-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
EliteTorrents Shut Down ... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter KeypadSDM
- Start date
SashatheMan
StudyforEver
nice theory , but NO!! companies dont make viruses and make patches for them.winicat said:
SashatheMan
StudyforEver
its a victimless crime . and perfect at that. 5 people out of hundreds of million who pirate is so little that it becomes the perfect crime. mahahha . anyway back to downloading seeya lata sukazt-i-m-m-y said:
HellVeN
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 532
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2005
My arrogance is not as disturbing as your ignorance.t-i-m-m-y said:
1. I live in a country called Australia, not this "United States" you speak off.
2. This tiny figure you speak of is insignificant compared the masses of people who download illegal files and share videos.
Perfect crime my friend.
Last edited:
True. We live in Australia. But that doesn't mean they'll won't come chasing after us eventually. Right now, the focus seems to be on the US.
Even countries like Sweden that were previously easy to hide in have changing laws that will make it harder to run. I recall a few years ago, some guy got busted downloading Goldmember. (back in the days b4 BT)
Sure, its a tiny figure, but who knows?
Regardless of whether or not we care that Lucas is making heaps of money, its still a crime, copyright infringement
Even countries like Sweden that were previously easy to hide in have changing laws that will make it harder to run. I recall a few years ago, some guy got busted downloading Goldmember. (back in the days b4 BT)
Sure, its a tiny figure, but who knows?
Regardless of whether or not we care that Lucas is making heaps of money, its still a crime, copyright infringement
HellVeN
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 532
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2005
Do you honestly believe that they will catch us?
I for one think not.
First of all, as you rightly said, it will be a while before they start suing people here. But by then I am sure that file sharing technology will have become even more anonymous and decentralised. Also I can't see why the government or any anti-piracy organisation would go through all the trouble of suing individual users who simply download files. If they'd go for anyone, it's be the big distributors and webmasters of illegal file-sharing sites. Which I am neither.
Thirdly even if they "somehow" found out that I was sharing a few dozen movies and some mp3's (which is more than improbable), what tells you that I couldn't simply:
- Format a couple of times
- Destroy the harddrive
- Encript the harddrive
- Hide the harddrive
Etc?
Without hard phisical evidence I doubt that they'd have a case. Let alone take me to court for aledgelly sharing a couple of files LOL. What a joke.
So It is my opinion that file sharing is very much safe and will continue to be for a very long time. And I'm very much happy about that.
I for one think not.
First of all, as you rightly said, it will be a while before they start suing people here. But by then I am sure that file sharing technology will have become even more anonymous and decentralised. Also I can't see why the government or any anti-piracy organisation would go through all the trouble of suing individual users who simply download files. If they'd go for anyone, it's be the big distributors and webmasters of illegal file-sharing sites. Which I am neither.
Thirdly even if they "somehow" found out that I was sharing a few dozen movies and some mp3's (which is more than improbable), what tells you that I couldn't simply:
- Format a couple of times
- Destroy the harddrive
- Encript the harddrive
- Hide the harddrive
Etc?
Without hard phisical evidence I doubt that they'd have a case. Let alone take me to court for aledgelly sharing a couple of files LOL. What a joke.
So It is my opinion that file sharing is very much safe and will continue to be for a very long time. And I'm very much happy about that.
"For Australian file sharers and other citizens, the sky might as well be falling – what was once a relatively harmless, at the very least civil matter has now resulted in the extradition of an Australian citizen to the American empire. P2P users beware.
The United States has, on appeal, won the right to extradite Hew Raymond Griffiths to the U.S. on charges of copyright infringement and conspiracy to commit software piracy. The case originally stems from raids on the pirate group Drink or Die in December 2001. Known as DOD for short, Drink or Die was a “utils” group (read: a software piracy group dedicated to cracking and distributing software applications online) that was, at the time, already in decline, according to published media reports quoting individuals in the know. Griffiths was, according to the Americans, the group’s leader, although no evidence to this end has yet been seen.
Griffiths, if convicted in America, faces up to 10 years in prison. It’s worth pointing out that in order to bolster its chances for extradition, the United States Department of Justice essentially charged Griffiths twice for the same crime under two different laws – past charges against members of the so-called “warez scene” heralded maximum possible sentences of five years.
However, the U.S. had to paint the picture of a serious career criminal in order to make an example of an unemployed 40-something Australian who did not profit from his crimes, and who publicly spoke out against anyone illegally profiting from the work of another.
What they’d rather not have the public think of is the mockery of global law and sovereignty this case makes. After US senators have taken millions of dollars in campaign contributions from the software and media industries, the DOJ needs to make a statement – the industries in question want results for their money. It’s a scared-straight program that works in conjunction with the industry-wide attempt to quash user rights by criminalizing formerly legal actions – i.e. the right to back up something you’ve legally bought.
No one questions the legality of warez – not since it was made illegal under 1997’s No Electronic Theft Act – but there are plenty of questions as to the morality of the “crime”, and the reasons behind America’s actions. For example, those convicted of selling pirated software have generally received less jail time than those who give it away for free – yet in almost any other crime, profit-based motivation is cause for a harsher sentence. This seems to be direct evidence of the software industry’s fingerprints on the DOJ.
Add to this statements by several people involved in the case that the original informant in the group, James Cudney, who posed as a DOD member but worked for US Customs in breaking up Drink or Die, was actively involved in fraud and other illegal activities while working for the Customs Agency – with the agency’s knowledge.
There is no indication as to when Griffiths will actually set foot on American soil, but one has to think that it will be soon, as the DOJ will attempt to cash in on the momentum of this decision and railroad him in a quick sham trial. After all, what chance does a foreign citizen have against the American government in a case so politically motivated as this one? "
We're not immune, as some might think. Yes the chances are small, but not ZERO.
And the AFP now has the powers to install spyware to spy on your computer if they think you are doing something illegal.
The United States has, on appeal, won the right to extradite Hew Raymond Griffiths to the U.S. on charges of copyright infringement and conspiracy to commit software piracy. The case originally stems from raids on the pirate group Drink or Die in December 2001. Known as DOD for short, Drink or Die was a “utils” group (read: a software piracy group dedicated to cracking and distributing software applications online) that was, at the time, already in decline, according to published media reports quoting individuals in the know. Griffiths was, according to the Americans, the group’s leader, although no evidence to this end has yet been seen.
Griffiths, if convicted in America, faces up to 10 years in prison. It’s worth pointing out that in order to bolster its chances for extradition, the United States Department of Justice essentially charged Griffiths twice for the same crime under two different laws – past charges against members of the so-called “warez scene” heralded maximum possible sentences of five years.
However, the U.S. had to paint the picture of a serious career criminal in order to make an example of an unemployed 40-something Australian who did not profit from his crimes, and who publicly spoke out against anyone illegally profiting from the work of another.
What they’d rather not have the public think of is the mockery of global law and sovereignty this case makes. After US senators have taken millions of dollars in campaign contributions from the software and media industries, the DOJ needs to make a statement – the industries in question want results for their money. It’s a scared-straight program that works in conjunction with the industry-wide attempt to quash user rights by criminalizing formerly legal actions – i.e. the right to back up something you’ve legally bought.
No one questions the legality of warez – not since it was made illegal under 1997’s No Electronic Theft Act – but there are plenty of questions as to the morality of the “crime”, and the reasons behind America’s actions. For example, those convicted of selling pirated software have generally received less jail time than those who give it away for free – yet in almost any other crime, profit-based motivation is cause for a harsher sentence. This seems to be direct evidence of the software industry’s fingerprints on the DOJ.
Add to this statements by several people involved in the case that the original informant in the group, James Cudney, who posed as a DOD member but worked for US Customs in breaking up Drink or Die, was actively involved in fraud and other illegal activities while working for the Customs Agency – with the agency’s knowledge.
There is no indication as to when Griffiths will actually set foot on American soil, but one has to think that it will be soon, as the DOJ will attempt to cash in on the momentum of this decision and railroad him in a quick sham trial. After all, what chance does a foreign citizen have against the American government in a case so politically motivated as this one? "
We're not immune, as some might think. Yes the chances are small, but not ZERO.
And the AFP now has the powers to install spyware to spy on your computer if they think you are doing something illegal.