Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 159 posts

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#121

Post by nicki_easy »

tzs wrote: post #119
Natsu wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're arguing that this is legal. They're arguing that this is wrong. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hume%27s_Law

I took "RIP free speech" to imply that he thinks that this case marks some sort of change in how free speech is handled, which it does not. If he was instead trying to make a general argument that convicts should not have their rights restricted while they have not completed their term, or if he was arguing that prosecuting someone for massive willful copyright infringement is a violation of their rights, then I misu…

She ;)

I think the whole thing is disgusting and wrong. And I think that she was railroaded off because of the views she expressed post-sentencing--they were trying to make an example of her and "send waves through this community"* and she was standing up and taking it while disagreeing instead of bending over and whimpering with remorse. It's cruel, disproportionate, unjust and, frankly, mentally ill. This is not what our justice system is for at all, either prosecuting her in the first place or silencing her by whisking her away prematurely.

*"One of the reasons we targeted Ninja Video was because it had such a strong social element," says Kevin Suh, senior vice president of Internet content protection at the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). "We wanted to send waves through this community." http://prospect.org/article/ninja-our-sites

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#122

Post by chairface »

richardburton wrote: post #116
chairface wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see no slippery slope in his argument. Singing Happy Birthday in public is actually a copyright violation, right now.

De dure, not de facto. Show me a report of someone getting arrested for it. Hence my accurate description of his ridiculous scenario appealing to a slippery-slope style train of thought. Case closed.

It's still not a slippery slope. It's an analogy that illustrates what would be possible, de jure. Honestly, there's no slope involved at all.

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#123

Post by Natsu »

tzs wrote: post #119
Natsu wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're arguing that this is legal. They're arguing that this is wrong. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hume%27s_Law

I took "RIP free speech" to imply that he thinks that this case marks some sort of change in how free speech is handled, which it does not. If he was instead trying to make a general argument that convicts should not have their rights restricted while they have not completed their term, or if he was arguing that prosecuting someone for massive willful copyright infringement is a violation of their rights, then I misu…

I don't think it was an argument so much as a way of registering her frustration.

After all, while convicts may, in general, have their rights restricted, it's not clear what state interest is being advanced by hurrying someone off to prison for making jokes on their Facebook page.

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#124

Post by [deleted] »

tzs wrote: post #120
nicki_easy wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So do you think her common sense should have told her to keep her mouth shut? As an idealistic young American with no experience with the justice system and a firm belief that what was happening to her was wrong, I think her common sense told her she had the right to speak her mind and to crack a few jokes to mollify the terror she felt at having just received a federal prison sentence. I think that would be a fairly…

Cracking a few jokes--within what common sense would allow. Celebrating your crime--not common sense.

[deleted]

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#125

Post by droithomme »

draggnar wrote: post #113
droithomme wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, given that the song was written in 1893 and has been published with the current melody and lyrics since 1912 it's amazing to think it is still really under copyright, especially given that there is not a single other thing in the world from 1893 or 1912 whose copyright hasn't long since expired.

the really amazing thing is that nobody has invented a new happy birthday song. did we reach perfection and that's it? no creativity for birthday melodies? orwellian or utopian? i can't tell anymore. "It's not utopian to want to build better stuff. It might be utopian to claim the stuff we've got is the best we're capable of."

Thanks, you bring up an excellent ancillary point in the discussion. The momentum of tradition is quite powerful. As a point of comparison, I use a Dvorak keyboard layout which allows me to touch type faster and has reduced my carpal tunnel syndrome effects considerably. I personally know several others that use Dvorak. However, I also realize that most of the world will not be switching from QWERTY because that is just how it is.

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#126

Post by Natsu »

droithomme wrote: post #71
lachyg wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What punishment, if any, do you believe is fair for her?

Depends on what she actually did. Isn't copyright violation a civil and not criminal matter? How is what she did different from youtube? You know, even today there are hundreds of thousands of hours of unlicensed movie and show content on youtube. Why aren't they being investigated. Really the only difference I see is she is black and doesn't have friends in high places. If she sold the site to Google she'd be on the…

> Isn't copyright violation a civil and not criminal matter?

Not always. This case was for criminal infringement (and conspiracy). The definition of criminal infringement was expanded by the NET Act a long time ago, but only recently have there been many cases of it making the news.

Here's an article on how the whole criminal infringement thing works if you want to know more:

http://www.ericgoldman.org/Articles/warezcriminalcopyright.p...

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#127

Post by eropple »

tikhonj wrote: post #105
lachyg wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, like all my opinions above I'm going to get downvoted, but I still can't comprehend how you can justify that it's not wrong to download it just because they're "ephemeral" digital goods. How does that make it any different? How about this: famous dress maker designs and creates an extravagant dress and then you, with your fine sowing skills replicate the dress entirely and wear it. Is that not wrong in your ey…

First off, your example wouldn't even be illegal, as far as I know: at least in the US, fashion is not covered by copyright. Secondly, I don't see why it would be immoral: the designer of the dress is not hurt at all by your copying it. Now, if you claim your dress has actually been made by said designer--e.g. you infringe on his trademark--that's basically fraud and a completely different case. The real issue is tha…

"Wrongness" seems fairly straightforward in this context: you're deriving utility from the work of others without the recompense that we as a society have deemed is their right to extract.

The major content producers and their organizations (the RIAA, etc.) are stupid, but I think it's rather hard to allege that they don't have the moral high ground.

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#128

Post by rdl »

Does anyone have her address? (Is she really going to serve 22 months in a county jail? WTF. I thought jails were for Apparently her interim address is

Hana Beshara c/o Alexandria Detention Center 2001 Mill Road Alexandria, Virginia 22314

And she'll be moved to a real prison later, but mail should be forwarded.

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#129

Post by res0nat0r »

droithomme wrote: post #101
OstiaAntica wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google purchased YouTube and THEN entered into those content deals. Before that, it was very touch and go for YouTube-- they couldn't afford their bandwidth, let alone licensing deals, and many commenters said that Google was stupid to take on YouTube's copyright liability.

Yes, thank you, exactly. There were tons of articles at the time about YouTube's blatant disregard for the law and their wanton illegal activity, and the obviously weren't troubled by it. They managed to get a huge amount of investment and then had their lawyers make deals and settlements with content owners. This is all a matter of public record and has been well covered in the media. The gentleman claiming to work…

Note the difference between YOUtube and this website. YouTube wasn't explicitly designed from the ground up to be based off of copyright infringing works. This site on the other hand was. That is the big difference.

Re: US Authorities Silence NinjaVideo Founder, Rush Her to Prison

#130

Post by biot »

Zirro wrote: post #8
lachyg wrote: post #6

My comment doesn't directly relate to the issue in the article (how she's being put in jail early) but I'll go ahead anyway. Does anyone honestly think piracy should go unpunished? People that upload movies, music, games etc should be punished, as they are doing something illegal and and the people downloading should also be punished as they are getting the content without paying the creators. I'm curious if anyone h…

As long as it is illegal, it is technically correct for them to be punished. Some laws, however, are too absurd to remain. Piracy, for me is certainly not about not wanting to pay. It's about the feeling that the money I pay mostly doesn't go to creators, but to the companies in-between who doesn't deserve it. I don't want to support such an industry. It also the fact that I want to push for legal alternatives which…

Let's say I ran a startup and secured $20M in VC funding but had to give up 80% of the company to get that, then later had several additional large rounds of financing which diluted my ownership to 5%. Would you rip off my company's products/services because you feel I'm not getting most of the profit?

I'm curious to know how the two situations differ. In both cases, parties have entered into contractual agreements to give up a large portion of ownership in exchange for money and other benefits they wouldn't otherwise receive if they tried to bootstrap things on their own. Would you rather people get 5 cents on the dollar from your purchase so that they could save up enough profit to not have to give up so much ownership the next time? Or 0 cents on the dollar from your piracy and not be able to save anything such that they're forced into the same arrangement the next time?

Post reply on HN