Live data from Hacker News

Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

arstechnica.com

311–320 of 356 posts

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your congressman is most likely accepting large sums of money from companies supporting these draconian laws. Sums you can never hope to compete with. So break these laws. Break them as much as is possible. Convince others to do the same. Civil disobedience is the engine of progress.

If you have a concrete example of this occurring, then consider whether it's bribery: 18 U.S. Code § 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses "directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official, former public officia…

Lobbying is what I was referring to, and it basically is bribery legalised.

You cannot hope to compete with lobbysists from Disney, the MPAA/RIAA etc. It's heavily skewed in their favour.

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a concrete example of this occurring, then consider whether it's bribery: 18 U.S. Code § 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses "directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official, former public officia…

Lobbying is what I was referring to, and it basically is bribery legalised. You cannot hope to compete with lobbysists from Disney, the MPAA/RIAA etc. It's heavily skewed in their favour.

[deleted]

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#313
post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can try but you'll never be able to rationalize stealing from someone. Especially when you use someone(s) else's actions to try to justify stealing from them. You folks are young. If you're lucky enough to learn some of these things, the fact that a lot of bad karma will suddenly disappear from your life and things will go shockingly smoothly -- will only be the dessert. The real banquet will be knowing that you…

>>>You can try but you'll never be able to rationalize stealing from someone. Especially when you use someone(s) else's actions to try to justify stealing from them. The supporters of a too-strict, repressive form of copyright often use words like “stolen” and “theft” to refer to copyright infringement. This is spin, but they would like you to take it for objective truth. Under the US legal system, copyright infringe…

You often need permission, then pay royalties, to copyright holders. That is the theft. In cases where you enjoy then distribute the copyrighted works of someone without their permission and avoid paying them the required royalties -- you have stolen money $$ from them. It's the same as eating at a restaurant then not paying. STEALING. You got a benefit you were supposed to pay for -- and you DID NOT PAY.

Stealing from others habitually is a very bad decision. You can justify it using any inner dialog you like.

The only caution is this: there are consequences to bad decisions you've made.

Here is the biggest consequence: if you purposely decide to hurt someone else (financially in this case), unless you are sociopathic/career criminal, you'll have an internal conflict about it. You will 'explain it away' so it doesn't feel as bad: "I do this because the law is unfair" or "everyone else is doing it".

YOU ARE LYING TO YOURSELF. You know darn well you shouldn't act that way. Once you start lying to yourself, you're going to green-light lying to yourself again.

For example: If asked in a job interview with the IRS "let's say we hire you and you have access to the IRS secure network, and after a week you discover that a lot of your IRS coworkers change personal data in our computer system and underpay their taxes. And you find your coworkers also download and seed torrent clouds with copyrighted material. Which activity would you find acceptable?"

YOU'D HAVE TO LIE TO THE IRS INTERVIEWER!! See? You'd have to say "I would never cheat on my taxes. And I download copyrighted material and seed with copyrighted material all the time."

YOU WOULDN'T SAY THAT!

Nope, you wouldn't get hired if you admitted to the IRS interviewer -- OR ANY OTHER COMPANY INTERVIEWING YOU FOR A JOB -- that you make illegal, unauthorized use of copyrighted works.

Why wouldn't you admit to the IRS job interviewer you seed torrents with copyrighted works without the owner's permission?

BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT'S WRONG. That's why.

RECAP: (1) you're stealing from an artist by not paying royalties on their film/music/etc. when using sites like KAT; (2) YOU'RE LYING TO YOUR FUTURE EMPLOYER in a job interview.

Slippery slope. In managing large groups of tech workers, what I discovered was this: if an employee is unethical or dishonest in one area of life, they seem to have a hard time restricting those bad decisions to only one area.

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#314
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

extradition treaties are reciprocal, no country is going to extradite its citizens if the other country won't extradite theirs in return. the numbers don't necessarily balance: probably a lot more Mexicans commit crimes in the US and flee to Mexico than the other way around. Usually, I would think, extradition entails countries extraditing their own citizens back to face charges at home; people will tend to commit cr…

> extradition treaties are reciprocal, no country is going to extradite its citizens if the other country won't extradite theirs in return. That's not quite accurate. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16041824 > A critical test set out in the treaty is that the British request must include "such information as would provide a reasonable basis to believe that the person sought committed the offence for which extra…

thanks for that, interesting article! but your quotes are a little selective and tell only one side of the story of that more nuanced article, I think leaving a deep misimpression for readers here on HN.

another quote from the article says "a Home Office-commissioned independent review...found the US had not refused any extradition requests since the treaty came into force. A total of seven US requests were refused by the UK in that time."

that asymmetry in the treaty is not the result of a disparity of negotiating power nor clearly unfair-to-one-side. It's because the US has "untreatyable" constitutional rights that UK does not grant its own subjects, so for due process to grant an extradition request, the UK must submit that evidence. Since the US and UK are such close allies, that treaty may reflect the UK's desire not to slow down the process in either direction. Perhaps (this is pure speculation, we don't have the data) if the US complied in the other direction as the UK does, the UK courts would grant more of the extradition requests.

I'm not meaning to argue that the asymmetry works out fairly for every single defendant, clearly individuals will suffer more in one direction than the other, I'm saying that "the People" on both sides are not necessarily disadvantaged if we "presume evidence of guilt" and a symmetric desire to punish.

and this is for another topic, but the presumption of guilt is how the system is designed to work, otherwise, how could they even compel you to show up in court, or hold an axe murderer while awaiting trial? the commonly quoted "presumption of innocence" applies when you are in court in front of judge and jury; the entire rest of the system from arrest thru the trial is based on a necessary presumption of high probability of guilt.

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#315

If you think about it, torrent sites are like a modern day robinhood. They take profits from the rich and bring enjoyment to the poor.

> If you think about it, torrent sites are like a modern day robinhood. They take profits from the rich and bring enjoyment to the poor. Over 2.1 billion people in the developing world lived on less than US $ 3.10 a day in 2012. Downloading torrents means you've got a computer, power, internet and most likely food and clean water. You're not 'poor'. You're mingy.

Yes and some people make millions per day and on that scale I'm closer to $3.10. Poor is a relative term if you haven't figured that out. Thanks for lecturing us all on our extreme wealth though, I'm sure everyone feels better about themselves because of your statement.

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but whats your point?? he did make those roads... he paid taxes in gas, insurance, purchase of a car tax, license plate tax... all that do indeed sponsor roads he drives on! as of military defending his patch of land, hard to argue. Africa is much bigger than USA -- how much they spent as a continent on defense? Bet 1000th of what US does. Other than that, he might choose to protect his own land with the second Amend…

Sure he sponsored the roads, but the government implemented those roads. Planning, buying, organizing, maintaining, etc are all part of the work that the government does.

I still don't get it. Who do you think paid for planning, buying, organizing and the cost of maintaining of all that??

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So did you make the roads you drove on to work? Impressive. How about the fire, police, schools, environmental protections, consumer protections, and court system? How big is the military defending your patch of land? I admit there are problems, but I'm always amazed when people say the government doesn't do anything, then take a car to work on public roads, listen to the radio (FCC), eat food (FDA), etc.

but whats your point?? he did make those roads... he paid taxes in gas, insurance, purchase of a car tax, license plate tax... all that do indeed sponsor roads he drives on! as of military defending his patch of land, hard to argue. Africa is much bigger than USA -- how much they spent as a continent on defense? Bet 1000th of what US does. Other than that, he might choose to protect his own land with the second Amend…

No he didn't. If we abolished taxes tomorrow everything would fall apart.

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely. KAT apparently had a Facebook page, so step one was serving Facebook with a search warrant demanding the list of IP addresses used to administrate that page. They likely then went to major companies like Apple, Google, etc. with search warrants for any billing activity (valuable as it comes with a cardholder name and address, usually) matching those IP addresses.

So he may have been fine by simply using a VPN?

Maybe, maybe not. Plenty of VPN providers are in places within the reach of US law enforcement, and it only takes one slip up to expose yourself.

Re: Alleged founder of world’s largest BitTorrent distribution site arrested

#320
post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>You can try but you'll never be able to rationalize stealing from someone. Especially when you use someone(s) else's actions to try to justify stealing from them. The supporters of a too-strict, repressive form of copyright often use words like “stolen” and “theft” to refer to copyright infringement. This is spin, but they would like you to take it for objective truth. Under the US legal system, copyright infringe…

You often need permission, then pay royalties, to copyright holders. That is the theft. In cases where you enjoy then distribute the copyrighted works of someone without their permission and avoid paying them the required royalties -- you have stolen money $$ from them. It's the same as eating at a restaurant then not paying. STEALING. You got a benefit you were supposed to pay for -- and you DID NOT PAY. Stealing fr…

As a libertarian I would never work for Government Especially the IRS.

>>You often need permission, then pay royalties, to copyright holders. That is the theft.

You operate under the idea that I believe they are entitled to these things, I do support or believe copyright is ethical, I do not believe the government has the ethical authority to tell me how I can arrange the bits on my hard disk, I do not believe the government has the ethical authority to grant a person or company the monopoly on an idea or arrangement or words, notes, or images

Post reply on HN