It did make me curious what the laws are actually like in Sweden; if this had taken place in the US they would've subpoenaed the **** out of everybody involved to get the locations of the servers, then imprisoned everybody who refused to cooperate.
[M] TPB AFK - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Metaphysic
63 Posts
It did make me curious what the laws are actually like in Sweden; if this had taken place in the US they would've subpoenaed the **** out of everybody involved to get the locations of the servers, then imprisoned everybody who refused to cooperate. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Hrrrrm
United States2081 Posts
| ||
|
Noro
Canada991 Posts
| ||
|
Bobgrimly
New Zealand250 Posts
| ||
|
MysteryMeat1
United States3292 Posts
| ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
| ||
|
GunSec
1095 Posts
| ||
|
rasnj
United States1959 Posts
On February 09 2013 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote: I can't help to think that their defense was a bit chaotic and not well prepared... Definitely. Maybe I'm just ignorant of how trials work or what they can disclose, but some of the arguments the prosecutors brought up should be brought down fairly easily. For instance the whole issue of how much money they made of TPB, where the prosecutors claimed they made $1.664M a year, and they claimed they made about $104,000 a year (64ads vs 4ads at $500/week). How hard could it be to gather their financial statements and very clearly state something along the lines of: "In terms of ad revenue we received $250k over the last 3 years, in that time we spend $100k on bandwidth and hardware upgrades, leaving us with a profit of $50k a year to be split among at least 3 people. Median incomes with people of our technical expertise and background would suggest that if we went for a traditional job we could easily make $200k a year together." ? This could easily be supported by having people in the relevant industries assess their qualifications, and by gathering their bank reports, but instead they let the prosecutor have his way, despite them knowing that whether or not they did it for personal gain was an important point. I do think part of it is in how they chose to present the documentary though. While it seems overall like a pretty fair presentation, there can be no doubt that this documentary tries to stir up sympathy for the people behind the pirate bay who were unfairly targeted by the US and large corporations. It seems that portraying them as small and disorganized helps solidify them as victims and "Hollywood" as a villain. | ||
|
Coal
Sweden1535 Posts
| ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
On February 09 2013 21:00 rasnj wrote: Definitely. Maybe I'm just ignorant of how trials work or what they can disclose, but some of the arguments the prosecutors brought up should be brought down fairly easily. For instance the whole issue of how much money they made of TPB, where the prosecutors claimed they made $1.664M a year, and they claimed they made about $104,000 a year (64ads vs 4ads at $500/week). How hard could it be to gather their financial statements and very clearly state something along the lines of: "In terms of ad revenue we received $250k over the last 3 years, in that time we spend $100k on bandwidth and hardware upgrades, leaving us with a profit of $50k a year to be split among at least 3 people. Median incomes with people of our technical expertise and background would suggest that if we went for a traditional job we could easily make $200k a year together." ? This could easily be supported by having people in the relevant industries assess their qualifications, and by gathering their bank reports, but instead they let the prosecutor have his way, despite them knowing that whether or not they did it for personal gain was an important point. I do think part of it is in how they chose to present the documentary though. While it seems overall like a pretty fair presentation, there can be no doubt that this documentary tries to stir up sympathy for the people behind the pirate bay who were unfairly targeted by the US and large corporations. It seems that portraying them as small and disorganized helps solidify them as victims and "Hollywood" as a villain. This. Makes me so frustrated since everything i this case can be dissprooved so damn easily, just explain how torrents works for instance. | ||
|
VarmVaffel
Norway378 Posts
On February 09 2013 22:04 unkkz wrote: This. Makes me so frustrated since everything i this case can be dissprooved so damn easily, just explain how torrents works for instance. To be honest, it almost seems like the defending lawyers are just as technology-illiterate as the prosecutors. He didn't even get to speak for himself when he appealed, which almost could have been better just for him to explain his case properly. God I get so mad at this. | ||
|
nkr
Sweden5451 Posts
God he's a prof. at perhaps the most prestigeous university in sweden, and they claim he's nothing. | ||
|
Alur
Denmark3900 Posts
On February 09 2013 22:17 nkr wrote: Well to me it seems they were not interested in how it did or did not work. When they did bring in a professor on one of the subjects; rather than discussing the subject, they attacked his persona. God he's a prof. at perhaps the most prestigeous university in sweden, and they claim he's nothing. When you say "they", who are you referring to? | ||
|
nkr
Sweden5451 Posts
On February 09 2013 22:19 Alur wrote: When you say "they", who are you referring to? Prosecutor + Judge. Judge made no attempts at bringing back the discussion to the subject. | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
| ||
|
Noizhende
Austria328 Posts
| ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
God bless Sweeden | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
On February 09 2013 12:58 Hrrrrm wrote: Great movie. Just another example of US corporations using their political influence to get their way. Sweden wouldn't of proceeded if it wasn't for the US "threatening" sanctions. The old way of thinking is dieing off and sooner rather than later the majority of that industry will be obsolete. People are still willing to pay for content and eat it up just not at the incredibly high profit margins of before. Yeah I agree...imo films need to cost £4 / $6 max. Games should be £20 / $30 max. Then piracy would drop off massively imo. | ||
|
DertoQq
France906 Posts
On February 09 2013 23:49 sc4k wrote: Yeah I agree...imo films need to cost £4 / $6 max. Games should be £20 / $30 max. Then piracy would drop off massively imo. Accessibility is even more important imo. Pirating gives you anything you want, in any format, in less than 5min. It surely beats driving for 20min to go on a store and buy an (overpriced) dvd. | ||
| ||