AWKWARD ZOMBIE

BurntToShreds wrote:He doesn't host the content, but he provided links to the content, which is exactly what the Pirate Bay does. Why are supporting him even though he's doing the same thing that the Pirate Bay does?

I support ThePirateBay. It's a great website and a great way to share content between users. Supporting ThePirateBay, and file-sharing, doesn't mean you support the sharing of copyrighted content.

Syobon wrote:I think if he pays for the serverspace he is responsible for the content. If it's the other way around webhosting companies are pretty much boned.

No, you misunderstand. He didn't pay for the serverspace on which the infringing content was. He didn't host any infringing content himself. None of the infringing content belonged, or was hosted by, him.

RikuKyuutu wrote:MegaUpload removes a lot of stuff when they find it.

Exactly. MegaUpload is very reactive with the DMCA claims and takes down infringing files very quickly, I believe they are second only to YouTube.

Le Great Handsome Oppressor wrote:

Syobon wrote:I think if he pays for the serverspace he is responsible for the content. If it's the other way around webhosting companies are pretty much boned.

No, you misunderstand. He didn't pay for the serverspace on which the infringing content was. He didn't host any infringing content himself. None of the infringing content belonged, or was hosted by, him.

Isn't paying hosting fees paying for the serverspace? Or am I missing something? Who is responsible for the content then?

The servers are just for his website. The content is not on his servers.

No, he payed for HIS OWN SERVER, for HIS OWN WEBSITE. He only LINKED to infringing content.

He was still hosting links to places where people could obtain infringing content, and he knew that the content was copyrighted. He is responsible for people illegally gaining access, through links that HE PROVIDED, to copyrighted material.

Oh, sorry Le Great Handsome Oppressor, I thought TvShack hosted the content itself. Sorry man, it's been a long day.

Burnt, under that reasoning Google infringes copyright laws.

Should we close down Google, then?

Okay, so he wasn't the one hosting the content. Then where was the infringing content being hosted?

A bunch of sites apparently. What does it matter?

BurntToShreds wrote:Okay, so he wasn't the one hosting the content. Then where was the infringing content being hosted?

I think you're still missing the point here. The issue is that he should not have been extradited for this.

It matters because if he's not hosting the content, then who is? Who is to blame for uploading and/or hosting the infringing content? If someone is to be convicted of copyright infringement, then who is it? That person or persons should be the ones extradited to the US, and not the man who merely posted links.

The issue is that someone needs to be shown as guilty of piracy, but nobody, not even the pirates themselves, can decide who that is. It's not the people who are willingly posting links copyright infringing material, it's not the people who host file-sharing sites even though they know that as a file-sharing site they will be inundated with pirated material.

Google is a search engine, nobody posts the links; the links to websites are not put there by a person. The links can be taken down via request. This is completely different from a website where an individual knowingly posts links to where people can get copyright infringing material.

Him being extradited for hosting the site is the exact same as if Katie got charged on copyright infringement because you post something on this forum. There is no difference other than the intent of the website. His website is designed to share links to files that users post on his site. If this site was dedicated to sharing links to files then according to this, Katie would be responsible.

Katie has committed no crime in hosting the website. There are no content on this website that is infringing copyright. She has not posted any links to any of the infringing material. Only the users have posted links to the infringing material. The infringing material is hosted on some other peoples server.

The feds go for Katie as she is visible, but the people who host the files are not.

Note that this is only a hypothetical situation, but it is what would happen if this site was dedicated to sharing content.

BurntToShreds wrote:It matters because if he's not hosting the content, then who is? Who is to blame for uploading and/or hosting the infringing content? If someone is to be convicted of copyright infringement, then who is it? That person or persons should be the ones extradited to the US, and not the man who merely posted links.

Uh no, actually no one should be extradited to the US. The US is not the worlds police. A countries laws only applies within it's own borders. The only time extradition is normally used is if crimes are committed in or against that country. And the ones who should be sued are the users who upload illegal content.

There's no official word yet, but apparently anonymous DDoS'd the Department of Justice website