Man jailed five months for running Torrent tracker

Grant T. Stanley, the man behind the Elite Torrents BitTorrent tracker that came under fire last year for posting a print of Star Wars Episode 3 before the film’s theatrical release, will spend five months in jail for his role in running the site. U.S. District Court Judge James P. Jones has sentenced Stanley to a five-month prison term plus five months of house arrest, a $3,000 fine, and three years of “supervised release.”

According to U.S. Attorney John Brownlee, “This is the first criminal enforcement action against copyright infringement on a P2P network using BitTorrent technology.” Brownlee added, “We hope this case sends the message that cyberspace will not provide a shield of anonymity for those who choose to break our copyright laws.” Elite Torrents is estimated to have aided the unlawful distribution of more than two million movies, applications, games, and songs.

Comments closed
    • stmok
    • 14 years ago

    I get the feeling this is nothing more than the regular (continuing) fear mongering campaign. They can’t go after the bootleggers or tougher folks, so they’ll settle for the “easier to target” folks. (Its like the “drive by cracker”…If someone’s too tough to break into, go to the next, easier target…That’s for Port Scanners are for!).

    Its one thing to be fined for sharing copyright material and such, but its getting over the top when someone goes to jail for it. Its hashes FFS!

    But hey! If it scares people from doing it, then who cares!

    Does it stop people doing P2P? (or any other number of ways to transfer files?)

    Of course not! Taking legal action against filesharing is as futile as herding ants. They know it, and we know it.

    Looking from the outside, it seems if you want to control the world in some way: go to America, become really successful, develop “political friends” via campaign contributions…And then, when the chips are down, or you’re too stupid to adapt to the changing face of technology, use your political friends to change the law so you can get your way!

    Don’t forget to hype things up a bit…You need to scare average Jane/Joe PC user into line! ๐Ÿ™‚

    Basically, it feels like the US Govt isn’t working for the people anymore, its working for anyone who pays them well.

    But then again, if you have people in charge, that believe the Internet is a “series of tubes”, well, you’re in serious sh*t, aren’t you?

      • AKing
      • 14 years ago

      Exactly whats the dangerous. If the people feel that filesharing is good for them. You cant have politicis based on the companies. Money should never decide political decisions in a democracy.

        • wierdo
        • 14 years ago

        Well it does in this one, so there goes the theory ๐Ÿ˜›

    • MadManOriginal
    • 14 years ago

    Those laws just don’t make any kind of logical sense, I don’t understand how it’s ok to download or ‘possess’ something that is illegal to upload or ‘distribute.’ The downloads necessarily come from a source that is defined as illegal…it’s just strange to say it’s ok to have goods from an illegal source.

    Regardless of the reason why it still doesn’t make sense and there are surely ways to keep companies from suing people (although people could just not break copyrights in the first place der) that don’t seem so silly.

    • albundy
    • 14 years ago

    brownlee, you just made 5 million more torrent trackers active! thank you and GFY!

    • MadManOriginal
    • 14 years ago

    Damn those evil corporations for employing people from low skilled to highly skilled, funding the social security system (employers have to match what employees pay in taxes for that) creating things like the computers we use to post. And they want to get paid for their work, bastards! I hope all the anti-corporate ‘it’s ok to infringe copyright’ people work for free – if they even do work instead of living off a welfare state – otherwise they are hypocrites. I know, we should all just go back to being substenance farmers or hunter/gatherers! How many of the ‘corporations suck omggg’ people ever really thought about what a corporation is on a human level instead of as a big vague something-or-other? And how many can trace your money back to corporations in one way or another? I’m betting a lot of you.

    And before anyone calls me a ‘corporate bitch’ again, no I’m not at all. When it comes to politics and corporations I am displeased with things which is why I am pleased to see things like Arizona’s and Maine’s publicly funded election systems and am looking very hopefully toward the results of California’s proposition 89 vote being ‘yes.’ Look it up because I’m not going to explain it here. But the problems don’t make corporations inherently bad.

      • eitje
      • 14 years ago

      ยง[<http://www.cleanmoneyelections.org/<]ยง because the corporate bitch was too lazy. hehe! :)

        • MadManOriginal
        • 14 years ago

        Nice, I didn’t feel like searching for it after writing that post which was pretty long ๐Ÿ˜‰

        I hope all the California readers will vote yes, especially the ones that always rant about corporations :p

    • Vrock
    • 14 years ago

    Minor quibble with the topic wording…Cyril says Mr. Stanley posted a “print” of Episode III on the net. Impossible. A print is an analog medium made from the negative or interpositive. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • sigher
    • 14 years ago

    The lesson is clear: don’t be an ass and confess to a crime which would not exist if you didn’t confess to it.
    A tracker does NOT send copyright information to anybody and therefore is not illegal, but if you admit to a crime nonetheless yeah then you nicely set yourself up.
    This makes me wonder if the guy didn’t get payed by the MPAA/RIAA to artificially create a unlawful precedent, I hope somone checks this guy’s bankaccount out to see if he doesnt’t suddenly gets a large bonus.

    • murfn
    • 14 years ago

    EDIT: was posted in the wrong place.

    • Ruiner
    • 14 years ago

    I wonder what kind of time people are currently serving for assault and theft.

    • AKing
    • 14 years ago

    Oh one of several millions. I bet while they jailed him a hundred new people started filesharing.

    Filesharing on the peoples conditions is the future, the companies cant stop that. Filesharing is good for the society.

    The question is how can we optimize the possibilities and gains of filesharing while still keeping the companies abilities to make profits on their investments. One important point is that many, if not most filesharers believe that filesharing does not lead to lower profits but rather just better decisions from the consumers about whats worth to buy. And their has been a danish investigation treatise on the subject showing just that filesharing hasnt lead to lower consumption, just different. Other believe that the copyrightlaws are just aged and needs to be rewritten to suit best the society we live in today.

    Of course u should have the right to say u made this product, and to sell it. But that doesnt have to mean that you have to restrict other persons lifes and what they do. In other words either all people can have the right to fileshare what the producers sell, but only the producers have the right to sell the product (becouse the big problem with piracy, i sugest, isnt the free filesharing on the net, but its when people sell pirated products). Or there could be an yearly filesharerfee that a specialized filesharingauthority handles, and depending on which products have been downloaded the most, gives the money to those companies.

    One thing should be clear though, people still buy things! People tend to think, and especially in their unlogical reports about the billions of losses filesharing is supposed to have caused different companies, that if you downloiad 2000 songs and 20 movies u would actually buy all that if u werent be able to download it for free. Of course thats not true so those reports are not sensible. So if we would have a filesharingfee it wouldnt be that large per person but together it would be enough to substitute the supposed losses of those companies.
    And again, all people wouldnt like that becouse many feel that filesharing is just and doesnt cause any losses to companies. Becouse those who actually make good products get things sold becouse people will pay for that. In other word higher quality competition.

    But becouse of cultural and intellectual positives of filesharing people will never give up on this. Becouse we the filesharers know our history and we wont give up on the future.

      • murfn
      • 14 years ago

      q[

        • AKing
        • 14 years ago

        I think u pay per song at itunes. Im talkin more about a yearly fee which lets u download how much u want. But for that to work the filesharers must accept it, becouse its they who run the filesharing community.

          • murfn
          • 14 years ago

          I have been thinking about the Swedish type of copyright law (as outlined by you) which empowers filesharers to download anything at will. And I have contrasted it against the US view, which I personally believe in. One point that comes to mind is that the US is probably the biggest exporter of entertainment in the world. And Sweden on the other hand is probably a net importer of entertainment. It is possible that the lax copyright laws that you have in Sweden may be the result of your Government not really being motivated to protect foreign industries and politically accepting the popular view, which is cheap entertainment. I am not sure that your laws are an outcome of idealogy. I am guessing that your native industries probably get more legal assistance from your government.

            • AKing
            • 14 years ago

            May be the reason. But still for being this small of a country populationwise, we have a lot of mediaexport. Starbreeze, Dice, SIMBIN etc in videogames, a lot of musicexport. Maybe not a lot of movies though.

            But the consumption hasnt gone down while filesharing has been growing. It has for music, but not for videogames and movies. It should be added that there is a lot of actually free music on the net competing with what was previously the only popular music, and u had to pay for it on the market. And the sale of music reached a very high level in the ninetees i dont think we will see that kind of salelevels anytime soon if ever again.

            Today there is a different view on music as an art and entertainment where many think that artists should gain more income from concerts and diversified income sources rather than jutst CD-sales, especially as CD-sales mostly benefit the companies who have signed the artists. Of course they help with recording and production, but with todays techbnology artists and groups can distribute their music without needing any company to do it for them.

            Anyhow according to Swedish copyright law the copying of copyrighted products is not legal. But there has been laws set to protect individuals. So u cant really face charges becouse of downloading copyrighted material through the internet. But you can for distributing/uploading it.

            Anyhow in my opinion the problem is the rare cases when people sell pirated products. Not the filesharing that has lead to an broader cultural experience and informational library available for more people.

            To end this post i want to state that i think its important that the society is built upon whats good for the population. The politics cant be run at the companies conditions, they shouldnt have more to say than any other individual in the society. We cant just ignore the positive effects of filesharing becouse the companies MIGHT be making a little bit less profits. Even if they are, maybe they have to adapt to the new times. Altough there should be an solution to keep both parts happy.

            We already pay for the libraries, TV etc. Altough we dont think about it when we borrow a book from the publcservice libraries for example. Filesharing in the future may be the same thing. Im confident that people want to support what they appreciate, filesharers knows just as well as u or any other on TR that companies needs profits to keep developing new innovations. If u find something u really appreciate u go and buy it. But today there is so much out there and few of us could afford to pay even for the things we dont find are worth their set price tag. Filesharing is also an superior way of finding and getting information and entertainment fast.

            • murfn
            • 14 years ago

            Are you saying that Swedish law actually protects individuals sharing music P2P? It looks to me that copyrights are enforced in Sweden, and authorities have chosen to turn a blind eye to filesharing.

            Also, Sweden has had a number of notable international successes such as Abba and Roxette. However, if the numbers were tallied I am certain that entertainment imports would dwarf exports in your country.

            I disagree with you on the benefits of filesharing. No entertainment industry in the world compares to the resources that are invested in entertainment in the US. Movies with budgets of over $100 million dollars and TV series that cost several million per episode to make. The quality of the end product reflects that investment. The world has developed an appetite for this type of entertainment. However, the budgets invested are based on strict copyright laws. To consume such entertainment and to state that getting it free benefits it, is hypocrisy.

            If filesharers wish to take a moral high ground they should wean themselves off the big budget productions and concentrate on artists that promote the sharing of their creations. Those that see it as a way to make them more popular and hence lead to greater concert revenues. Those that make low budget movies because they wish to spread some message.

            • Shintai
            • 14 years ago

            Its like in Denmark. You can download all you want to. But its illegal to distribute. Running a tracker is also ok, since you dont distribute directly.

            But say, having a FTP on your computer to share things on where they can download would be illegal. But you can basicly download all the copyrighted content on your home PC and nothing would ever happend.

            The reason is the content industry itself. They used to bully people and make unreasonable claims. Mostly to scare a family to pay without going to court. So this is why. This law was made due to the content industry

            • murfn
            • 14 years ago

            It appears that in Denmark, and probably Sweden also, the act of sharing copyrighted content is illegal in its totallity. However, somebody in the chain has to be explicitly guilty of the crime. Otherwise, you are making a mockery of the law. If it isn’t the tracker, then it is whoever put up the file for sharing.

            The US view of the law, I am guessing, is that anyone found knowingly aiding a crime is complicit. If Grant T. Stanley was aware that his tracker was used in such a manner, and he did nothing to stop it, he would be guilty. Not prosecuting private individuals is a law enforcement strategy, and it does not make the act of sharing copyrighted material legal. Your view in #24 appears to contradict that.

            It appears to me that Scandenavian countries offer nothing revolutionary on the legal status of copyrights. They have simply made it clear that they will not prosecute private individuals for the time being. They are certainly not condoning copying as suggested by others here. I am suggesting that they would have acted had it hurt them as much as it hurts the US. They are not being very noble.

            • sluggo
            • 14 years ago

            I think if you live in a country that doesn’t view entertainment as an “industry”, as we do here in the US, then you probably have a different view of copyright laws when it comes to movies. Less one of “they made it, they should get the revenue”, and more one of “why the hell should I have to pay extra money for my DVD player, AV Receiver, video card, and digital display, all to make sure that the content provider controls every means of my access to what they sold me?”

            I’d have less of an attitude about the movie industry if they were paying the hardware manufacturers the costs of the implementation and ongoing support of HDCP, but that’s not the case. The movie industry’s attitude seems to be “you guys figure out a way to protect our content our we’ll sue your asses off. And oh yah, we don’t expect to see a bill for any of this.” In countries where the entertainment industry’s lawyers are not quite so well funded, I doubt they would have the political clout to pull this off, but here in the US the Valenti gang always gets paid.

            • murfn
            • 14 years ago

            It seems to me that many of the opposers here to copyright laws are using emotive arguments not only in trying to convince others but also themselves. If you think about it coldly you will see that the HDCP is coming with a brand new video standard that offers superior quality to the one it succeeds. The chip that does the decoding will be included with each new video player that is sold. The chip itself is so cheap it is offered as standard in new video cards. You will not be hindered in any way from viewing your content on a new DVD player or the PC. The movie industry is not doing anything bad with this HDCP.

            • AKing
            • 14 years ago

            Emotive no. I think that filesharing is good for the society, individuals and the market. For society becouse more people have access to intellectual content and culture no matter their income etc. For individuals becouse it becomes easier to develope ones cultural and intellectual interests. For the market becouse there is plainly so much shit out there. And filesharing leads to people making better choices on what to buy/support, a better competitionclimate. That way the companies cant just mess around with people. Becouse if their consumers think that they have gone to far in just trying to make money but not improving products which consumers need (for examply some monopolistic businesses). They dont need support them and can put their money on some other companies. To put it in a nutshell i think filesharing will make it neccessary for companies to have a certain respect and trust for consumers and vice versa. Becouse they will BOTH have to rely on each other, which i think is better than if the large mass of people get dependent on some companies.

            Of course there are several steps to go to reach this. But u have to be realistic, u can not stop filesharing, and there is no real gain in just sying private individuals . As for the filesharers there is no gain in not supporting companies either.

            And as u said, in Sweden we dont offer anything revolutionary in copyrightlaws. To big part becouse their are still these extremes who thinks on one side that filesharers are “evil” and should be threated with accordingly, in other words no form of filesharing of copyrighted content should be legal, this would be a logical statement fifty years ago but it just doesnt work that way today. On the other side there is filesharers who want to keep filesharing completely free and even state that they simply think the market has to adapt and get used to this new climate of unlimited exchange of culture no matter where it came from.

            But there are also those who try to figure out a solution thats works so that it fits our society and market. In other words give companies compensation depending on how much their products are being shared, and at the same time rely that people still buy products to an extent which their wallet lets them. While retaining the freedom of choice and access to content of interest for individuals.

            As ive said earlier i view filesharing as a modern day library. Its not just that its free. Its a superior way to get hold of content. Many people have developed interest to for example music they never even would have listened to if they didnt occassionaly find it while filesharing. Most people have the logic to support this artist/artists if they really like their work. Personally i think it lies in human nature to support what we appreciate.

            • murfn
            • 14 years ago

            Let me describe the act of filesharing in Sweden as I understand it. You download a US movie, US or British TV episode, US or British Song and you view or listen to it. Whether you like it or not you are not going to go out and rent the movie or buy the record. You are not going to go out and seek ways to reward whoever is responsible for creating it. Calturally, you will start to adopt US mannerisms and hate the US for brainwashing you in this way.

            Why are you bringing ideology into this? And what’s up with the library? A book or CD at the library doesn’t get copied. There is nothing ideological about filesharing. There is nothing inherently evil about filesharing. It is nature’s way to want a free ride.

            If you want better choice watch MTV, switch on the radio, download movie trailers. Nobody is forcing you to buy anything without knowing what you are buying.

    • Shintai
    • 14 years ago

    He should move to ascandinavian country and create a site. There it would be legal and he would be able to give them the middle finger gesture.

      • Vrock
      • 14 years ago

      And he could shoot up with government subsidized needles, live off the dole, bang gov’t funded prostitutes two at a time, and get free health care. Yep, a socialist paradise, through and through. I sure as hell am glad I don’t live there.

        • AKing
        • 14 years ago

        U sure are a sad person. Is it better in the US where tens of millions of people are poor?

        U probably havnt even been to for example here in Sweden so dont talk crap. Its not we who kill 650 000 people in a country on the other side of the planet.

        Neither pure socialism nor pure marketeconomy is good, becouse they are old utopias which doesnt suit todays society and certainly not the future. U have to take the best from each and think freely.
        But becouse of all the anticommunist propaganda in the US im not surprised u feel that way.

        The needles arent a way to keep people taking drugs. U cant just punish people who have got stuck in drugaddiction, u have to offer them help. For the good of all society.

          • A_Pickle
          • 14 years ago

          y{<"U sure are a sad person. Is it better in the US where tens of millions of people are poor?"<}y Seldom is there a reason beyond the person themselves for poverty in this country. Additionally, you might want to check your facts regarding "poverty," because according the Federal Poverty Line, I'm in that category of "poor people." Strange. I just bought a new laptop. Eh. y{<"U probably havnt even been to for example here in Sweden so dont talk crap. Its not we who kill 650 000 people in a country on the other side of the planet."<}y That's weird, neither do we. y{<"But becouse of all the anticommunist propaganda in the US im not surprised u feel that way."<}y Yeah, you certainly haven't been to the United States. If you had, you'd know that there is no shortage of left-wing opinion here, quite the opposite. In either case, it's funny that you even bother to argue the point: Communism doesn't work. Plain and simple.

            • Shintai
            • 14 years ago

            Ultraliberalism doesnt work either. Plain and simple. And I really doubt you are one of the 12.7% under the poverty line. Do you earn less than 10000$ a year? (If you are single) else add about 3000$ per family member.

            ยง[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States<]ยง Im sorry, somehow I really like to pay to our welfare here. And who are debt free, you or us? :D Atleast we can pay our bills without borrowing money *cough* And please check the cause of poverty in the wiki page. Welfare kinda equals the natures "unfairness" abit. Aswell as social classes and location. Nobody should be denied to have a worthy life nomatter their lack of skill or abilities.

            • AKing
            • 14 years ago

            I maybe pushed it a little. But our social welfare system is good (not perfect of course) thank you.

            No i havnt been in the US but have cousins in Detroit and Chicago.

            Your political opinions about the society arent the same as here (in average) just look at how the society works. I think your first line makes that clear:

            “Seldom is there a reason beyond the person themselves for poverty in this country”

            But does everyone have the same oppurtunity no matter where u grow up and with what wealth.
            I to think that everyone should handle their own life and income, but u also have to take responsibility in the society you live in.

            Of course, you can only yourself decide how you want your country to be, and im not saying anything against your choice. If we want socialistic parts in our system thats our choice. Altough we dont have socialrule here (even though our right is more socialistic than your democrats, which i guess are your left, altough i know its different from state to state).

        • adisor19
        • 14 years ago

        LOL you’re awesome vrock ! ๐Ÿ™‚ i’m glad i don’t live in the glorious US&A too ๐Ÿ™‚

        Adi

    • rika13
    • 14 years ago

    firstly, being sentenced to 5 months prison means hes going to min prison, not the orifice enlargement joints, and any time he served already is required to be deducted from his sentence

    second, the fine is probably the killer, not the jail time, $3,000 is a lot, probably get a loan or hawk the car for it

    third, if he actually fought it, he probably would have had the jury nullify it since no jury outside of hollywood would convict since he is entited to a jury of HIS peers, not the terrorist’s (aka mpaa/riaa) peers

    the release almost sounds like an ad for piracy, get an unlimited selection of movies, games, cd’s, etc. and usually before it comes out in theatres or the streets

      • Vrock
      • 14 years ago

      MPAA=terrorists? Sensationalize much?

      • muyuubyou
      • 14 years ago

      3000 US$ is not that much money if you run a popular torrent site. I don’t know you, but I’d certainly pay 10k to avoid 5 months of jail time.

    • muyuubyou
    • 14 years ago

    Uhm sounds lil bit of scaremongering. I reckon this guy won’t see the jail, since it’s just 5 months and I believe it has to be at least a year.

    • blitzy
    • 14 years ago

    Thank god! the studio profit margins are safe

      • Vrock
      • 14 years ago

      You say that like wanting to run a profitable business is a bad thing.

        • blitzy
        • 14 years ago

        just expressing my distate towards the fact that wealth = power

        meanwhile more serious crimes go unpunished or underpunished

          • Vrock
          • 14 years ago

          I don’t see what penalties for other crimes has to do with anything. Justice was served in this case, so the wealth of the plaintiff is immaterial.

            • blitzy
            • 14 years ago

            yea because its all black and white

            so when rich people manage to get off charges that an ordinary man would have no hope in hell escaping the money has nothing to do with it.

            you’re entitled to your own opinion, enjoy your fantasy world where the rich don’t manipulate society, it would be better than the real world.

            • Snake
            • 14 years ago

            But the “rich” didn’t get off – Napster got hit hard, and they were certainly wealthy, making quite a bit of money off cross-promotions (advertising).

            Fact is, copyright is copyright.

            • dmitriylm
            • 14 years ago

            uhm…i guess you have difficulty distinguishing between entities and actual individuals.

            • A_Pickle
            • 14 years ago

            Apparently you missed this:

            ยง[<http://www.officeroutlook.com/news/Financial/2427.htm<]ยง

            • Vrock
            • 14 years ago

            Why do you keep arguing things that have no relevance to this case?

            You’re obviously upset that that this guy was found guilty, in court, of violating copyright law. You seem to want lay the blame for his guilt on the wealthy movie studios instead of the man himself. In your view, he’s only guilty because rich people control the world! Those darn rich people! Um, sorry, but that’s not what happened here. I submit to you that you’re the one who lives in a fantasy world. Maybe you can be Mr. Stanley’s prison pen pal, I’m sure he’d love to correspond with you.

            • blitzy
            • 14 years ago

            the outcome of the case was correct, however its a perverted use of the law its not justice.

            so one guy gets pinned when theres a network of probably millions of people who are illegally copying copyrighted material, is that justice?

            I never said he wasn’t guilty, obviously he is, however what I’m saying is that the law is being used for stupid things that arent important when there are much bigger issues. All because the rich have the money to use the law in their favour, it’s bs.

            what happens when a little man gets his IP copied illegally? bugger all because he ain’t got the cash to do anything about it. Is it any less important?

            Why I express distate towards these large companies is pretty simple. They don’t exist for the benefit of society, they exist purely to make money and in the process they leave a trail of shit through society all in the name of $.

            its not even about justice, its about money and thats why its a waste of time and a misuse of the law.

            • A_Pickle
            • 14 years ago

            y{<"the outcome of the case was correct, however its a perverted use of the law its not justice."<}y Apparently the very obvious hasn't clicked with you yet, so read this out loud until you grasp it: - That man broke the law. - He was caught. - He was punished. The law was not used at all, it was enforced /[

            • adisor19
            • 14 years ago

            lol do you know how much it costs to PROOVE your innocence in a trial ? you’re NOT presumed innocent when you have to pay tens of thousands of $$$ to defend your ass. I hope nobody ever sues you.

            Adi

            • A_Pickle
            • 14 years ago

            Nobody has legitimate reason to sue me, and so if they did, defending myself would be pretty easy. But that isn’t what occurred here, what occurred here was a criminal trial, and the criminal was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and punished, as the law says.

            What’s your point? ‘Cause if it’s “I hate the USA,” then we all knew that. Don’t worry, in 10 years I’m sure we’ll be out of the popular spotlight that happens to be anti-Americanism.

            • adisor19
            • 14 years ago

            OK, my point is that your perfect society where apparently rich corporations do NOT influence politics and justice doesn’t care about the poor and the “innocent”. So when you say you’re innocent and have no reason to be sued, well think again. Errors DO happen and when they do and you have to prove your innocence, that society that you so admire, will treat you like garbage. But then again, you have no problem with it so more power to you. As i said, i’m glad i’m not living in your society and you’re probably glad you’re not living in mine.

            Adi

            • A_Pickle
            • 14 years ago

            y{<"OK, my point is that your perfect society where apparently rich corporations do NOT influence politics..."<}y When did I ever say rich corporations don't influence politics? Money has a huge influence in American politics, our right to monetarily support politicians of our choice is (in my opinion) one of the gravest underminings of our system. IE, no, I don't think it's perfect, but I'm content not to pander to the current fad that seems to be "Hate Anything American." y{<"...and justice doesn't care about the poor and the "innocent". So when you say you're innocent and have no reason to be sued, well think again. Errors DO happen and when they do and you have to prove your innocence, that society that you so admire, will treat you like garbage."<}y You're right, errors do happen. And when they do, they often make the news because /[

            • PLASTIC SURGEON
            • 14 years ago

            We all know the “Rich get richer and the poor get screwed”
            However, he broke the law. Got caught. End of story. Sucks to be him. But as Beretta said many times: r[<"don't do the crime if you can't do the time!'"<]r

        • AGerbilWithAFootInTheGrav
        • 14 years ago

        perhaps protecting business interests through law instead of letting it deal with market forces (oh yes, stealing redefined, artist would still make money, perhaps even more so), while you have peadophiles running the congress, not a bad deal for the citizens after all.

          • Vrock
          • 14 years ago

          Again, one thing has nothing to do with the other, and laws protecting businesses from unauthorized copying and distribution of their property are hardly unjust. You may feel you’re entitled to movies and music for free, but you’re not. Sorry.

    • Vrock
    • 14 years ago

    For facilitating the unlawful distribution of over 2 million movies, he got off with a slap on the wrist. Of course, if he gets sent to a federal pound-you-in-the -***-prison, I’m sure he won’t see it that way. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • Sparrow
    • 14 years ago

    It’s hard to feel sorry for the guy. However to be honest, I wish the entertainment giants and law enforcment would spend a little less time worrying about P2P, and more time worrying about the real leeches: bootleggers. Especially the ones on Ebay — who rip off unwary noobs who think they’re getting the real thing, and screw the artists at the same time. Even Amazon is full of them in zStores. Those guys are the ones that should be going to jail.

    • astrotech66
    • 14 years ago

    Wow, I feel so much better now that I know my nation’s copyright laws are a little bit safer.

      • A_Pickle
      • 14 years ago

      Good. I’m sure you’d hate to have people stealing your work, too.

        • wierdo
        • 14 years ago

        Weird Al sure didn’t like it…oh wait.

          • PLASTIC SURGEON
          • 14 years ago

          But he asked them very nicely for their permission ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • Vrock
    • 14 years ago

    [Nelson] Ha ha! [/Nelson]

    • Hizpanick
    • 14 years ago

    This was the first sentence of this kind? Wasn’t there another person jailed for his same thing?

      • A_Pickle
      • 14 years ago

      Apparently not. ๐Ÿ˜€

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This