Is Pirate Bay Sinking? - Comments Page 1

Bob, did you forget newsgroups and IRC? The place where all of this stuff originates is the news servers (in binaries), run by the very ISP's themselves.

I don't see why nobody ever mentions usenet. They also seem to totally ignore usenext which profits from the illegal distribution of files on usenet. There is even a program called binTube that will stream video from it.

Plenty of people make money from this, they are just going after the biggest fish. I ran dialup bbs's in the 80s and run my own servers now and I will tell you for CERTAIN:

As long as there are computer networks there will be illegal file trading on a massive level. Period.

EDITOR'S NOTE: True, but the big fish are easier to catch. (Oh, and many ISP's have dropped Usenet. See http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2326848,00.asp )

On one serious level, Pirate Bay is helping others to violate laws. On one serious level, you (Mr. Rankin) have Netflix popups on your websites. Which of these issues do I find more offensive? Truthfully, I'm not downloading anything from Pirate Bay, and I have little to no control over what others do. I can, however, tell you that popups are offensive, and ask you why you choose to plague me with them. Why? I seriously doubt you'll post my comment, but I shall see.

EDITOR'S NOTE: I'm happy to post your comment, John. First, there's nothing illegal about popups, or Netflix. So I can't see any fair comparison between this and blatant, massive, illegal copyright violations. Second, the popup should appear only once per day, unless you have messed with your cookie settings. And finally, the ads on this site pay the bills. You get free, helpful, credible information, and my kids get to eat. I think that's a fair trade, don't you?

Sometimes I'm glad I'm not from America - the country where the credit crunch originated. Why was that? Greed. But corporate America still thinks it owns the world. Where I live (the Netherlands) downloading is legal (uploading is not BTW - for those who think that anything goes over here). If the billion dollar corporations win this trial and TPB is closed down, can I sue them for denying me my legal right to download?

We're all living in a capitalist system, and that's fine by me. But the way America handles that system is the main reason half the world outside America hates it. I read about a case where a hard working single mother had to pay thousands in fines because her twelve year old daughter downloaded a couple of songs. It's really pathetic. For all I care The Pirate Bay lives forever just to annoy those bozo's.

The music industry is wrong with claiming those huge sums. Most of the "downloaders" wouldn't have BOUGHT the music anyhow. On the contrary, many downloaders buy music after they downloaded a few samples.

(Asked sum) minus (real missed sellings) minus (aditional sellings)= ???

Now make the addition please. I guess that at the end the result will be (close to) ZERO !!! (Asked sum) minus (real missed sellings) minus (aditional sellings)= ???

It is also VERY wrong to go after ppl behind Pirate Bay and other similar sites. They also should go after ppl behind Wikipedia. It is because of them that ppl buy less books. I hope that the judges in the pirate bay case think about this !

Listen Bob, you are looking at this all wrong. Let's say I just bought Viva la Vida and you live next door to me on my street and we are very good friends and you just bought U2's No line on the horizon cd. After a couple of weeks we both started getting tired of our new cd's I let you borrow my cd for a few days and vise a versa. Should we both be arrested? You know there is nothing wrong with that at all. It is called sharing. Just because I share something I purchased with a friend is not in any way wrong.

EDITOR'S NOTE: That's quite different from the "file sharing" that happens online where NOBODY pays for the music, right?

What do you mean "NOBODY" pays Bob? If that were the case there wouldn't be any music at all available for sharing! Of course people pay, how else do you think those albums got there? I love your tips and usually agree with you, but if they outlaw sharing, you could not borrow a cup of sugar from your neighbor. Why is "file" sharing diffent from some other type of sharing. The short answer... it is the same. Now, if people were charging money and making a profit off of a shared item, then of course that would be wrong. But simply to share (look up the word share)is never wrong. In fact, it is quite the neighborly thing to do!!!

EDITOR'S NOTE: I'm going to let someone else address this. The logic hurts my brain...

If they are so worried about how much they are losing why don't they stop paying the stars rediculous sums of cash and start treating people of lesser status like ourselves with respect by not charging extortionate prices for cd's and DVD's. Then this may all stop. I am glad they lose money and i am all for people ripping them off. Taste of their own medicine

I disagree with the editor that sharing physical cd's is different than sharing music files. I have spent literally thousands of dollars on legal downloads and every time I am on Limewire, I share those files. I bought those digital albums and mp3's and I should be able to share them with whomever I chose.

Bob, I'm a little confused with the arguments made by the recording industry... that they're losing money. Back in the "old days" of 78s and 45s, and later 8-tracks, somebody in the hood would buy a legal record or tape. Then it would make its way through the neighborhoods and people would copy it to small cassette recorders, reel to reels, etc. Quality was horrible but one could argue that we were stealing from the music industry since only one purchase took place.

Fast forward to a few years ago when companies like Time Warner, Dish Satellite, etc and now AT&T's U-verse offer their customers the convenience of recording up to 4 shows at a time. People are copying and sharing these recordings. Only the original subscriber paid for the cable or satellite service but many others are benefiting from it.

So are the companies saying it was OK when just a few people were doing it but now that the internet makes sharing available to millions it's illegal? That's like saying murder is OK as long as you only kill a couple of people but it's a crime if you kill too many.

EDITOR'S NOTE: You could argue (correctly) that it was never legal. It's also true that the scale of the crime sometimes determines whether or not it will be prosecuted.

Shane and HMAN: You are both either morons, or too young to have enough experience with the real world to see things clearly.

How about an analogy to put things in perspective? Suppose you worked for years to write a really great book. It's selling pretty well, until one day some guy scans the book and puts it online as a free downloadable file. Hordes of people download the free ebook, and sales of your paper book dwindle down to nothing. How do you feel? I thought so...

Comment on John's post

John: On one serious level, Pirate Bay is helping others to violate laws.

Although, I don't pirate software/music, I think that this view is a bit skewed. Car companies build cars with the ability to generate speeds in excess of 75 MPH. There isn't a speed limit in the USA greater than 75 to my knowledge. Your logic dictates that the car companies are helping others violate speed limit laws and should be stopped. Do I think file sharing is illegal...yes...to some extent.

Is recording a TV show/movie shown on cable or taping a song directly off of the radio/satellite radio to keep in your library wrong? Again...to some extent. I suppose it's who you ask. I think all media should be free...but I understand capitalism, being a businessman myself.

...and on a lighter note Bob, keep those ads coming.....I'd like your FREE newsletter to stay FREE :) !!!

A question: where do the LEGAL arguments live?

When I become aware of a good book, movie or CD,I spread the word and more books, movies and music are sold to others. I'm just guessing, based on the fact that I buy more books, movies and CDs, BECAUSE the informatin flows freely. I buy when the artist produces something of value to me. And I refer others to that piece of work. How they acquire their copy, I personally don't care. If someone refers me to an artist by way of a bootleg copy, I buy their work in the future if I think the work is of value. i.e., more people are buying the products, possibly, than they otherwise would. The exponential growth of the industry can't continue forever, but is the CORPORATION suffering so now that they have to send the lawyers out hunting? They might consider a different model to fill their coffers and let the networking pirates be the ad agencies. Merge into the information and profit.

Note: I've met some brilliant kids that know their way around the workings of the internet, and they wouldn't be so bright without the pirates. And when they rise out of poverty, they contribute more to culture and the economy than the majority of plain old honest shoppers that can't find their way past email and youTube or WallyWorld. Don't keep the boys and girls ignorant by chasing them down with lawyers or they might become lawyers themselves in retaliation. I'll retract that last comment....

EDITOR'S NOTE: Open Source seems like a better answer than piracy...

I don't feel it is fair for them to attack TPB as all they are doing is helping. I believe in Sweden they have a law saying the person who PUTS the file on The Pirate Bay for example is the one who gets the fire? It would be completely unfair and unnecessary for them to send out the lists of who has been downloading as for a start they may not have continued to download for example. I also agree with what Shane said.

H MAN said "Why is 'file' sharing diffent from some other type of sharing. The short answer... it is the same." No, it is NOT. It is ENTIRELY different. Let me try to take your example of borrowing a cup to its logical conclusion. If you "borrow" a cup of sugar from me, I don't have it anymore. If a dozen of my neighbors borrow a cup of sugar, I won't have any left and I'll have to go back to the store and buy more. The company that produces the product gets paid for every cup that gets used. This is totally different from having one person buy a song file and then having who-knows-how-many people make free copies of it, having full benefit of its use, with no compensation to the company that produced it.

A-a-a-hem! I tried Pirate Bay for the first time about 3 weeks ago to get a Leona Lewis song ... wanted to listen before I purchase cd. It took forever to download and there is no sound. Tried another one, no sound so I figure nothing ventured, nothing gained, but the disappointment is still lingering.

EDITOR'S NOTE: You may have something else lingering... it's common for viruses and spyware to be disguised as music files on the P2P networks.

Ok, when bands are young they love sharing their music on the internet but when they get well known and rich they don't like it. I don't know, seems either hypocritical or greedy to me, I mean when you're a freakin billionaire why do you care so much about a few people, who probably wouldn't buy the cd anyway or couldn't buy it because they can't afford it, listening to your music for free. Couldn't you put your time and resources to a better use than chasing down a few poor people who want to listen to you but can't afford to buy your cd. Plus, how can you really police the whole world? Whenever someone wants something bad enough they are going to find a way to get it, one way or another. Just think how smooth the www would be w/o all this hoorahrah. There'd be alot less stress and ulcers if everybody would just chill out. That's my two cents anyway...

My comment pertains to music. Not games, tv shows, movies etc. Everyone used to buy cassettes, then cd's. Cassettes were about $7.99, cd's $15.99, this went on for years (until the pc age). The cd's were cheap, I'm guessing pennies for large quantities. The cd's could've been sold for $7.99 but no the greedy music companies sold them for $15.99. Payback is a bitch.

It's real simple, it's called the law of supply and demand. If there's no demand, there will be no supply. Does anyone think that creative people such as writers, and songwriters create just for fun? Wrong, the fun is collecting money to spend on something that is fun. So, if they don't get paid for their work, they won't work. How many of you reading this would go to work today if you weren't getting paid?

File sharing, torrents and what new technology could come in future can not be stopped by adopting medieval measures like jailing, fining...etc.

There should be a new approach to this issue away from the colossal greed of music and the like industries where a stray boy becomes a billionaire within months while a hard working scientist burns his whole life in research barley brings ends together.

If the copyright holders "mostly artists" can accept a reasonable income, then there could be a way to insure the satisfaction of all sides, the copy holders, "pirates" and the main steam people.

If we read the contemporary history of technology we will see the same arguments with the radio emergence as well as with TV against theaters movie houses, books and newspapers, at the end no one killed the other, only the natural process of development governs here.

The technology giant had woke up long time ago and nothing can stop it.

Bassim

Baghdad-Iraq

Has anyone mentioned the legal downloads avail. from TPB ? Will down-loaders be penalized for old-time radio and other public domain stuff??