Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars • Hacker News Board

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#11

Post by molo » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:06 PM UTC

sdfjkl wrote: post #9

S_A_P wrote: post #6

That is bizarre. The government is, in theory at least, non biased towards any particular private interests. The fact that a private entity can launch its own investigation using its own methodology and then use said evidence to take away someones freedom is downright terrifying.

It's increasingly becoming clear that the practice is very different. There's several cases, most notably Assange and the current Megaupload trial that indicate that private entities are putting pressure on governments, who in turn put pressure on their peers in other countries. And it can't all be written off as conspiracy theories anymore.

I'm sorry, what is the private entity involved in Assange's case?

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#12

Post by soult » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:14 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #10

jrockway wrote: post #7

Especially ridiculous is that the judge complains that he has no remorse for "making available" content that "infringes copyright". But of course, he didn't make any such content available. (Do .torrent files "infringe copyright"?)

For something like a movie they mostly consist of a hash list which is clearly a derivative work based on the original so probably. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrent_file EX: A 4GB file using 4MB pieces would have 1000pieces x 20 byte hashes or 20k of 100% derivative work. And ~2k for all other meta data.

By your logic a plot summary would be a derivative work.

You can't recreate a movie from a plot summary, same way you can't recreate a movie from a torrent file.

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#13

Post by objclxt » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:22 PM UTC

drucken wrote: post #8

The UK has a spectacularly weak judicial system for an industrialized country. From the lack of judicial review of primary legislation ([1]) through a huge abundance of archaic haphazard laws, to lack of representative judges, to the ease with each political, police, partisan and private organisations can influence the judiciary, the UK system is ripe for abuse and disruption by any industry. It is also fertile groun…

I'm not sure what perspective you're writing from, but I think many people in the legal profession would disagree with you.

Firstly, the UK has several distint judicial systems. I suspect in this case you're referring to the English legal system (Scotland having its own, entirely separate, process). There's then the civil and criminal courts. The former are held in high regard around the world - the English courts are often the venue of choice for impartially resolving international disputes and litigation.

You can argue it is a discrepancy that private prosecutions are still allowed - at some point in the past they did actually serve a purpose - however, under the English system it is up to the government, rather than the judiciary, to correct that.

I am not pretending it is a perfect system: far from it. I think in this case the judge behaved inappropriately, and the logic being used to force a copyright claim (which is a tort, i.e, purely a civil matter) into a criminal one (conspiracy to defraud) is potentially very spurious. However, this is also why an appeals system exists.

What I'm basically trying to say in a round-about way is that I don't think the English courts are 'spectacularly weak' - they have their problems, but what judicial system doesn't?

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#14

Post by abend » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:26 PM UTC

molo wrote: post #11

sdfjkl wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's increasingly becoming clear that the practice is very different. There's several cases, most notably Assange and the current Megaupload trial that indicate that private entities are putting pressure on governments, who in turn put pressure on their peers in other countries. And it can't all be written off as conspiracy theories anymore.

I'm sorry, what is the private entity involved in Assange's case?

I think SAP is referring to an external entity having an influence on a government's judicial process, not necessarily strictly private. Whether it's the US Government or a special interest group. Assange's case included.

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#15

Post by _delirium » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:28 PM UTC

admg wrote: post #3

I can't believe what I've just read. A civil case yeah why not but criminal charges and imprisonment from a private entity after the CPS have basically said its not worth it? Scary.

English law has only partly transitioned to public prosecutions. Private prosecutions are still legally the norm, but CPS prosecuting a case is de-facto the norm, as they have the right to take over a private prosecution. In most cases, CPS either takes over a case and prosecutes it, or takes over a case and drops the charges (if evidence is wholly insufficient, or continuing prosecution is against public policy). But this leaves the awkward vestigial category: cases that CPS chooses neither to intervene to prosecute nor to intervene to drop, which can go forward at a private party's own expense.

(Note: Only true of English/Welsh law; Scots law makes it much harder to bring a private prosecution.)

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#16

Post by uxp » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:35 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #10

jrockway wrote: post #7

Especially ridiculous is that the judge complains that he has no remorse for "making available" content that "infringes copyright". But of course, he didn't make any such content available. (Do .torrent files "infringe copyright"?)

For something like a movie they mostly consist of a hash list which is clearly a derivative work based on the original so probably. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrent_file EX: A 4GB file using 4MB pieces would have 1000pieces x 20 byte hashes or 20k of 100% derivative work. And ~2k for all other meta data.

A Torrent file's hash is representative of the movie or music's binary data, much like a synopsis or summary is representative of the plot line. You can't recreate a movie 100% from a summary, and it's even more difficult to recreate a movie from a hash.

The only infringement would come from downloading the movie itself (as a separate action) and comparing it to the hash or summary to ensure you have the correct movie.

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#17

Post by tptacek » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:51 PM UTC

objclxt wrote: post #13

drucken wrote: post #8

The UK has a spectacularly weak judicial system for an industrialized country. From the lack of judicial review of primary legislation ([1]) through a huge abundance of archaic haphazard laws, to lack of representative judges, to the ease with each political, police, partisan and private organisations can influence the judiciary, the UK system is ripe for abuse and disruption by any industry. It is also fertile groun…

I'm not sure what perspective you're writing from, but I think many people in the legal profession would disagree with you. Firstly, the UK has several distint judicial systems. I suspect in this case you're referring to the English legal system (Scotland having its own, entirely separate, process). There's then the civil and criminal courts. The former are held in high regard around the world - the English courts ar…

The UK has a criminal copyright infringement statute; like the US, infringement becomes criminal when you do it for money.

It is news to me --- and, wow --- that private entities can prosecute crimes in the UK. Am I reading that right?

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#18

Post by gcb » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:55 PM UTC

S_A_P wrote: post #6

That is bizarre. The government is, in theory at least, non biased towards any particular private interests. The fact that a private entity can launch its own investigation using its own methodology and then use said evidence to take away someones freedom is downright terrifying.

"government unbiased"

"half the people vote on their interested and elect officials for those interests"

Pick one.

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#19

Post by Retric » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:59 PM UTC

uxp wrote: post #16

Retric wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For something like a movie they mostly consist of a hash list which is clearly a derivative work based on the original so probably. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrent_file EX: A 4GB file using 4MB pieces would have 1000pieces x 20 byte hashes or 20k of 100% derivative work. And ~2k for all other meta data.

A Torrent file's hash is representative of the movie or music's binary data, much like a synopsis or summary is representative of the plot line. You can't recreate a movie 100% from a summary, and it's even more difficult to recreate a movie from a hash. The only infringement would come from downloading the movie itself (as a separate action) and comparing it to the hash or summary to ensure you have the correct movi…

That's not how copy write works. A summery involves creativity and factual information, and hash is a purely mechanical transformation without creative input. For much the same reason if you ran someone else book though a language translation software you could not prevent them from selling copy's of their work after being run through that same software translation. However, if you paid someone else to translate a book you could not sell it, but you could prevent the original author from selling that translation.

PS: There is a great post on copywrite that basically talks about bit's having color. It's not a physical process but legally the way there created creates a 'fingerprint' that matters.

Re: Private justice: How Hollywood money put a Brit behind bars

#20

Post by waqf » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 3:02 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #17

objclxt wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what perspective you're writing from, but I think many people in the legal profession would disagree with you. Firstly, the UK has several distint judicial systems. I suspect in this case you're referring to the English legal system (Scotland having its own, entirely separate, process). There's then the civil and criminal courts. The former are held in high regard around the world - the English courts ar…

The UK has a criminal copyright infringement statute; like the US, infringement becomes criminal when you do it for money. It is news to me --- and, wow --- that private entities can prosecute crimes in the UK. Am I reading that right?

Yes, that's right. For example the RSPCA, a private charity, brings its own prosecutions against alleged animal abusers, something that the CPS (government prosecutors) might not want to spend time and money on.