320 x 240 window for 45 minutes is beyond me?

It's better than watching it in a 0 x 0 window for 0 minutes (i.e. not watching it)

Dave!

FruitLover wrote: »

It's better than watching it in a 0 x 0 window for 0 minutes (i.e. not watching it)

Good thing you clarified or that woulda went right over my head

Sinfonia

Red Alert wrote: »

Theoretically sites like that are no more illegal than telling someone on a bus where they can get a rip of a DVD without actually providing it to them.

+1

It's the same principle as this websites promotion company discussion ban.


Authorities and companies are finding the internet very useful for throwing their weight around where they couldn't before, i.e. when we all had to make tapes for each other and loaned each other videos. They're still pissed off and are trying to make all that money back!

ian_m

If it was so popular they felt it should be shut down, why aren't they offering an alternative?

So what happens now?

Agamemnon

ian_m wrote: »

If it was so popular they felt it should be shut down, why aren't they offering an alternative?

So what happens now?

Their idea of an alternative is for you to watch the films and shows on tv or DVD. There are other alternatives but the film companies don't like them either...

Xcom2

19 October 2007

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/11510.cfm

Spanish court decides linking to P2P downloads is legal

In Spain, a Madrid magistrate has declared the case against Sharemula, a website publishing download links through which users can acquire TV series, music, software, etc., dismissed.

In October 2006 15 individuals were arrested, among which were people responsible for Sharemula. Now a year later court came to a decision that the site or its administration have not committed any violations against the copyright law by publishing links to peer-to-peer downloads.

The ruling was a considered a success by the Sharemula attorneys, who based the defense on three existing court rulings on similar cases. By not directly profiting from the downloads or storing illegal content, Sharemula did not break the law and was released from the accusations.

It is likely that the prosecution, including multinational companies such as Walt Disney, Paramount, Sony and Time Warner, will file an appeal shortly.

Source:
ELPAIS.com (Spanish)

humbert

I get the impression that quite often when these charges are contested the defendant wins, the problem is the enormous risk. If Joe Websiteowner loses he is facing insurmountable debt, the multinationals can afford to lose.

It goes a long way to explain the lawyers reaction in the case of the woman charged with sharing a few mp3s. They don't need to win them all, just scare the shit out of people so they won't contest the charges.

blah

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5UYHXQPCPk

Thrill

Lol. Excellent clip.

Is it copyrighted?

Feral Mutant

More news
Well this is unsettling. Apparently one of the site's mods over here was arrested in connection with the site.

Well I may aswell post here now. I was an SMod on tv-l, ive been in a police station for the last 5 hours been questioned about my involvement in the site. Apparently they can charge me for involvement in organized crime!!! WTF!!!! The scary thing is that im not even in the UK, im in Ireland, which is governed by FACT (Federation Against Copyright Theft) the police operation was massive scale, I was on tv-l just as it went offline, no warning whatsoever. AFAIK Sin (site owner) is still been held. All I know for sure is that the sites gone (for now anyway)… and that we (mods) could, in theory (if it goes this far) be sued £100,000,000, which FACT are saying is what the industry lost as a direct result of the site. Needless to say, im a little concerned atm

Nick_oliveri

I think a majority of p2p users should start doing the euromillions.

sued £100,000,000, which FACT are saying is what the industry lost as a direct result of the site

Statistics from a reputable and honest source....of course

Edit: Careful now blah, you are linking to copywritten material. Organized crime so it is.

robinph

Seems that they have now released the guy and are still trying to figure out which unrelated law they might be able to charge him with breaking.

The Register

Feel free to delete the link though if that also counts as linking to copyrighted material though.

Thrill wrote: »

Lol. Excellent clip.

Is it copyrighted?

That clip was from The IT Crowd.

Nick_oliveri

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/10/p2p_hacker?currentPage=all
Lots of crap coming out lately.

humbert

I hope they have to pay reparations if they can't convict him of anything. You'd think it would be necessary to prove he was doing something illegal before taking the website down, obviously not.

The_B_Man

does this mean Google is gonna get sued next? After all, google for an episode of any tv show and your pretty sure to find it in google. therefore, google is providing links to copyrighted material!!

oh wait, google is infallable and incapable of doing wrong!! :rolleyes:

ScumLord

I suppose technically they have a right to go after him, if it was child porn he was linking to no one would have a problem with him being arrested.

It is stupid though I would rarely ever buy a series or even a movie. Once I've seen something I have little or no interest in seeing it again. I've only ever bought Family guy box sets because there not on any channel I have. Once I've watched it I usually give it away to a friend.

This is really Napster all over again, this stuff should be available anyway. I was thinking the other day I'd almost be willing to pay for a British TV licence if it meant I could get into the BBC website and watch all there shows online.

I hope he gets off I don't think he did anything that wrong.

Blowfish

onechewy wrote: »

Question though, I overheard two dudes braggin that torrents are basically untraceable.. is that true? Aplogies if this gets locked, but I'm just honestly wondering, I don't use them myself. I still love the whole buzz of buyin me some choons in the shop!

The BitTorrent protocol has absolutely no methods in place to provide anonymity. Any of the seeders/leechers can obtain the IP's of the other seeders/leechers without difficulty. In fact some clients keep a log of every single IP that connects to a file.

There is software which people use to block tracking from known government and anti-p2p corporations IP's. It would be naive to think however that the governments/AP2P companies aren't aware of this, and that they wouldn't just an IP that isn't registered with them to track the files.

Truth is, you are never really anonymous on the internet.