back to article Pirate cops bust LITTLE GIRL, take her Winnie-the-Pooh laptop

In their zeal to excise the cancer of copyright-infringing downloads, a Finnish anti-piracy group sent police to the home of a nine-year-old girl, where the coppers confiscated her Winnie-the-Pooh laptop. The Pooh-impounding plods were unleashed upon the young lass by the Finnish Copyright Information and Anti-Piracy Centre ( …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Winkypop Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    9 years old

    9!

    Pooh to the thugs from the Copyright Stazi.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

        Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

        I doubt it. My guess is that he absolutely hates this sort of thing because it is something that really *is* capable of convincing the general public that intellectual property rights are inherently evil and must be abolished.

        If you wake up in 2020 and discover that inventors and artists can no longer make a living selling their talent and that your international rivals can steal whatever they like from your employer's product line, blame the record companies.

        1. Eponymous Cowherd
          Devil

          Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

          I'm generally law abiding when it comes to copyright material, but this sort of this just make you think "fuck 'em", tool up with TOR and download as much as you can.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

            Please don't "tool up with TOR and download as much as you can". The TOR network wasn't designed for that, and it causes massive latency issues for other TOR users (as well as headaches for the volunteers who donate exit nodes).

          2. henrydddd

            Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

            Is this any worse than what the RIAA did; suing a 7 year old girl whose mother was disabled for downloading a mp3? Maybe Anonymous can invent ways for people do download. Up with the Pirate Party.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

              In other news, Germany just made anonymous filesharing illegal.

              http://torrentfreak.com/anonymous-file-sharing-ruled-illegal-by-german-court-121123/

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

                "...Germany just made anonymous filesharing illegal."

                I can't find the link now but after the last batch of Ip laws were passed in Germany, a spokesman from the German federal police made a statement to the effect that they didn't have sufficient resources to chase copyright infringers as they had more important things to worry about, such as terrorism. He implied that they would only chase infringement of a commercial nature.

                1. Inselaf
                  Joke

                  Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

                  Yes that is true. The problem here in Germany is that a few windy Lawyers have taken it upon themselves to send out threatening letters with totally out of proportional demands to pay certain certain sums of money. I have a friend who apparently tried to download a film (for 6 min´s) at the same time as uploading it & stating their IP adress as evidence. The fact that the IP adress was wrong (& the line was only 1.2 s so therefore absolutely unable to do such a thing!) they should also sign a form to say they would not do a anything like that again ( DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING LIKE THAT!!!!) was for the Lawyers irrelevant. So now my friend has taken the correspondence to their Lawyer. He just laughed & said wait & see if they are prepared to go to court, as it would be thrownout before it got before a judge!!!!!

                  What has happen to this poor girl is so heavyhanded that the Father should & must go to a Lawyer & also press charges against these shameless idiots!!!!!!

                  The fact that the Artist is not bothered enough to help this girl says also a lot about her morals!! I hope she looses a lot of fans& income.

                  1. veti Silver badge

                    Re: Orlowski will be able to put a positive spin on this

                    "The artist" can't do much. She can make legally-irrelevant statements in her choice of forums, but as far as actually altering the course of the prosecution is concerned - nope.

                    About all she could, in theory, do is to pay for the kid's defence and maybe buy her a new laptop. But bear in mind that "big in Finland" does not automatically mean "multi-millionnaire". It's a small market. Would you be willing to pay that kind of money to help a complete stranger? If so, there are probably more deserving cases for your charity.

                    For the future, of course - when her contract is up for renegotiation, she could hold out for some level of legal control over enforcement of copyrights in her works. But that wouldn't help this family.

      2. I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects

        I'm positive the police are shit.

        Every-f-where.

    2. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: 9 years old

      "9!

      Pooh to the thugs from the Copyright Stazi."

      I have never heard someone 9! = 362,880 years old referred to as a kid. A stiff, yes, a fossil, more likely

      Please pass me the one with the elementary algebra book in th epocket

      1. I think so I am?
        Facepalm

        Re: 9 years old

        I think the commenter was going for "9 exclamation mark" not "9 factorial"

        1. Uffish
          Headmaster

          Re: "9 exclamation mark"

          First, it should be "marks" (ie plural) not "mark" .

          Secondly, where is your justification for claiming that the commentator was going for nine exclamation marks. This is a serious journal and it is much more likely that a reader would use the conventional format of one exclamation mark to signify surprise and incredulity.

          Thirdly, I've got bored with being literal - one up to Winkypop and one up to Michael H.F. Wilkinson.

        2. beep54
          Trollface

          Re: 9 years old

          Er, it's, I say, it's a JOKE son! You gotta - I say, you gotta keep on your toes. Toes, that is.

      2. AndrueC Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        Re: 9 years old

        I used to own a calculator that took 27 seconds to work out 49!

        I think I bought it from Tandy. Just thought you'd like to know :)

        1. BorkedAgain
          Thumb Up

          Re: 9 years old

          I remember my old Casio being similar...

          And now my mobile phone, using RealCalc, tells me with no discernable pause for thought that 170!=7.257415615*10^306... Remarkable...

          1. keithpeter
            Windows

            Re: 9 years old

            I actually welcome this development.

            Because, when this 9 year old grows up, she will vote in a government that takes a sensible and balanced view of copyright protection in the digital age.

            The deadbeats who are enforcing this kind of stupidity are in the process of sawing off the branch they are sitting on. I don't think the rising generation will wear this.

            The Tramp: that is what I'll be when the 9 year old is old enough to vote (Osborne is after my pension)

            1. Quinch
              Big Brother

              Re: 9 years old

              Keep dreaming. At this rate, by the time this 9-year-old is old enough to vote, having sensible views on copyright will be grounds for imprisonment, let alone public service.

      3. Jordan Davenport
        Coat

        Re: 9 years old

        If you really want to be pedantic, a formerly living being from 362,880 years ago is unlikely to have completely fossilized by now (while we're grabbing our textbooks and all).

        1. Michael Dunn
          Happy

          @Jordan Davenport

          And probably isn't au fait with downloading stuff from Pirate Bay, either.

    3. I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects

      I f soviet russiahad only won that war...

      They would have had the freedom to do what they liked to survive, if they could and everyone would have beena pirate. Even the policce would have been on the side of the people ....(who pay their wages these days.)

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So the amount is excessive but I don't know what else is wrong with this.

    They even openly admin they attempted to steal their work.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      what's wrong is

      no illegal copying actually occurred.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. I think so I am?
        Thumb Up

        Re: "They even openly admin they attempted to steal their work."

        And we slowly walk to a world like "minority report" where just because you might commit a crime your arrested!

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "They even openly admin they attempted to steal their work."

        There is a slight omission in this story. The original finnish story says the 9 year old girl was trying to find snippets of songs that are usually released for people to listen to before buying the record eg legal content released by the recording company.

        Second omission is when the TTVK big guy put his leg deep in his mouht claiming that nobody can download illegal content by accident, not even a 9 year old.

    3. Martin
      WTF?

      I don't know what else is wrong with this??

      1) She was nine years old. She probably just googled the song, saw a link and tried to download it. She may not even have realized it was wrong.

      2) It was ONE FUCKING TRACK. Which she didn't even succeed in downloading.

      3) The original amount asked for was ridiculously excessive. The father probably didn't take it seriously.

      3) So, as a result, the police arrive in force, armed with and confiscate a nine-year-old girl's laptop.

      And you don't see anything wrong with that??

      This is on a par with a nine-year-old kid being arrested for stealing a few sweets from the Pic-and-Mix at Wilkinsons.

      1. HarshKarma
        WTF?

        Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

        "This is on a par with a nine-year-old kid being arrested for stealing a few sweets from the Pic-and-Mix at Wilkinsons."

        Given she didn't even download the song & her Dad bought it for her the following day - it's actually more akin to trying to pick up a sweet and finding her hands too small. Tells Daddy who buys her the sweet. Then getting arrested for stealing - totally bizarre.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

        It was an album, according to TorrentFreak.

        Still not justified.

        No material downloaded.

        No material made available for further copying

        1. James Micallef Silver badge

          Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

          "No material made available for further copying"

          Especially this one. There is a very strong case to be made against some publishing other people's intellectual property onliine. Merely downloading it without making it available to someone else is on an order of magnitude a lesser infringement (and that's even before considering in this specific case that teh download failed)

          1. dssf

            Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

            It seems that the courts and police involved put innocence second, guilt first, and imply attemp is comparable to malicious intent, conspiracy, and will to infringe perpetually.

            What of people who downloaded years aro, but cannot afford the haul they made, but try to keep from being hacked and who do not share online, and who share what is in the public libraries.

            Even though there is no physical theft, i can see that people and distributors want to get paid, but, if the price is to high, some people will take copies, wich is not the same as hittin a store an running off. And, som people will take the moral high ground and just quietly never pursue the music or movies. That is akin to resistance. In both cases the artists and distributors miss out, the only or main subtlety being quasi-theft and and generic deprivation. Maybe, willful deprivation rises to a crime? Maybe FOAD as a response to advertising will rise to the level of "developing an increased likelihood of IP theft and must be monitored, accused even, to bring back into the fold" some day?

            And, why do cops not get told from national government to not seize property for non-violent, low-level, per-person low-cost events? They could have used legal means to examine her, her home's, and one or two friend's or random 2 or 3 friends' home or school IP logs for indications of repeated, reticent behavior.

            Besides, exposing a LIMITED, non-recurring number of people, especially if foreigners, offers an increased chance of purchasing followership. It is a form of coerced advertising, not in their budget, but advertising nonetheless. Maybe, counterfeit goods deterrence will allow trademark enforcers to grab random people and demand proof of purchase and receipts to aid in verifying the purchase location iis authorized to exist?

      3. JetSetJim Silver badge
        Paris Hilton

        Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

        I'm certainly not excusing the tactics employed by the enforcers, but:

        She visits ThePirateBay and is presented with a list of links to d/l the track/album. Aren't they all magnet links nowadays? If so, Winnie the Laptop needs some s/w installed to recognise that link and translate that into a torrent download (ditto if it was an actual .torrent file).

        So, either:

        a) she didn't have the software (why would a 9-y-o install u-torrent, for example?) in which case the enforcers are monitoring the clicks on ThePirateBay (and I thought they were all cloudy, now, so you couldn't do that).

        Or:

        b) she did have the software, which may raise eyebrows, but aborts the download before it completes - perhaps due to ISP throttling of P2P? Enforcers are, in this case, monitoring IP addresses in a swarm.

        Am I missing something, or is her laptop not as pure as the driven snow (regardless of who installed the software)?

        1. Richard 81

          Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

          We know she failed to download it. I agree that we don't know all the details, but when do we ever?

        2. Da Weezil
          Mushroom

          Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

          Excuse me Mr Judgemental but I can think of at least one browser that includes a torrent facility.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          If you don't know, don't speak out of your ignorance.

          My pre-installed linux laptop came with Transmission pre-installed as well. And yes, linux is exactly the system I would buy my little girl, because that effectively prevents her from getting every virus from the web into the home lan.

      4. BillG
        WTF?

        Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

        This is as cold and as cruel as it gets.

      5. Peter Johnstone

        Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

        I'm concerned with the attempt to force the parents to sign a non disclosure agreement. The organisation in question know they're acting like a bunch of c*nts but carry on anyway and try and cover things up.

      6. fajensen Silver badge
        Angel

        Re: I don't know what else is wrong with this??

        And you don't see anything wrong with that??

        They should send drones and take out the entire neighborhood. Its the only way to be sure!

    4. GitMeMyShootinIrons
      Thumb Down

      This is a 9 year old CHILD...

      She is likely not even aware that what she did was illegal - many adults aren't that sure. Equally, how do they prove that the father had any knowledge that the child attempted this?

      This is a ridiculous act of 'summary justice', only matched by the brutal, ham fisted handling by the police.

      Would the same gestapo tactics be employed for other minor deeds by a child? Doubtful. And as for the attempt to get the father to sign an NDA over the settlement, I too would apply FOAD as well and post the damn thing and the full story with as many news agencies as possible.

      1. Evil Auditor Silver badge

        Re: This is a 9 year old CHILD...

        9 year old child? This is a young criminal and we all know what happens to young criminals - they grow old and are going to commit serious crimes. Before you realise she'll be raping your wife, robing your children, terrorising your country or even pirating some software. Lock her up!

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

        2. henrydddd

          Re: This is a 9 year old CHILD...

          You sound a lot like 'Weird Al'. He makes sense too

        3. beep54
          Headmaster

          Re: This is a 9 year old CHILD...

          " raping your wife, robing your children, terrorising your country or even pirating some software."

          Well, robing your children doesn't sound bad, esp. if they have no coats or jackets.

      2. Lars Silver badge
        Thumb Down

        Re: This is a 9 year old CHILD...

        Agree, but not with the "brutal, ham fisted handling by the police.". I don't think they like to do silly things like that.

        What worries me is that they apparently have to do it anyway. In Finland the team is normally a man and a woman, mostly very well behaving, always armed. Arms are used so seldom that I think there is a high risk of them shooting themselves in the leg if they had to use them.

        A rotten thing to have happened, not pleased.

    5. A J Stiles
      FAIL

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      You keep referring to copying as "theft".

      Theft has a very specific definition in law: it means, dishonestly taking someone else's property with intent permanently to deprive them of it.

      So, please tell me what the thing is that person A had before person B copied a piece of music, that they no longer have afterwards? Because if there is no deprivation, then there is no theft.

      1. kain preacher Silver badge

        Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

        Not were I live. Theft is defined as taking some thing that does not belong to you. So if I take your car but give after few days no theft happened right

        1. Richard 81

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          "So if I take your car but give after few days no theft happened right"

          But then we just come back to the old question: if I made an identical copy of your car without actually taking it away from you, is that theft?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

            But then we just come back to the old question: if I made an identical copy of your car without actually taking it away from you, is that theft?

            If it was a truely identical copy, you might well owe the car manufacturer a bunch of patent royalties!

            1. daveeff
              Joke

              Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

              >if I made an identical copy of your car

              Not to mention illegal registration or driving on false plates / lack of tax or forgery of tax disk

              and

              COPYRIGHT THEFT of the CD's in CD player!!!

              Dave

          2. dssf

            Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

            No. Not from the consumer, who may have no moral qualms. But, music and film warnings try to coerce or compel consumers ot library borrowers to act as IP integrity or security agents. The danger is it puts unreasonable burden upon people. What if a visitor or snooping landlord, maintenance worker, or ven computer repair tech swipes tagged and flagged music ad redistributes it. Woe/woes be unto the over trusting or to the naieve.

            So, the agents, manufacturers, and IP rights holders in the car and its parts, however, might take issue with the cloning of their car. Even states's motor vehicle and transportation safety agencies wold have a say from the safety perspective if you intend to operate said vehicle on public (and in some cases, private) roads.

            But, if someone stea, umm, makes unauthorized copies of my art or designs, it is probably not enough for me or my representatives to show possession. I in advance should build in first-owner watermarking to thwart or even encourage future value increase or to dissuade the first consumer from parting ways with it. First sales doctrine laws may allow downstream giving away of some classes of property without any escrow or tracking procedures required. But, if i mire my paper and digital art with certain codes (purchase, possession, ownership, upgrade, etc privileges), am i compelled to pass on discount an bulk purchase or upgrade benefits to someone with whom I have never entered a relationship or with whom I cannot verify a proper hand off (without copying) has been effected? Is possession supposed to pass as rightful ownershipmto my disadvantage? If so, then laws toward music sharing should be revisited and updated. But, in the USA and many other countries, possession may be 9/10 of the law. Unfortunately, that can apply to proper, unbroken chain of custody possession of family heirlooms all the way to illegal possession of (controlled or even non-controlled) narcotics, designer merchandise, and even photos of celebs.

            But, all i can hope for, at this point, is that code-embedding into my paper and digital art proves UNAUTHORIZED COPYING, not unauthorized possession. With music, such is possible, too, but again, people give stuff away, for nor profit motive, or swap property for non-criminal-intent reasons. And, this is where jackbooted warnings and blatantly commercial misuse of the FBI logo is applied as a bandaid for a tournequit or snow plow might be in an avalanche.

            What else I could hope for is building a good relationship to encourage repeat purchases and loyalty for as long as possible. It might be years, or it might be a one-off sale. But, whom I grant discounts, ugrade access, or extensions should be my call. And, none are deserved without a basis, the basis being legit first acquisition. It should be my right to OPTIONALLY, case-by-case decide if, when, and to what extent I vary the terms so long as meanspirited discrimination is not in the equation.

            Th music and movies industries need to evolve, or die a painful death, evolving meaning equitable coexistence, not boundless price greed and wielding of police badges by proxy.

          3. Ejit

            Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

            Correct if you take his car to have wee hurl aroond and intend to dump it later then you have no stolen it. Take and drive away is the short hand version from the Road Traffic Act. In Scotland it prior to the statues to deal with it, it would have been libelled at common law as Clandestine Possession.

            It you nick the motor with no intention of dumping it and strip it down into bits and flog them off, them yes it is theft. Make as many copies as you like, you may have committed a civil offence but you certainly have not stolen it.

        2. John Bailey
          Facepalm

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          No it isn't.

          Theft is still the act of taking something without the owner's permission with the INTENT to PERMANENTLY DEPRIVE them of the benefits of the item. Intent is a vital part of criminal law. Intent is the difference between negligence, manslaughter, and murder.

          Copyright infringment is not theft. Nor a criminal offence for that matter. Still wrong, but still not theft, no matter how blue your face gets, and how many times you say it.

          Infringement is what is being discussed here. So please skip the emotional daily mail crap. It isn't the law's fault infringement is not as emotive a word as stealing.

          And actually, you are accidentally correct. According to UK law at least, you described taking and driving away. Not theft of a car. Because the intent to deprive is next to impossible to prove.

          Take a car, and bring it back, not theft. Not legal either, so you will still be up in front of the beak, but not for theft.

          1. dssf

            Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

            Would you care to compare and contrast to line jumpers in a theme/amusement park, when, say, the line jumper actually breeches admissions, and calculatingly does so off peak, reasoning that no one in line is made to wait unduly long since the roller coaster is never more than half full at that time of day?

            What about fare evaders of buses? For example, in San Fransideshow, drivers are not fare enforcers. They generally have no desire to be mugged, threatened, or delay the bus more than a few minutes arguing with hostile evaders. So, they have become numbed, and in SF, probably up to 40% of the bus driv..., umm operators will just waggle or loll as people board (some because they never gave a damn, some because they were worn out by union politics, and some precisely because when they confronted or inconvenienced some fare evaders, they received a serious ass mugging), and only look at transfers and fare deposits if compelled to. Ultimately, this could be extrapolated to affect people in numerous states since at SOME point, federal money is part of SFMTA's operating budget. But, technically, out of state police cannot arrest or cite a driver out of jurisdiction just because an overzealous officer chooses to fly to SF to help resolve national budget woes.

            Personally, i would call it theft if someone took my car (if I still had one) whether in the middle of the night whilemi slep, or whether at gunpoint. Just because i cannot PROVE the taker will not bring it back does not mean it will not be crashed into something, hit by another vehicle, demolished in some way, or used in the commission of a crime which could falsely snd inconveniently implucate me, forcing me to clear my name of something in which i had no involvement. But, i am sure thst those verse in law will handily whip out or point to the legal or codified terminology.

        3. Pete B
          Stop

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          No - that's why the offence you're charged with is "Taking without the owner's consent".

        4. Marcelo Rodrigues
          FAIL

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          Right. Well, it depends.

          In Brazil:

          If (and only IF) You take my car without permission, and I find out WHILE You have it, then I can put the cops after You for stealing.

          BUT

          If (and only IF) You take my car, use it a few days and return it BEFORE I find out... then it is not theft. Yes, the law will want a few words with You - but not for stealing. I don't remember what was, but had something to do with "compensation due to wear and tear" and another little things.

          At least, was this way about 18 years ago - when I was helping a girlfriend, who was at law school. I remember this very point, because I raised this very question: "What would happen if..."

        5. lotus49
          Thumb Down

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          Which legal jurisdiction do you live in? Please quote the specific legislation that defines the act of theft in your jurisdiction.

          If what you say is actually true (which I do not believe) then you cannot live in the UK.

          The Theft Act 1968 s.1 says "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly."

        6. Andus McCoatover
          Windows

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          Happened to me once. Left my 850 cc Mini Traveller outside, in a nearby work carpark on a Friday morning. Left work, car gone.

          (They were easy to steal, screwdriver in the ignition switch - dash-mounted, no steering lock, push the slidy windows open, press starter button on the floor.)

          Reported, natch. Walked back to work on Monday, it was back, almost in the same place. Not only that, it had a full tank of petrol. I guess someone needed it in a hurry.

          I didn't pursue the case any further.

        7. Rob Hooley

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          Erm.. Hecne the offence of Taking Without Consent? AKA Twoc'ing I believe?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

        So, please tell me what the thing is that person A had before person B copied a piece of music, that they no longer have afterwards? Because if there is no deprivation, then there is no theft.

        Having been on the other side of people 'borrowing' IP before - a couple of times conversations have gone something like:

        Them: Can we use a photograph you've taken on our website?

        Me: If you pay for it.

        Them: We don't actually have a budget for photography.

        Me: Well, you can't use it then.

        only to find they've gone and used it anyway, I'd say the deprivation would be of the revenue that would have been due had the IP been acquired correctly.

        Having said that, I do think that the reaction of the CIAPC/police was rather heavy handed and that a more appropriate 'punishment' for a 9*-year old, assuming this hasn't been a regular occurence, would have been to have her attend online-safety and responsibility classes.

        * torrentfreak says the attempted download actually happened in 2011, so the kid was probably only 8 years old when it happened.

        1. Vic

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          > I'd say the deprivation would be of the revenue

          Yes, but that's a false dichotomy.

          No-one is claiming that copyright infringement is permissible.

          What we're saying is that it isn't Theft. Theft is a well-defined offence, and copyright is also a well-defined offence - but a different one.

          So whilst copyright infringement might mean you don't get some putative licensing fee, to describe it as theft simply demonstrates an ignorance of what that word means. That still doesn't make infringement right, but it doesn't make it Theft either.

          Vic.

          1. Arctic fox
            Thumb Up

            @Vic Re:"That still doesn't make infringement right, but it doesn't make it Theft either."

            Precisely, an understanding of what the words mean promotes understanding of what the "perpetrator" has done wrong and how society should act where an "offence" has been committed (I am not in this in any way supporting the way those tossers are enforcing current law or the way in which a nine-year old child has been treated, I am addressing a more general principle). A classic example are those who still log on to howl "convicted monopolist" on threads concerning MS. They do not understand the law (the charge of being a monopolist does not exist under US or UK law) and, even worse, they reveal that they do not understand what Redmond's (serious) offences were. If they do not understand what "anti-trust violation" means they contribute to confusion and shifting the focus away from what any example of "BigCorp" you may care to name are actually trying to get away with. In this area of life (as in many others) words are important as is understanding what they actually mean.

        2. A J Stiles

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          But surely you would have been just as much "deprived of that revenue" if they had not used your photo?

          By your logic, vegetarians are stealing from butchers.

      3. Nigel 11
        Headmaster

        Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

        She did take someone else's (intellectual) property. If it was done with provable intent to evade paying the license fee, then it was theft. Composers and performers, and perhaps even the horrible multinational companies to whom they sell their copyrights, do have a right to earn a living (and if composers couldn't sell their copyrights, how would they then earn a living? )

        Of course it wasn't theft on other grounds. Firstly, a 9-year-old can't reasonably be expected to understand such fine points of the law. What's the age of criminal responsibility in Finland? It's 10 in the UK. Secondly, how can someone know that what is delivered when one clicks a link is delivery of stolen goods? That's as daft as saying you're a thief if you un-knowingly buy a packet of crisps from a shop run by a man who nicked a big box of them from Tesco. It's the person who knowingly posted the link to stolen intellectual property that is the thief.

        1. Richard 12 Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          No, by definition "theft" is an act that is fundamentally IMPOSSIBLE to do to any form of intellectual property.

          IP can only be infringed.

          Words are important - you'd find it rather strange if somebody said you were flying a book or eating a bicycle. Saying that copyright infringement is theft makes about as much sense.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            @Richard 12

            "No, by definition "theft" is an act that is fundamentally IMPOSSIBLE to do to any form of intellectual property."

            Lemme fix that for ya!

            "No, by my definition "theft" is an act that is fundamentally IMPOSSIBLE to do to any form of intellectual property."

            What makes your definition so fucking special?

            1. DavCrav Silver badge

              Re: @Richard 12

              ""No, by definition "theft" is an act that is fundamentally IMPOSSIBLE to do to any form of intellectual property."

              Lemme fix that for ya!

              "No, by my definition "theft" is an act that is fundamentally IMPOSSIBLE to do to any form of intellectual property."

              What makes your definition so fucking special?"

              Probably because it coincides with that in dictionaries and the law?

        2. dssf

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          As a side matter, composers and performers need to learn to extricate themselves from the toll gate agencies that often fleece them.

          It is dizzyingly ironic that the very people purportedly being protected from musice misappropriatin or nonpayment are often the LAST to see a pittance unless they play gigs outside the industry, or unless they are truly and well represented, and very wealthy enough and popular enough.

          But, nowadays, we in Tier 1 or 2 nations are conditioned to expect shops and street vendors to have a tax certificate, operating permit, sales license, and health permit, among other documents that must be prominently displayed or shown upon demand bye any customer, not just relevant authority. So, while we cannot download a packet of crisps, the industey ARE inculcating (poorly or not) that there is no free ride, no burying of hrad in the sand. But, what we need for consumer insulation fro jackbooted enforcers is a revamped labeling and distribution system that clearly puts musicc into "save zones" and are off limits to the thugs over reaching their remit or bounds. There have been cases of businesses playing non represented, free, artist-produced and distributed music STILL being fined and dragged int a court.

          Also, i believe schools nowadays do some small bit in civics and citizenship responsibility. I am prett sure that just as soda and junk food and extortionist interest credit cards permeate high schools and universities (where allowed), music labels get their messages across in those environs.

          I will say that those who refuse to or cannot pay for music need to be careful to avoid being collared, but, really, hardly anyone intellectually can claim innocence. The burden upon us is to research the titles, document our acquisition means, and avoid torrents, honeypots, and the like. Otherwise, it is no less than dancing in a legal minefield. Oh, and parents can bw held liable for their kids' acts. So, i presume the licencing thugs in Finland will finsgle or somehow prove the father was lax, and they will probably get close to the $600, and insult him by getting the judge to pay court and police time costs. That is what they do to get their message across, as vile and destructive as it is.

          If only ALL artists would re form and reassemble under new distribution schemes, if only they negotiated smarter, and got their OWN weasel clauses that negate label shenanigans. But, they are starry-eyed, like drug addicts, looking for that pinnacle moment, consequences be damned.

          1. Sean Timarco Baggaley
            Stop

            IP creators need to extricate themselves from agencies that often fleece them.

            As opposed to the freeloaders who don't pay them a penny? At least record labels actually pay something. That's a lot better than sod all, which appears to be the only alternative proffered by many.

            It's also depressing how often people conflate the implementation of a concept with the concept itself.

            Yes, the media conglomerates can be very heavy-handed: they're old, crusty, conservative and uncomfortable with 'change'. This is normal. It's not nice, granted, but it's perfectly predictable behaviour. Most CEOs tend to be on the old side and, therefore, less interested in disrupting their nice, clean, venerable – and increasingly outdated – business models. These are people who still call in their secretaries to take dictation rather than messing about with those newfangled 'computer' things.

            What we're seeing is poor implementation of IP protection. Nobody is seeing this from an engineering or IP creator's perspective: the legislators are seeing it only through the lenses of those who have built empires leveraging IP to make money off it – the middle-men. I have nothing against middle-men per se, but they do need to offer genuine value-add services to justify themselves. Many are starting to come round to this, but a lot more of the old guard are still trying to milk the old business model for all its worth.

            Legislators tend to favour the wealthy with laws that help increase that wealth–they know what side their bread is buttered. Again: this is perfectly normal and utterly predictable. The original article barely counts as "news".

            If you don't like this, kick the buggers out. That's what elections are for.

            And don't whine that "they're all the same" either. You have just as much right to stand for election as any of them. That "somebody" you insist should "do something" to protect your high-minded principles? Look in a mirror: that somebody is YOU. It's your fight. Nut up and do it yourself. IT-literate politicians and lawmakers aren't going to magically appear out of thin air.

            But remember this: if the concept of Intellectual Property is such a bad idea, why do people keep gibbering endlessly on about FOSS on these forums? The various GPLs would be utterly worthless without IP legislation to back them up. And without those licenses, the entire "Software Libre" movement would collapse into irrelevance overnight.

        3. A J Stiles
          FAIL

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          "(and if composers couldn't sell their copyrights, how would they then earn a living? )"

          By doing something else besides composing!

          Look, I'd like it if Severn Trent paid me for what I flush into their sewers, but it ain't going to happen; so I went out and got a proper job instead.

          Now, the question which nobody has answered: What don't you have after the copy is made, that you did have before it was made?

        4. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          The only way to 'steal' someone's intellectual property would be if that IP were in a physical form, such as an original master recording of a performance, and you were to steal that. In other words, if you were to permanently deprive an artist of the rights to their work by tricking them into signing a contract which allowed you to rent copies of their work to third parites, whilst keeping all the money for yourself.

          Hey, that sounds like a good business model. I wonder if anyone has come up with it before?

      4. lotus49
        Thumb Up

        Re: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

        Anyone who downvoted this post (Orlowksi, I'm thinking of you) is simply wrong.

        Read the Theft Act and the definition is very clear right at the beginning of the Act and is pretty much exactly as this post says. Copying something cannot be theft in English Law.

    6. fung0

      Sideshow Bob: "Do they give out Nobel prizes for attempted chemistry?"

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    7. JohnG

      "They even openly admin they attempted to steal their work."

      "They" did not admit that at all. The father acknowledged that his 9 year old daughter had attempted to download a track and failed. He purchased the track for his daughter the next day. :-

      - downloading copyrighted material is not theft, in the same way that theft is not murder (different laws);

      - the track was not downloaded, so no copyright infringement occurred;

      - the age of criminal responsibility in Finland is 15. As the child is 9 years old, she could not be charged with any crime, even if her download had been successful;

      - collective punishment is forbidden by the ECHR - the family cannot be punished for the action of one member.

    8. David Cantrell

      Even if they did attempt to "steal" (I think you mean "illegally copy") the work, 9 is below the age of criminal responsibility throughout Scandiwegia.

  3. mrweekender
    Mushroom

    For copyright infringement? WTF is going on?

    In the words of Greenday...

    Sieg Heil to the president Gasman

    Bombs away is your punishment

    Pulverise the Eiffel towers

    Who criticise your government

    Bang bang goes the broken glass and

    Kill all the fags that don't agree

    Trials by fire, setting fire

    Is not a way that's meant for me

    Just cause (hey, hey, hey), just cause, because we're outlaws yeah!

    I beg to dream and differ from the hollow lies

    This is the dawning of the rest of our lives

    I beg to dream and differ from the hollow lies

    This is the dawning of the rest of our lives

    This is our lives on holiday

    1. Amorous Cowherder
      Pint

      Re: For copyright infringement? WTF is going on?

      My reply to this comes from one verse in a song by the more mature and stunningly brilliant Porcupine Tree's Steve Wilson, the track Sound of Muzak, a plea to stop debasing music as simply a commodity:

      "The music of rebellion makes you want to rage.

      But it's made by millionaires who are nearly twice your age."

      1. ravenviz
        Thumb Up

        Re: For copyright infringement? WTF is going on?

        Upvote for Steven Wilson!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: For copyright infringement? WTF is going on?

      Dead Kennedys did protest better.... Greenday ? Rebels without a clue.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: For copyright infringement? WTF is going on?

        "Dead Kennedys did protest better"

        Yes. But they would probably have been 'Too Drunk To (give a) F*ck' :)

        If you are under 40 then this may help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7TWLxCIgwE

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Angel

      Re: For copyright infringement? WTF is going on?

      Wow! Those lyrics are, like, really deeeeep, man!

      [Disclaimer: I actually like Green Day, but they ain't exactly Bob Dylan]

    4. Bernard M. Orwell

      Re: For copyright infringement? WTF is going on?

      OMG! You've just STOLEN those LYRICS! You THIEF! You have deprived EVERYONE of EVER hearing them again, and you've stolen thousands and thousands of pounds from Green Day (Sorry, their production company) and made them very sad indeed! You KNOCK-OFF NIGEL THIEVEING SCUMBAG!

      Expect a stiff letter demanding recompense from the Copyright Inquisition forthwith, and if you don't pay up without question immediately then you can expect armed police kicking your door down in the small hours of the morning to ruin your life and scare your children into corporate obedience!

  4. NoneSuch Silver badge
    Joke

    Cops that are willing to seize a Winnie the Pooh laptop have weapons with a hair tigger.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Coat

      Not so much pigs as piglets.

      Do their police vans sirens go "ee-ore, ee-ore"?

      While they're confiscating cartoon laptops, are bank robbers free to carry on 'Christopher Robbin'?

  5. ratfox Silver badge
    Devil

    demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

    …and sign a non-disclosure agreement promising to keep mum about the settlement.

    My, my, what a pretty business model they have. Do they even declare that money?

    1. dssf

      Re: demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

      There should be a mafia that shakes THEM down. Would it be illegal to PRAY thata these fucking piratical companies fall victim to mobsters? Demanding hundreds of dollars for an ATTEMPTED download, and THEN having the GALL assert a non-disclosure. Contemptible fracks. No matter WHAT country, those types are a contemptible spawn of humans. The whole point of monitoring should be to taint or flag the largest-draw songs, and then to go after recidevist redistributors of pirated songs, not onesy-twosey types

      Sigh...

      Everyone, make sure your Amarok app is not trying to talk to the wiki servers... I know of someone who had a firewall running, but noticed in an IDS/monitoring app that amarok was calling out even though the setttings to deny that were off. INT WTF?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

      I would hope that in the UK such an NDA would be enforceable as being grossly unfair conditions.

      It's pretty dark stuff.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

        you can bet that in the UK an NDA would be enforceable......

      2. M7S

        Re: demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

        Alsa no, in the UK lots pf public bodies, particularly in the NHS use gagging clauses as part of the conditions of settlement when silencing whistleblowers, despite orders from a secretary of state to cease. I'd expect there to be quite a few in other sectors, both state and private, but due to their very nature we'll never really know.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Mushroom

      Re: demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

      It's a pity that one cannot just beat these shit heads up.

      In the mix of "Hollywood Accounting" - losing 110 million on a movie that grossed 340 million, and cost 55 million to make...

      And the scammy "everything" - to do with anything about all of this....

      Buy a fucking piano and learn to read and write music and make some albums, get gigs and entertain real people in real venues.

      Most of the AFACT RIAAA etc., etc., etc., are just fucking lying crooks anyway.

      More dirty money in those "business models" than anything else that comes to mind.

    4. hplasm Silver badge
      Pirate

      Re: demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

      ...demanded that to avoid prosecution he fork over €600…

      Sound like PIRATES to me.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Threatening someone with prosecution unless you pay them money is called extortion where I come from.

    Expect more of it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Sounds like it to me, and is standard practice for these kind of people...

      She hadn't even managed to download the song! so no infringement had occurred...

      I hope they fight this in court and win damages! We need a precedent in the EU to use against the media barons... Even the artist in question is trying to distance herself from this..

      1. Bob Hoskins

        "We need a precedent in the EU to use against the media barons..."

        Exactly. It would be nice to see the EU as beneficial to people rather than corporations but don't hold your breath.

  7. FartingHippo
    Big Brother

    On the upside...

    This sort of thing will hopefully motivate millions of kids to:

    a. understand the importance of online privacy

    b. research and implement online anonymity.

    Which, in my view, would be a very, very good thing.

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: On the upside...

      Also learn to use guns. Lots of guns.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: On the upside...

        the torrent is mightier than the gun

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: On the upside...

      Hmm that's a healthy lesson to teach kids. "Sure kids it's OK to go out and knock off other people's creative work so long as you're careful and don't get caught!".

      Simply hiding your ilicit activities from them is not the answer, fighting back, getting the facts in the open and demanding what the hell these thugs think they're doing to citizens who stay on the right side of the law 99.9% of the time with the occasional slip-up. It simply needs a small slap on the wrist to correct ( say a nominal payment of £5 for loss of earnings and admin on the legal letters ), not a bloody huge legal "crowbar to the back of the skull" of the family of a 9 year old girl!

      1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

        Re: On the upside...

        > knock off other people's creative work

        Begging the question are we?

      2. FartingHippo
        Stop

        @AC 13:39

        I wasn't trying to suggest that piracy is good, but that learning that people can track what you're viewing, who you're talking to, and what you're saying is a very important lesson. This applies to ill thought out comments on Facebook or political criticism on another forum, both of which are real issues which can severely impact a young person's life and happiness.

        When people can search your house on the grounds you tried and failed to download £1-worth of music in Finland - a relatively liberal country - the implications for less enlightened regimes comes sharply into focus.

        For the record I think piracy is wrong. I also think that enabling something is a long, long way from doing it.

    3. GitMeMyShootinIrons
      FAIL

      Re: On the upside...

      And so ends the whole concept of childhood. Now children need to have lessons in the three R's and copyright law?

      What a narrow minded apologist. It starts with criminalising children with attempted copyright infringement. Where does it end?

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: On the upside...

      Online anonymity done properly either involves hacking networked equipment belonging to others or being very slow. Not suitable for downloads, as those hacked for this purpose risk getting blamed or brave souls who operate Tor exit nodes do. Better to stay on the right side of the law and keep Tor for political activism which really needs online anonymity.

      On this one, given that politician's careers depend upon this, much better that millions of kids learn how to use their votes once they are old enough to ensure candidates which have a clue on the copyright issue do better than those who have sold out to the maximalists in the hope of getting good old fashioned press coverage in exchange for a bad reputation online. I'm all in favour of bringing down the voting age to 16 - too many older voters in my generation are still mainly influenced by old media which belongs to the maximalist side.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: On the upside...

      Well I'll go ahead and invoke Godwin at this point. It was just this sort of indoctrination of a false morality and rules under fear of certain retribution in children that directly resulted in a mass backlash against the state and the rise of fascism all over Europe in the mid twentieth century. I say the Finns are setting themselves up for a fall if they persist in this.

      On a technical note: WTF? She didn't download it, so they weren't tracking the torrent presumably. piratebay.se is all SSL. How they do that then? Forged SSL certs? Aren't there robust laws against that?

      1. JetSetJim Silver badge
        Unhappy

        Re: On the upside...

        I said pretty much the exact same thing on page 1 of the comments and get 20 downvotes for it - go figure

  8. OpenIndiana
    WTF?

    Fine does not fit the crime

    If it had been a bar of chocolate that was pilfered would there have been a €600 fine?

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: Fine does not fit the crime

      But bars of chocolate are not HALLOWED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THAT MUST BE DEFENDED AT ALL COSTS. Lawyers' well-being depends on this! Think of the lawyers.

      1. The Alpha Klutz
        Trollface

        Re: Fine does not fit the crime

        There's a lot of intellectual property in a choccy bar, maybe they should start suing on the grounds of IP infringement lol. Not the actual chocolate bar manufacturer's, but a shady cabal of chocolate bar resellers who claim to act in the public interest and do everything in secret.

        1. Tom 35 Silver badge
          Trollface

          Re: Fine does not fit the crime

          You didn't buy that choccy bar, you only licensed it!

          Oh wait, I think that's beer...

      2. Ted Treen
        Pirate

        Re: Fine does not fit the crime

        @Destry All Monsters (13:36)

        I AM thinking of the lawyers.

        That's why your earlier advice to "...learn to use guns. Lots of guns..." made such perfect sense.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fine does not fit the crime

        I AM thinking of the lawyers, & the thoughts I'm thinking over ths involve cattle prods, rolls of carpet, spades & bags of quick lime :)

  9. Suricou Raven

    Why the NDA?

    I'd have thought the enforcers would want their successful prosecutions widely publicised, in order to deter others. So why try to keep it hushed-up? The NDA request would have been long before those responsible knew the age of the accused.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why the NDA?

      they don't want to make it public, they want to extort money from the people who cannot afford to fight, which is usually why they downloaded in the first place!

      1. dssf

        Re: Why the NDA?

        Probably the NDA is so they can selectively slam the shit out of some people and demand less from others, either at a whim or based on other metrics or demographics infor they pay to find out about the vict... Umm, target. This way, when they go to court, or even arbitration, knowing that the NDA is in force means they can get away with being inconsistent since there will be no public infor for people to crowd share.

        But, if the NDA were not respected, then the next vict.. Umm, target who happens to know can in turn strong arm the henchmen prior to trial or arbitration, or just take it to a judge, who migth demand they show the judge their income stream, proof of consistent application of fines/setttlement amounts, and so on. The NDA probably just helps them avoid having their own asses ripped to shreds in open courts that determine greed and vulturism.

        1. Chris_Maresca

          Re: Why the NDA?

          Of course, if it gets to court, you could file a discovery motion for all the NDAs.....

    2. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Devil

      Always make isolated attacks on weak and straggling herd animals

      It's far better that there be rumors that goons are bloodying the noses of random people and shake them down successfully if they so much as twitch, as to have a public spredsheet which shows that a bunch of greedy clowns are making away with a few quid in so-and-so-many cases and are getting told to fark off in so-and-so-many cases with no followup.

  10. John G Imrie

    At 9 years old

    is she even old enough to be held criminally responsible.

    1. GaryH

      Re: At 9 years old

      If they use the same approach as here, it's her parents (or the account holder of the broadband connection) who will be held responsible, not her personally.

      1. Carl

        Re: At 9 years old

        Only if the plaintiff can show that the parents were negligent and did not exercise reasonable control over the child. The court will likely find that in this era it is unreasonable to expect parents to sit and watch a kid surfing the internet every hour of every day.

        The court will also have a duty to wider society. It is not in society's best interest to lock up people for downloading tunes any more than it was in my day when we all used to tape the top 40 off the radio.

        On the other hand, the kid is systematically downloading songs and making a CD for sale to her friends, than thats clearly another matter. It is this kind of activity that the law is in place to prevent.

  11. Babbit55
    WTF?

    Thought Crime

    So we are now saying that for thinking about committing a crime people have to pay large amounts of money!?!?! that is a very scary prospect and I hope they appeal on the European Human rights, lets face it they stopped a known radical from being deported surely they will stop a little girl being done for thought crimes

  12. Haku
    FAIL

    Flabbergasted

    I...hey...whu....th....

  13. The Alpha Klutz
    Happy

    why does this happen globally in all countries at ounce

    because of the global dictatorship.

    1. disgruntled yank Silver badge

      Re: why does this happen globally in all countries at ounce

      What's Oz got to do with it?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What's Oz got to do with it?

        If anything they are the most guilty party for their failure to intervene.

  14. frank ly

    Crime often occurs in clusters

    Did they also check to ensure that her Winne-The-Pooh laptop had proper licensing agreements from the estate of A.A. Milne and/or the Disney corporation? It would have been a real feather in their cap if they'd found any infringement there.

    1. James Micallef Silver badge
      Happy

      Re: Crime often occurs in clusters

      And also, did she have any Hunny in her cupboard that she might have stolen from poor Pooh?

      Will no-one think of the bears?

  15. Gordon861

    The Offence?

    I thought the (criminal?) offence related to copyright infringement was the act of making a copy available?

    If so the fact that she failed to download the song means there was no case to answer in the first place.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The Offence?

      Torrents...you start giving out the smallest chunk of data you have downloaded to anyone else who wants it.

      So if you download a torrent that the original uploader never uploaded more than 99% of, you are uploading that 99% of "failed download" to everyone else.

      To these legal people, sharing parts of the content is enough to claim infringment.

      1. Mark Leaver
        FAIL

        Re: The Offence?

        So she clicks on a torrent to download a copy of the song... and doesnt have a bit torrent client on her Pooh laptop...

        Is she still sharing out 99% of the "failed download" with anyone else?

        I am willing to bet that she didnt have a copy of any bit torrent client and therefore was physically unable to share the torrent.

        If she is unable to share anything, then it was an attempt to download that failed and therefore is not an infringement.

  16. g e
    Childcatcher

    Always worth reiterating in these cases...

    Buy Second Hand. Starve them of revenue.

    1. ravenviz
      Facepalm

      Re: Always worth reiterating in these cases...

      No, no, no, buy directly from the artist!

      1. g e

        Re: Always worth reiterating in these cases...

        Well, yeah, but Cubby Brocoli's family won't personally sell me a Bond Box set for Xmas...

        ... will they?

        I did buy How To Destroy Angels' latest 'An Omen' release direct from the HTDA site on principle.

        1. g e
          Holmes

          P.S.

          What clown would ever downvote the suggestion that an artist is paid solely and directly for their own work?

          Maybe the MAFIAA are trolling El Reg.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Always worth reiterating in these cases...

        No, no, no, steal directly from the artist!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Always worth reiterating in these cases...

          fuckin take their instruments lol lets see them play a song then

  17. Old Painless
    Terminator

    ..on the plus side...

    ..being a Finnish copper looks pretty comfy, as it turns out they LITERALLY HAVE FUCK ALL BETTER TO DO THAN SCARE THE SHIT OUT OF CHILDREN.

    Fair dos to you mates, you must have felt really proud of yourselves....give yourselves a beer...

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Criminal Resposibility

    I am pretty sure that in Finland the Age of Crimial Responsiility is 15 so I don't see how this could happen. Presumably if the girl refused to give up the "laptop of very little MIPS" they couldn't have arrested her. Perhaps Finnish law transfers the Criminal Reponsibiity to the parent under some circumstances? Any Finns on the forums?

    1. Pingviini
      Black Helicopters

      Re: Criminal Resposibility

      Yes, I'm a Finn, and the age is 15 years. And also the funds for the police are cut down year by year to fight REAL crime (like MC gangs, dirty contractors on building business etc.). As fas as I know, the responsibility is not transferred to parents (I asked a layer couple years ago when then 3y son hit neighbour car with his bike, and I was asked for money).

      But as a taxpayer it warms my heart to see that they still has resources to send TWO non uniforms to mission important like this...http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/black_helicopters_32.png

  19. tkioz
    FAIL

    Please tell me this is a freaking joke!?

    Do the police seriously have nothing better to do then chase up copyright claims?

    What the hell is going on in the western world?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Sad

      "Do the police seriously have nothing better to do then chase up copyright claims?"

      She was using downloading using a torrent. Unfortunately this means that she was also uploading at the same time.

      The uploading (distribution) turns it from a civil offence to a criminal offence.

      When Santa brings her a new laptop perhaps he'll be kind enough to also give her a usenet account (with SSL access) and a copy of "Proxies for Kids".

      1. Captain Underpants

        Re: Sad

        @AC 14:08

        Nope.

        She was attempting to download using a torrent.

        1) The fact that it's described as an attempt which was followed up by buying it legitimately the next day says it failed, and

        2) Until they've released some quite detailed logs showing otherwise, there's no proof she uploaded anything. (Who's to say her torrent client wasn't configured for leech mode - ie downloads will be slow as hell but the uploading aspect is effectively negiligible?)

        Either we're missing details from the story here or Finland has a keen interest in joining the Top Three in the Big Book Of Bastards category for Disproportionate Responses, Subsection: Copyright Infringement.

        1. foo_bar_baz

          @attempt

          The police were doing what the law requires them to. The law says attempted infringement is also punishable. See Lex Karpela (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_Karpela) - thanks to the EU directive, in turn probably lobbied into effect by Hollywood and the global music industry.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_Karpela

          If someone is to blame, it's the industry associations in Finland, Europe and worldwide.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Unfortunately this means that she was also uploading at the same time.

        Not if the download failed, which it did, as reported.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Sad

        When Santa brings her a new laptop perhaps he'll be kind enough to also give her a usenet account (with SSL access) and a copy of "Proxies for Kids".

        No need for the SSL, do you honestly believe that ISPs spy on you still. Maybe you want a tinfoil hat for christmas!

      4. Rob
        FAIL

        Re: Sad

        As stated in the article, she was searching for the song and stumbling across the Pirate Bay whilst using her Pooh laptop, she probably doesn't have a clue what Bittorrent is or even what a bittorrent client is, hence the failure to get a copy of the tune.

        There are some clues which help paint a picture here, she was 9yrs old with a Winnie the Pooh Laptop and was downloading some pop artist popular with young girls, this doesn't smack of a serial copyright infringing pirate (although in this day an age all of that could be completely wrong).

        Please let there be an international out pour of disgust at the Finnish Police and their copyright mafia.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Sad

          So Google linked to copyright-infringing material?

          Type in name of TV show into Google, click 'videos' or 'Youtube', and maybe "20 minutes +" if needs be.

      5. Vic

        Re: Sad

        > The uploading (distribution) turns it from a civil offence to a criminal offence.

        Does anyone have a link to a decent translatoin of Finnish copyright law?

        Because the above is most certainly untrue in the UK...

        Vic.

  20. mhenriday
    Thumb Down

    For my part, I'm surprised that

    the Finnish police dared to intervene personally in this parlous situation, instead of sending in the Reg's «executive editor». That would no doubt have scared the poor girl so severely that she'd never dare even think of «illegally» downloading a music file again....

    Henri

  21. Stratman

    Google's part in all this?

    Isn't linking to torrent sites which host copyright material and make it available for download also an offence?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Google's part in all this?

      Anti-Pirate Bully Boy say to himself :

      "Who am I going to pick on today? A little girl, or a 500lb gorilla?"

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Condom

    She should have been wearing a condom. It's Sweden...

    1. dogged
      FAIL

      Re: Condom

      Finland != Sweden.

      American detected.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Condom

        I can sometime forget which is which, so tend to use the term "Scandinavia" to cover a multitude of sins and designer consumer items.

        1. John Doe 12
          FAIL

          Re: Condom

          FAIL version 2.0!! Finland != Scandinavia !!!

        2. stanimir
          FAIL

          Re: Condom in Scandinavia

          And now this is the absolute fail - Finland is NOT a part of Scandinavia even though Swedish is an official language there (along w/ Finnish, ofc).

      2. ravenviz
        Happy

        Re: Condom

        Finland, Finland, Finland

        The country where I want to be

        Pony trekking or camping, Or just watching TV.

        Finland, Finland, Finland. It's the country for me.

        /montypython

  23. TrishaD

    Jacques Offenbach

    We're public guardians bold yet wary

    And of ourselves we take good care

    To risk our precious lives we're chary

    When danger threatens we're not there

    But when we see a helpless woman

    Or little boys who do no harm…

    We run them in, we run them in

    We run them in, we run them in

    To show them we're the beaux gendarmes

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Great police work

    if only they were that efficient at cuffing, rapists, burglars, muggers and yobs.

  25. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  26. Alistair Silver badge
    Flame

    Personally I find the NDA the most obnoxious part of this

    a) that the young lass hit some site where one could conceivably download offending material is not being questioned - and, being 9 years old and a fan of a pop artist will tend to lead young ones down odd paths.

    b) I would guess that the offence would (in any case) be booked against the subscriber of the broadband account, thus her parent(s)/guardian(s). I will for the purposes of the argument ONLY moot the fact that any offence actually was committed. ( the law typically being an ass, its possible that the attempt itself is an offence. )

    c) the fee is ridiculous. But that is to be expected - the folks running this scam want it to be prohibitive to get caught.

    d) - The NDA is what revolts me the most. It takes the penalty (the fine) from being a fine to being extortion. Period. "We caught you doing this, cough up this money and NEVER tell anyone about this."

    If they are going to permit this **AND** use local law enforcement to do so, WE as citizens (where ever this occurs ) should damned well KNOW that our law enforcement tax dollars are going to support the corporate flunky agencies. Here's my question.

    What portion of the COST of law enforcement participation in this corporate income enhancement is being funded by the corporate entity that is getting paid?

  27. moiety

    All the authorities involved should be up on extortion charges. And for the police involved; there's probably a wide range of corruption charges to play with.

    Despicable.

  28. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What a joke

    If you are naive enough to believe a nine year old isn't using drugs, learning sex or pirating, you must live under a rock.

    The police did their job, nothing more or less. Copyright holders are forced by law to act on piracy so hating them is ignorant and futile. Sooner or later those who believe they are above the law are going to get a knock on the door and the judicial system is going to make it very clear to them that they are not above the law and that they will be held acountable for their crimes.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What a joke

      0/10

      Must Troll harder

    2. John G Imrie

      Re: What a joke

      f you are naive enough to believe a music executive isn't using drugs, learning sex or pirating, you must live under a rock.

      The police did their job, nothing more or less. Copyright holders are forced by law to act on piracy so hating them is ignorant and futile. Sooner or later those who believe they are above the law are going to get a knock on the door and the judicial system is going to make it very clear to them that they are not above the law and that they will be held accountable for their crimes

    3. heyrick Silver badge

      Re: What a joke

      "If you are naive enough to believe a nine year old isn't using drugs, learning sex or pirating, you must live under a rock."

      I live in a house made of rocks, does that count?

      In some places, children are still children and aren't getting doped up, banged up (either sense of the phrase), or engaging in wholescale wilful piracy (I don't count listening to copyright material on YouTube etc as I reckon the fine points of copyright infringement would probably be lost on the under-10s). I wouldn't consider myself naïve, I just consider myself lucky I don't live wherever it is that you live...

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What a joke

      You are Matt Bryant and I claim my prize.

  29. chiller

    €600 for failed attempted download by a 9 year old?

    Next stop, the 'Thought Police'

  30. NomNomNom

    The father should sue this "Chisu" character on his daughters behalf.

    Think of the publicity of being sued by a 9 year old...

    If you want to hit the enforcers hit the people they are supposedly working for.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Chisu is just the artist...

      Who wants nothing to do with this whole sorry mess.

      Read the article. Read the source.

  31. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Err...

    I notice that no-one has bothered to think that this story is complete balls?

    It's reported from torrent freak, who are hardly an impartial source and basic common sense (what's the age of criminal responsibility in Finland?) suggests it's to be taken with a pinch of salt. However everyone seems to be believing that the nasty police came round to the girl's house and arrested her, but that they didn't even speak to her parents or, more likely, arrest them, what with the broadband and laptop being in their name.

    Try a tiny little bit of critical thinking, for pity's sake.

    1. RAMChYLD
      Black Helicopters

      Re: Err...

      That's because the nasty police has been known to do things like this before?

      1. RAMChYLD
        Unhappy

        Re: Err...

        In any case tho, after reading this, I've lost all faith in this world and don't want to live on this planet anymore.

    2. Timo Karjalainen
      Stop

      Re: Err...

      Sadly the story is true. It is all over all Finnish news media, with interviews from named police personnel involved with the case. You'd think they would deny it happened if it wasn't true, eh?

      Torrentfreak has also reported on TPB-related news from Finland in the past. I've read a few of their stories and they have been remarkably thorough and well written.

      1. Joerg
        Thumb Down

        Re: Err...

        So just because the media spreads something on the 'net you think that it must be the absolute truth,uh?

        1. Captain Underpants
          Thumb Down

          Re: Err...

          Well, when it gets to the point where state broadcaster's news services are reporting on it, it's reasonable to assume that either:

          a) there's some sort of factual basis for the story, or

          b) someone at said broadcaster will soon be making an embarassed apology for publishing something without doing any fact-checking.

          I notice you're not actually giving any compelling evidence against the story being true, other than your own personal "smells like bollocks" sense, which is hardly an objective metric.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Err...

      http://yle.fi/uutiset/laittomasta_latauksesta_mittava_sotku/6385471

      YLE is is Finland's national public-broadcasting company.

      (and Google Translate is your friend, as the case might be.)

  32. Scott Pedigo
    Pirate

    The Evidence Room

    So from now until forever, there is going to be a brown box in the evidence room of the Finnish police station with a Pooh laptop in it? I can see it now.... years in the future, the Finnish "Cold Case" squad cracks open the box and finds the laptop. On it, are pictures of a 9 year-old girl. "What!" they exclaim, "this must be an unsolved child pornography case!" After a long investigation, to their shock and dismay, they find that the laptop contains the fingerprints of a retired Finnish policeman. He is charged and arrested for possession and distribution of child porn, thrown into the slammer, where he becomes the unwilling wife of the tossed salad man, and eventually dies in prison of AIDS."

    </end of daydream>

    1. Mectron

      Re: The Evidence Room

      time for FINISH revolution.

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    You see kids...

    ...*this* is one reason that twin tape decks and CD burners had their advantages...

  34. Will Godfrey Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    Today's lesson kiddies...

    is that you are going to be shafted for something you haven't done, so you might as well go ahead and do it anyway.

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Child exploitation

    Whomever released this story to the media is exploiting this child to promote their negative views on enforcement of copyright laws. They should know by now that it's futile as all civilized countries enforce copyright laws so it's time to get real. Feel free to pirate but expect to be held accountable for your actions as this girl and her parents are being held accountable for their actions.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Child exploitation

      *What* actions?

      Did you read the sources at all?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Child exploitation

      Good grief.

      How can someone with so little technical knowledge be reading The Reg? They won't be catching me any time soon, I can tell you that.

  36. jonfr
    Holmes

    EU law

    Copyright law in EU are based on the EU copyright directive. This copyright directive was subject to heavy lobbying (bribes) by the music and movie industry. It holds manner of all stupid restrictions on breaking encryption etc.

    I am not even sure it holds up to EU treaties. But nobody has so far put it to the test in ECJ that handle this type of matters inside EU. So this EU copyright directive goes on unchallenged in EU.

    However. Many countries have chosen to implement it as laws. But ignore action part of it. Sadly. That country is not Finland. How did go crazy in enforcing this directive to the letter and way be on it in reality. Germany has also gone way past this directive mandate in terms of enforcing this law. That are based to service the MPAA and RIAA needs. Not the artist them self. How often get paid less and late due to the music companies willingness to cheat them out when and where they can do so.

    More on this in links below.

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32001L0029:EN:HTML

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Directive

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060428/036245.shtml

    http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2012/120718brein

  37. JMB

    It sounds reminiscent of the solicitors in the UK who were sending out false accusations of illegal downloading and offering to drop proceedings on payment of a large "administration" fee. At least the UK police did not seem to get involved in the scam and I don't think any cases ever went to court because they feared the precedent of a losing a case.

    1. Carl
      Unhappy

      Civil Law / Criminal Law

      Understand your rights.

      I am not a lawyer, but having seen off some "minor legal claims" in my time, my observations are here:

      If its a matter of a few hundred pounds/dollars,

      Any solicitor's latter demanding anything really isnt worth the paper its printed on.

      They have to take you to small claims court and get a judgment compelling you to pay up.

      Small claims court is there for such matters and its expensive for them (in time and fees) to get you there. Once there, they have to show your are liable for some tort or other (which is tricky). You will not have to pay their costs. Just yours. Nobody who knows their rights falls for it.

      So these scumbags just play a numbers game. They figure if they send out 100 letters and just one person falls for it, then they have broken even. Everything else is gravy. Its a shakedown on a grand scale.

      All that said, there are some very disturbing elements to this.

      The first is how the MPAA et al are slowly succeeding in co-opting the machinery of the state to protect intellectual property rights. The police exist to control activities that, if left unchecked, would threaten the security of our society. Things like murder, rape, arson, GBH, robbery etc.

      Leaving aside the debate about rights of artists to make a living, the police are NOT there to ensure record companies and artists get paid, any more than they are there to help me if I sell my services to a company that doesn't pay up.

      The second is the idea that a solicitor can use the threat of police action if payment isnt forthcoming. If a crime has been committed, a citizen has a duty to report it to police because its a criminal matter. If a tort has been committed the citizen has recourse to civil court for relief.

      Whenever the citizen demands payment in order to NOT go to the police, that's blackmail pure and simple - a far more serious offence than downloading content.

      This is why we have a separation of civil and criminal law. The commingling of the two in this case is deeply, deeply troubling. "We think you downloaded something, pay us $$$ or the police will raid your home"? What the F**K is that all about.

      1. Vic

        Re: Civil Law / Criminal Law

        > Small claims court is there for such matters and its expensive for them (in time and fees) to get you there.

        It's not *that* expensive. You can fill out the claim online in a maatter of moments. There is a fee to be paid, but that is added to the judgement should the plaintiff prevail.

        There is some expense in actually going to court - as always, it is better not to if possible.

        > Once there, they have to show your are liable for some tort or other (which is tricky).

        I disagree. If there is any case whatsoever, it's easy enough to show that a debt is owing. Small Claims Court Judges are sharp cookies, and they are predominantly interested in settling the issue - they expect those appearing in front of them to be untrained in the Law, and IME are especially accomodating. They don't get sidetracked, they just get on with working out who owes what to whom, and issuing a judgement accordingly.

        > You will not have to pay their costs. Just yours

        That's not true. In the event of a loss, the defendant is liable for the debt claimed (or part of it, should the judge award a partial), and for the court fees that the plaintiff has already paid. Additionally, the winning side can ask for - and might be awarded[1] - costs for appearing in court. These latter costs are currently capped at the princely sum of £50 per day.

        > Nobody who knows their rights falls for it.

        That depends on whether or not the plaintiff is just trying it on. Every time I have started Small Claims proceedings, the defendant has assumed exactly that. Each of them has later been surprised. I've only actually had to apply for a judgement on one occasion - most people settle once they realise you're serious. A CCJ against a trading company can really make a mess of things...

        Vic.

        [1] I was awarded costs the last time I went to court. And I'd only gone in as a witness for the defendant. He and I got £100 each for the two days we'd spent in court. Not exactly a great rate of earnings, but we did put an end to the efforts of the lying cheating git that filed the case. Which was nice.

  38. Tringle
    FAIL

    Age of Criminal Responsibility?

    Isn't she too young to be held responsible?

    Whatever, I will never buy anything from idiotTunes, and in the light of this fascism I shall not bother buying any more so called music. Except bargain bin CDs from time to time maybe.

    I think that copyright as is is well past its sell by date. I was a signed musician at one time - the record company and management took all of the money from the sale of recordings, I only ever got paid for live performances - and that is he way it should be - the recordings are advertising, no more, and the sooner the recording industry disappears in its current form the better for the world at large.

    1. lotus49

      Re: Age of Criminal Responsibility?

      My knowledge of Finnish Law is pretty limited but if this were in the UK then yes she would be below the age of ciminal responsibility. However, what this means is that she could not be convicted. It doesn't mean that the police wouldn't or couldn't investigate the alleged crime.

  39. Andus McCoatover
    Windows

    It's the Non-disclosure agreement that's the most worying

    It's like the authorities have something they want to hide. Their shame, perhaps?

    1. jon 72

      Re: It's the Non-disclosure agreement that's the most worying

      Yes disturbing indeed, whatever happened to Innocent until proven guilty?

  40. DN4

    Maybe where you live you hang at dawn everyone you don't like. Dunno.

    Here, in the civilised world, theft and unauthorised use of other's properties are two different crimes. Both are crimes only if the thing is of non-negligible value, etc. Of course, so called intellectual property has its own laws. And, of course, downloading for personal use is legal here.

  41. Andy Fletcher

    Maybe it's just me...

    ...the case stinks, but I do wonder whether unrestricted internet access is healthy for a nine year old child in the first place.

  42. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    You've been duped again

    The whole point of this story is to generate ire for copyright enforcement, which is wasted energy as the laws are not wrong and the police were just doing their job. Cybercrime is much more of a social problem than a lot of people want to accept.

    This situation could have been totally avoided. Yes the girl pirated and she probably knew she was pirating. Yes her father is a moron for not teaching her better and for not responding to the infringment notice he received. This should be a valuable lesson for both of them. Using the child to create negative sentiment toward copyright laws or the authorities who enforce copyright laws, is futile.

    1. Joerg
      Facepalm

      Re: You've been duped again

      "Cybercrime" and "piracy" are business managers bulls. The industry loves this, spins this and controls this all over the world.

      They could shut down every single torrent site and sharing site in 24/48 hours all over the world if they really want to.

      They never do that. With no controlled "piracy" they know hardware sales would drop and they would lose money. It's the industry itself that releases 90% of "pirated" copies on the 'net, as well as hacks, cracks and custom roms for smartphones and consoles.

      They want people to believe that little computer wiz kids are doing all of that, and genius university students and other bulls. Unfortunately they succeeded into putting these false silly myths in the minds of worldwide population. The truth is far different.

    2. fnj
      Devil

      Re: You've been duped again

      AC is just being a good nazi as well as a twit. Had he posted from an actual account I would not engage in ad hominem. As it is he deserves it.

  43. Johan Bastiaansen
    Facepalm

    GESTAPO GESTAPO

    The police officer was only doing as he was told. As was his granddad in the gestapo.

    This right to bear arms is becoming more and more attractive.

    1. heyrick Silver badge

      Re: GESTAPO GESTAPO

      "This right to bear arms is becoming more and more attractive."

      And whom would you shoot at? My understanding of the article is that the bastards that need to taste the bitterness of lead sent the police to go do their dirty work, who according to the "it might have been better if you'd paid" comment appear to have been more than happy to be complicit in this matter. Shooting at them is like taking down the Pawns and ignoring the King, not a terribly useful strategy. Plus, they probably shoot back, so for the sake of a nine-year-old's failed attempt to download a song (that was subsequently legally purchased), there'll be a bunch of dead or seriously injured people, maybe one of them looking at a lot of prison time, so potentially either way the girl loses her father. Of course, this is assuming he actually starts blowing away the cops. He might just want a big gun so he can brandish it and go "grrr", at which point the police must surely assume he is a justifiable threat and unholster their own weapons. If he is dumb enough to do anything other than put the gun down, he risks being shot. He will probably be arrested. In this less gory scenario, the girl loses her father. I'm sure there are some who might consider this just results for piracy...

      Are you still certain the right to bear arms is attractive? I can't see it does anything other than make a shitty situation worse.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: GESTAPO GESTAPO

        I used to play chess. You take their pawns first, then the king.

      2. Johan Bastiaansen
        FAIL

        Re: GESTAPO GESTAPO

        The police escalated the situation. Do you think they would have if there was a real risk that these people were armed? Bureaucrats are never heroes.

        Happiness is a warm gun.

    2. Captain TickTock
      Coat

      Re: GESTAPO GESTAPO

      "Knock Knock!"

      "Who's there?"

      "Gestapo!"

      "Gestapo who?"

      "WE ask ze questions!"

      The right to arm bears would make things more interesting...

  44. Carl

    Blackmail.

    "It would have been easier for all concerned if you had paid the compensation,"

    the police advised the girl's father, according to TorrentFreak.

    This is blackmail. Pure and simple.

  45. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    HAHAHAHA

    I hope the cops fucking kicked their door off as well, family's like this should go straight to the GAS CAMPS

  46. Cheshire Cat
    Black Helicopters

    The most disturbing part

    The most disturbing part is not so much the demands for E600 for a failed download, as their demands for agreement to secrecy. After all, if they had thought their actions were honourable, they'd have no need for this.

    I wonder how many people cave in to the threats?

  47. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The new online shopping?

    1. Pirate a song

    2. Answer jackboot on front door

    3. Pay fine

    4. Enjoy

    5. Profit (lawyers etc)

  48. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh look, another police state

    1) This is really bad, if it were my child i'd sue the whole bunch of bullies involved for inflicting unnecessary emotional distress on a minor.

    2) The child, her immediate family and everyone they know will probably think the forces involved are evil and trust them less than they used to.

    3) The so-called pop star sounds like a shithead, then again the top 2% don't care about the people who actually make the world go round and line their bulging pockets with artificially inflated prices & taxes

    4) I'm really happy with my encrypted VPN supplier, only $9 a month to stop the corrupt government spying on me - which they will try eventually

  49. Magnus_Pym

    They should offer to pay...

    ... but only directly to the head of the organisation making the demands, only at that front door of that persons home address and only in front of live steaming free to view video. Oh and the artist should also be there as they are complicit by accepting money from these corrupt practises.

  50. Lars Silver badge
    FAIL

    All charges dropped

    But still how come one has the feeling that any mugging or worse has less importance than a stupid thing like this, and how should children (and others) know when, among all the OK stuff, you are allowed and pushed to download there is suddenly something causing your death. Recently a teenager is supposed to pay 400.000 Euros for something similar. Absolute madness.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019