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

Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

wired.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 372 posts

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#241

Post by the8472 »

Donzo wrote: post #221
the8472 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's theft. Stop repeating that. It isn't. Even the courts agree on this one. And TPB did not engage in it either way.

Just because no one was strong armed for a loaf of bread does not mean that a theft did not occur. No one may have been deprived of physical property, but we do not live an entirely physical world. Piracy deprives content creators of opportunity: the opportunity to distribute their products in the way that they see fit. Perhaps this means that they give all of their work away for free through the channels of their ch…

Well, sure, you can sell it or give it away for free, that's up to you. But once you give it to someone you give someone a blob of information. Which is identical to the one you still have. That chunk of information is not intrinsically tied to you anymore.

So you can easily control initial distribution. But to restrict further distribution you have to restrict actions of others. You have to limit their freedoms to do with that new copy of information.

Is there a good reason to limit their freedoms? Maybe. But it doesn't occur to me as a natural right. Once you handed over a copy to someone else each of you control an identical set of information. You severed your ties.

So if you want the rights of others restricted then - in my opinion - the burden of constructing a case why they should be is on you.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#242

Post by mseebach »

boracay wrote: post #181
karmacondon wrote: post #43

Many don't agree with the principles of TPB, but Sunde was willing to take risks for what he believed in. He deserves a lot of respect for that no matter what people think about the morality of what he helped to create. Most people go their whole lives without caring strongly about any issue at all, and almost all of those that do care are willing to sacrifice exactly nothing. I'd like to think that I would be willin…

You act like one of those guys he talks about in the article. Judging people from the sidelines and telling them what they should have done without remotely knowing the story.

But on the other hand "I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?" judges me from the sidelines without remotely knowing my story because I didn't go to jail.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#243

Post by dragonwriter »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #187
pionar wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, copyright exists to say, I made this, I get to control how it's distributed.

No, copyright exists to incentivize the creation of new works for the benefit of society.

You're both right. Grandparent is more correct as to why, historically, copyright as a monopoly grant was first created, but parent is correct as to the explicit Constitutional provision granting Congress the power to create copyright (and patents, etc.) in the US system, and generally the most commonly accepted reason for the continuation of copyright in the modern world.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#244

Post by rayiner »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #206
karmacondon wrote: post #43

Many don't agree with the principles of TPB, but Sunde was willing to take risks for what he believed in. He deserves a lot of respect for that no matter what people think about the morality of what he helped to create. Most people go their whole lives without caring strongly about any issue at all, and almost all of those that do care are willing to sacrifice exactly nothing. I'd like to think that I would be willin…

> TPB wasn't about rights or freedoms or standing up to government oppression. People used it primarily to obtain media and software without paying for it. // I think there is an issue of rights and freedoms. With a capitalist economy certain elements of culture are effectively reserved for the wealthy. In other state structures those making the cultural artefacts that we use to express our selves, to link, to coales…

> Moreover, copyright was initially set up with a view to ensuring that eventually the wealth locked up in shared experience, cultural introspection, confrontation with new ideas and different aspects of the culture would be freed in to the public domain.

That's not the only theory of copyright. In Europe, copyright has traditionally been viewed in terms of the moral rights of creators to control their work. In many European countries, authors have perpetual rights to, e.g., prohibit alterations of their creative works.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#245

Post by antihero »

sigzero wrote: post #154
jimktrains2 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what TPB mainly distributed, was not information, it was products. It did no such thing. It provided a searchable list of user-generated content. It was no different than hacker news or reddit. It was used in a fashion that facilitated "crimes", but so are computers, Internet, and cash in general.

No, it was a lot different from Reddit or HN. Please stop trying to support the "pirating is okay". It's not. It's theft. You do not need or have to see those shows. You want to watch them and you fulfill that want by pirating. That pirating may cause purchases later is a horrible argument for theft.

What about content that you cannot legally obtain? For instance, TV shows that haven't aired in your country yet (or won't ever) due to greed or a whole load of other reasons?

It's absurd that there are people there are people waiting cash in hand to get content, and they are denied because of some sort of broken mentality on how content should be distributed.

Calling it theft is using a legal concept that is outmoded for the digital world. Theft implies that an object is removed from someone's possession in order to be taken.

You can argue all you like that it deprives content creators of income (although even that is complex, in many contexts), but it is not, and never will be theft.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#246

Post by thizzbuzz »

reubenmorais wrote: post #90
danielalmeida wrote: post #77

> "What people reveal, what people fight for, are major causes. Freedom of information. Liberty. Democracy. Governmental transparency and due process." I have a really hard time trying to link this with my experience on TPB. It's all about downloading stuff without paying for it. Honestly, that's it. I'm not proud of that, I'm not saying it's a noble thing to do. I really don't get what trying to "determine" what sho…

Torrenting is an answer to bad service. I want to look up a movie I want to watch, choose between different quality/file size options depending on my bandwidth/hard drive space needs, download an MP4 with decent speeds, watch it, then store it to watch again if I feel like it. I can do this legally for games via GOG or Steam, I can do this legally for (most) software I use, I can do this legally for music (limited ar…

> Torrenting is an answer to bad service. I want to look up a movie I want to watch, choose between different quality/file size options depending on my bandwidth/hard drive space needs, download an MP4 with decent speeds, watch it, then store it to watch again if I feel like it.

Totally agree. I own over 1000 CDs, but rather than ripping each one to my hard drive, it's much easier to download them illegally via P2P networks and torrents.

I download music illegally for other purposes too, but I've also spent a much greater portion of my income on music than most. Downloading has likely stimulated my appreciation for music.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#247

Post by the8472 »

pdabbadabba wrote: post #239
the8472 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making money from media is NOT a legal right. You don't have a right to profit. You have the right to attempt to profit from it and exclude others from doing the same with your work. That's all copyright provides. A limited right to an opportunity to make money, granted to you by society so you can make more of that work if society (by proxy of "The Market") deems your works as successful. This right is granted to yo…

> Making money from media is NOT a legal right. You don't have a right to profit. > You have the right to attempt to profit from it and exclude others from doing the same with your work. I think this is a distinction without a difference when the context is whether someone can interfere with your "attempt" to profit by violating your right to exclude others.

The context is that it's just a legal right and not a human one. It's one that society constructed for a purpose and then got extended further and further over time for commercial purposes.

People's moral compass does not always align with what's legal and at some point they may simply start ignoring the law.

Which is what's happening with copyright.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#248

Post by forrestthewoods »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #206
karmacondon wrote: post #43

Many don't agree with the principles of TPB, but Sunde was willing to take risks for what he believed in. He deserves a lot of respect for that no matter what people think about the morality of what he helped to create. Most people go their whole lives without caring strongly about any issue at all, and almost all of those that do care are willing to sacrifice exactly nothing. I'd like to think that I would be willin…

> TPB wasn't about rights or freedoms or standing up to government oppression. People used it primarily to obtain media and software without paying for it. // I think there is an issue of rights and freedoms. With a capitalist economy certain elements of culture are effectively reserved for the wealthy. In other state structures those making the cultural artefacts that we use to express our selves, to link, to coales…

I'm not sure I agree with much of anything you said.

>With a capitalist economy certain elements of culture are effectively reserved for the wealthy. [...] The democratisation of media particularly through availability of music and film - which are so central to our cultural experience

There is always going to be a culture. And there are always going to be things off-limits to the non-wealthy that would totally be part of the larger culture if made free. So? I don't think it's particularly important for music or film to be part of the larger, central cultural experience. If those things aren't available then something else will take their place. To the best of my understanding society had a culture 5, 50, 500, and even 5000 years ago.

I don't think I have a fundamental right to access or own things created by other people. I think people pirate because it's safe, easy, and free. I think most people's participation in piracy can be summed up as "selfish asshole". I think DRM is a blunt, ham fisted enforcement of the copyright deal and I'm curious as to why you think it breaks and should nullify the contract.

And on top of all this the maintainers of Pirate Bay are not benevolent Robin Hood's trying to give culture to the poor. They're making money. Megaupload network generated $175,000,000 in revenue. I don't think there's a damn thing honorable about any of these lot.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#249

Post by vezzy-fnord »

patzerhacker wrote: post #223
scrollaway wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sure talk a lot about how he was putting malware into people's computer through ads, when he himself said he's glad TPB is gone mostly because of how horrible its ads were[1]. You have a point (to the extent that it can be a point - it's just not really worth talking about anymore): downloading entertainment is not a human right. You make a very poor case of arguing that point. But I don't think anyone really arg…

> You are a fool if you're angry about piracy on your pet project. I'll tell my employees that as our company folds from lack of revenue. I'll tell my wife that as we apply for food stamps. I'll tell the that to the next person interviewing me for a job because people didn't want to pay for the value I provided.

Has there ever really been a documented case of people being driven to poverty as a direct result of their content being put on file sharing networks? It's a very common piece of emotional demagoguery that I see, but I've never seen any sources that substantiate it.

Re: Peter Sunde: 'I went to jail for my cause. What did you do?'

#250

Post by mathetic »

mbillie1 wrote: post #231
karmacondon wrote: post #43

Many don't agree with the principles of TPB, but Sunde was willing to take risks for what he believed in. He deserves a lot of respect for that no matter what people think about the morality of what he helped to create. Most people go their whole lives without caring strongly about any issue at all, and almost all of those that do care are willing to sacrifice exactly nothing. I'd like to think that I would be willin…

> Sunde was willing to take risks for what he believed in. He deserves a lot of respect for that no matter what people think about the morality of what he helped to create I find this argument completely fallacious. Does it change the value of a thing if someone takes a risk for it? Ought we respect the causes of suicide bombers, since they gave their lives for them?

Yes, it does. I will never advocate violence but if you look at the reasons that lead to that horrific moment in the suicide bomber's life, then you might see something even more terrifying than the act itself.

Sure, you can blame it on bigotry or ignorance, but it turns out suicide bombers on average are more intelligent and well-educated than those in their society [0]. Camus attempts to explain this in his essay The Rebel. He says a person keeps saying yes until the moment that he says no. The person who rebels is one who thinks the consequences of his actions are less important than those produced by conforming.

So maybe you should consider respecting someone who thinks taking his life and innocent lives to make a point, or at least respect the point he is trying to make.

You can find all sort of things wrong with what I stated above but you cannot possibly ignore the fact that Sunde went to prison on his own for what he believed was right. He didn't hurt anyone except himself. Unless you can explain all these with insanity, which I don't think you have the qualifications to do, you shouldn't completely find this fallacious.

[0] http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/13/1084289823327.html

Post reply on HN