11 more rounds to go...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8003799.stmThis is really silly. I have two main gripes against this ruling:
1. On the legality aspect, these guys do not host any protected data. They do not even trafic the bits as they are exchanged. They do not have the information on who has even a single byte of data. What they have is torrent files - the information there is a list of file names, url of trackers and a general description on how a big file is chopped into small pieces (without knowing what is in the pieces). They just tell you who to talk to if you want to find more people interested in the files listed in the torrent.
The real world equivalent: If you ask me, I can tell you who to talked to, that can give you the phone number of a drug dealer. Should I got to prison for drug traffic?
2. Why is downloading media that is broadcasted on TV a crime? I can record it at home and watch it 100 times legally. I can even load the tape to a friend who does not have cable and it is legal. If instead I download the same episode using the pirate bay to get the .torrent it is a crime and they are criminals too. Why? I already payed to watch this episode. What business is this of anyone what electronic appliance in my house I use for this purpose? No one is missing a copy of the episode and it was already paid for. On the other hand, If an episode is broadcasted at the same time as a football game and I watch the one, I can't watch the other. Will I get a refund for content I payed for but was not delivered?
The way media companies are calculating their "losses" are borderline retarded. Even If I do download something that is not broadcasted locally, it is not like I would have gone out and buy it. If it was unavailable I would have watched some other crap - it is like zapping with the remote: it is all garbage, you just watch the most smelly and available garbage at the time.