The three Swedish owners of The Pirate Bay will have to pay €50,000 a day for failing to shutter the service in the Netherlands, an Amsterdam Court ruled on Friday. The Swedish pirate site was ruled illegal earlier by the Dutch courts, but remained online because its servers are abroad. Lawyers representing The Pirate Bay co- …
Holland is not a country!
The country is called The Netherlands. North Holland & South Holland are Provinces.
According to a Dutch friend saying someone comes from Holland is derogatory like saying Bah Southerners!
I wonder why some people get ths wrong?
As a Dutchman from Groningen, I can't be bothered by what you call this place. Holland will do, but is indeed more correctly used as the name of a province.
Good luck enforcing the fine, and free speech is still there because of the XS4All ruling.
Although, I would've said it's akin to Americans calling the UK "England", which is similarly annoying.
is "America", but that hasn't stopped the geographically lazy hacks on this site...
Mind you, they tend to get a bit upset if you conflate"Great Britain", "England", and "The UK"!
The article does not refer to Holland as a country
and Amsterdam IS in North Holland, so what's your problem, or have you just ASSUMED that Holland referred to the country?
The difference surely is that Americans call their country "America".
Hup Holland Hup
Because your national football team has Holland printed on it tee-shirts! 'Hup Holland Hup' as they chanted during the World Cup. Please ask your Dutch friend what he thinks now ^^
Hup the Netherlands Hup
That doesn't chant nearly as well, so....
Once you actually *win a war*, you get to decide on names, spelling and suchlike.
Test Man: "Although, I would've said it's akin to Americans calling the UK "England", which is similarly annoying."
Not just the Americans - the Dutch *always* refer to the UK as 'Engeland'.
Won a war?
Skipped history class much?
For Too Many . . .
That's "Murkah" for far too many (and a growing proportion) of us . . .
I find a loss of $250,000 per copyright infringement impossible to prove.
Where the hell is common sense?
Who needs common sense
When big business is paying the courts, the gubberment, and everyone else involved?
AC of course, since judges seem to be pretty cheap nowadays.
Paris. Getting shafted, one "upload" at a time.
Eat the rich
Holland is not a country!
That's what I focused on :)
Copyright holders running around like headless chickens. Why don't content creators stop creating stuff? That'll stop the freetards.
re: Why don't content creators stop creating stuff?
Judging by current crop of music and films - I thought they already had :p
The Law is an Ass, allegedly, ..... or is it a Banana whenever in a Republican strangehold?
How much should the Amsterdam courts charge the Netherlands for not forming a government which listens to the wishes of the people?
Not sure why...
everyone is so fixated on The Pirate Bay. There are plenty of other torrent tracking sites on the interwebs to choose from.
Well, I for one...
am quite glad they're fixated on The Pirate Bay, because it means that (for the moment at least) they're leaving Demonoid alone!
(Haha, you thought this comment was going to be about welcoming copyright-enforcing overlords or something, didn't you? ;) )
Hey dont complain...
Whilst RIPA and all the other people are focused on The Pirate Bay that means we freely get to make use of all the other trackers out there...
RE: Not sure why
It's what it represents.
After years of trying to take it down, it's still up and running and as strong as ever (if not more so from the free publicity)
Fail on behalf of the judges
All the Daily Fail readers will get confused! Pirate Bay = Torrents, in their mind!
The same reason we were all happy when everyone was focused on mp3.com back in 2000. That meant that nobody was watching Napster. Then everyone focused on Napster ... while we had already switched to Audiogalaxy, Limewire, Kazaa/Morpheus, Gnutella ... you get the idea. By the time the MAFIAA grabs one medium, the hordes have already moved on to the next big thing. Pirate away!
I sleep better at night knowing that there are people out there tirelessly fighting the scourge of copyright infringement and our european overlords levy such huge fines that ++ daily, all so that minority industries don't have to provide more value for money like everyone else does these days.
Arrrgh and Arrgh again.
(Long live the pirate bay)
I think Holland is a country
...the Englishman who first named it called it a "hollow land" which shouldn't exist. This became Holland.
The Dutch may see it differently, but since when did we let Johnny foreigner have a say in how we name things?
It's even worse in Belgium where we call Bruges by its French name and Zeburugge by its Flemish name and yet they are both in Flanders almost next to each other!
Yeah, and the Flemish speak Flemish and Wallonia are the Francophones. I wonder where this is heading? :) (And in case someone asks, most Flemmings speak Southern Dutch, and Walloons mostly speak French. However, my mother-in-law speaks Walloon Dutch and French and lives in Liege - So there! I think she is the only person I have met whom [poorly] speaks Walloon)
As ever, they [Belgians] are tied up and whipped by the political elite who work on a divide & conquer ideal. But everyone loves PirateBay.
When did the Dutch turn into Americans?
Trying to enforce your laws in another country is the sole perogative of the USA, in fact I wouldn't be surprised to find that the US is starting copyright infringement proceedings against the Netherlands
Sadly the Netherlands isn't so great now
That asshat Harry Potter lookalike and his buddies did a good job of messing everything up over the last few years.
Stands to reason...
... when you let the fundies run the country. Yes, they're officially middle-of-the-road christians except for the whackos in the splinter party that still don't want to let wimmins rule or even in the party and so on, but really, they're archetype holier-than-thou asshats.
The TPB ruling is small change compared to the civil liberties assaults that have mostly succeeded and are still going flank speed ahead.
$250,000 + 2 years per infringement * how many torrents on the 'bay?
So how did the unauthorised sharing of files come to attract a bigger punishment than murder?
Oh well. Google filetype:torrent, here we come.
Failing to shutter the service in Holland?
Except the service isn't in Holland.
So someone in Holland is importing (requesting the transfer of) the information from abroad.
How would the Dutch like it if the UK fined Holland's cafe owners on the basis that they supplied "goods" to UK subjects who then brought them into the UK where they are illegal?
Shoddy legal judgements lead to disrespect for the law, which is bad for everyone.
going for a song?
The expression now has a whole new meaning thx to the copyright-mad crowd (or is that the copyright mad-crowd ).
> two years in prison or a $250,000 fine for each example of copyright infringement
The Netherlands is still a tolerant place
if one wishes to smoke hashish or purchase sexual services ; otherwise in recent years it has become one of the less tolerant countries in Europe. That organisations like the RIAA and MPAA and their sisters have great influence over legislation and the courts is hardly surprising - it's a question of money, which is taken very seriously in the Lowlands....
If they were Brits or even just passing through here, the plaintiff would just lodge a complaint for non-payment of fines and then its a criminal matter with imprisonment penalties, for which the European Arrest Warrant would be used.
Maybe, however, the Swedes are a little more mindful of the rights ot their citizens and residents than our government is.
...aren't the Swedes also party to the Arrest Warrant?
Holland was such a tolerant place...
And his football team used to play football. Worth having a look at this piece of BBC news, especially the bit on "Webb, go to Robben Island":
>The difference surely is that Americans call their country "America".
Or do you mean US citizens call themselves Americans?
United States citizen just has too many syllables when compared to American.
BTW, what do people call themselves in the UK?
United Kingdom citizens?
Maybe we need better words...
Re: United Kingdom citizens?
I think we are referred to as British citizens.
It says so in my Passport...
i for one
consider myself scottish not british.
you could argue, but regardless of what our german queen writes on my passport that's what country i am from.
I have the impression that britain is more an alliance than a country - in some ways a bit like the U.S. I know some texans who wouldn't call themselves american, as they are from texas.
besides, I thought that britain didn't include northern ireland, but the UK does. So what do they have on their passports?
Pirate Bay - Start your own Torrent version of 'Radio Caroline' where Berne has no jurisdiction.
Seems to me the Pirate Bay owners should buy a junk ship moor it somewhere in the Atlantic out of the reach of any jurisdiction and set up a Torrent / software version of 'Radio Caroline' -- the once extremely popular 'Pirate Radio' station.
RADIO CAROLINE EVENTUALLY FORCED ARCANE RADIO LAWS IN THE UK AND ELSEWHERE TO BE CHANGED!
Then as a NON-SIGNATORY to the Berne Copyright Convention, Pirate Bay--flying under the skull and crossbones--can tell the RIAA, WIPO, ACTA et al to go root themselves until they come to their senses.
It's becoming clear to me that nothing else less than this level of civil disobedience will bring about a rational debate on copyright and so-called intellectual property law together with well needed and very justifiable changes to the outrageously unfair and unrepresentative Berne Convention.
Copyrights and patents have to become a hot political issue that politicians take note of before anything will change. Pirate Bay has to up the ante and be taken seriously as a serious political force rather than a lot of ratbags (as they presently appear to be).
Remember, the Berne Convention treaty, like so many others, is one in which ordinary citizens (here copyright consumers) were not effectively represented--only the vested interests were (and there they had governments to perpetrate the inequities on their behalf).
It's about time we citizens told governments that they can't sign international treaties willy-nilly without a proper plebiscite or referendum of the people.
Remember: we citizens cannot just leave treaty signing to governments for inevitability we will be screwed (as we were at Berne in respect of copyright).
The radio caroline model wouldn't work...
Because, wherever they are, they need a connection to the internet - rather than broadcasting radio waves. So they need an ISP. And ISPs are regulated by local law. And most countries, due to copyright holder lobbies, can restrict, demand disclosure of access, or prosecute ISP activities.
In principle this makes sense - illegal activities need a recourse to justice.
The problem is that the copyright holders and their lobbies have turned this into a farce by simply making up silly numbers for the damage done by an individual sharing a file.
What they really should have done was embrace this distribution model, perhaps making small amounts for what is essentially a FREE channel to market. Something that I (and I believe the majority of genuine users) would probably be happy to pay.
Instead they insist on charging out-of-date prices for content, driving legitimate users to illegal activities that they feel morally justified in performing.
@ctrlbreak. Essentially I agree with you over copyright.
I'm using hyperbole of course. Why else would anyone read boring stuff on copyright otherwise? However, that's the problem, the masses have always considered the fine print of copyright treaties etc. as something that doesn't concern them but they've done so at their peril.
Treaties and such are always a problem for the layperson; he/she usually has no advocate to go in batting for him* and doesn’t understand the significance until it's too late. Whereas those who've a vested interest and who are pushing the agenda--here copyright holders and or their agents RIAA etc.--have a strict well organised agenda and well funded budgets for lobbying, and of course they usually get exactly what they want (and with copyright is was 100%+).
As far as I'm aware, there's never been such a one-sided treaty in history as the Berne Convention on Copyright. Most treaties are intergovernmental where there's a high level of vested interest on all sides that provides a power balance tension for bargaining. With copyright, the individual citizen has become the adversary and essentially he's was never represented in the treaty and law making process over copyright, thus the complete one-sidedness of copyright law. When Berne was set up the individual was essentially dismissed or ignored, for back in 1886 (a) there was no Internet to fileshare stuff and (b) copyright was primarily aimed at big boys fighting each other, for only they had the technical resources, printing presses etc., that were capable of violating copyright, thus policing copyright was relatively easy. Until the advent of the Internet policing copyright was essentially a non issue for the copyright monopolists.
"The problem is that the copyright holders and their lobbies have turned this into a farce by simply making up silly numbers for the damage done by an individual sharing a file.
What they really should have done was embrace this distribution model, perhaps making small amounts for what is essentially a FREE channel to market. Something that I (and I believe the majority of genuine users) would probably be happy to pay"
Absolutely correct, but when you have a total absolute monopoly over copyright for over 100 years (and remember copyright and patent law wasn't new with Berne, they go back as far as the 1600's. Berne just focused the issue and made it possible to sue both nationally and internationally. With copyright essentially having gone unchallenged for over 100 years these monopolists are not very savvy when it comes to bargaining with the masses, (a) they out of practice and (b) they're only used to lobbying pliant governments, thus their ham-fisted approach.
The real issue for copyright users is a proper respectable advocate to put their case. At present there is no one single body, just a lot of disparate disorganised groups. Until such a lobby gets its act together and turns copyright and patenting issues into a real hot political agenda not much will happen on the legislative front to redress the issues of imbalance.
Re a Radio Caroline-style setup having difficulty accessing the Internet. I see this as essentially inconsequential. Throughout the world there are any number of service providers who have no qualms hosting virus writers spammers etc. thus it's only money that separates a Pirate Bay ship from a direct satellite link to fast Internet access. You'd only stop such activity when you stop spamming and virus distribution worldwide, and I reckon we're a long way off that yet. Anyway, the point is moot, the chances of it happening are almost zilch (although a 'spoofed' spam-type version in some compliant county is always a possibility).
* The government ought to be his advocate but it's been corrupted by copyright lobbyists who've bought its ear. As 'The State' theoretically is power invested within the citizenry, supporting the lobbyists at the expense of the greater utilitarian good is, in essence, a corruption of process. Addressing this issue would be a good place for copyright reformers to start.
here in Sweden the courts are no longer - if they ever were - mindful of the rights of citizens and residents, at least not when these rights come into conflict with the claims of organisations like the RIAA and the MPAA and their local counterparts. As the farcical trials of the Pirate Bay founders have revealed, our judges are often members of societies sponsored by and designed to promote the interest of copyright holders, where they meet and socialise with the legal representatives of the organisations mentioned above. Despite this, they never exhibit the good judgement or the decency to recuse themselves when matters of this type come before them, and when their obvious bias is taken to a higher court for review, the conclusion is always that membership in such societies does not *prove* bias - this, even though the law regulating such matters clearly states that even the appearance of bias is to be avoided. In cases of this type, our reputation for following the rule of law is entirely undeserved....
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Did Apple's iOS make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- 20 Freescale staff on vanished Malaysia Airlines flight MH370
- Neil Young touts MP3 player that's no Piece of Crap
- Review Distro diaspora: Four flavours of Ubuntu unpacked