UK Police Launch Campaign To Shut Down Torrent Sites 244
An anonymous reader writes "City of London Police inform TorrentFreak that they have begun targeting sites that provide access to unauthorized content for 'criminal gain.' The initiative is part of a collaboration with Hollywood studios represented by FACT and the major recording labels of the BPI. In letters being sent out now, police accuse site operators of committing offenses under the Serious Crime Act. The National Fraud Intelligence Bureau further warns that the crimes carry a jail sentence of 10 years."
What are they trying to achieve? (Score:5, Insightful)
wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah giving them the same sentence as a rapist. That seems reasonable. This shit should be a civil matter not criminal.
Re:define "serious" (Score:4, Insightful)
Things which need media attention.
Re:What are they trying to achieve? (Score:5, Insightful)
When police put overt effort in to enforcing a specific law then you have to ask the question why?
They should be enforcing all laws equally, not picking on some and neglecting others.
Improper use of police powers and public funds (Score:5, Insightful)
I am still uncomfortable with the fact that this action is yet another example where the police, who are publicly funded and granted extensive powers in pursuit of their public duty, are essentially (mis)using their powers to protect the private property rights of a select few, i.e. copyright owners.
Copyright owners who, incidentally, are rich enough to pursue their own civil action against alleged pirates. Then again, making the public pay is better for their bottom line.
Here's the proof that copyright law is insane (Score:5, Insightful)
police accuse site operators of committing offenses under the Serious Crime Act
When sharing information about shifting bits of data across a computer network is considered a serious crime, the corruption in the system is not only obvious but blatantly so.
Re:What are they trying to achieve? (Score:5, Insightful)
The [British Recorded Music Industry] say that an [National Fraud Intelligence Bureau] officer was previously embedded with their anti-piracy unit.
âoeThis appointment is the first secondment by NFIB into private industry, enabling City of London Police to develop a greater understanding of the illegal distribution and sale of music online by organised crime gangs,â the music group reveals.
They seem to be equating torrent sites with organized crime.
For some reason I'm skeptical of that categorization.
10 Years? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Improper use of police powers and public funds (Score:3, Insightful)
Those are laws and law enforcement being used to protect the private property rights of a select few.
It might be the case that theft is uncommon, but almost everyone owns private property. Am I seriously supposed to care that someone's government-enforced monopoly is tumbling down?
After all, victims of theft should simply pursue their own civil action against the alleged thieves.
Unfortunately for you, government-enforced monopolies created in an effort to ensure artificial scarcity don't resemble real property at all, so this whole example is rather ridiculous to begin with.
Re:define "serious" (Score:5, Insightful)
Specially it's the parliament, which is elected by the people.
I wonder what percentage of the British population believes that Parliament is representing their interests well and voting with those concerns in mind? Here in the United States, only 11% of the population approves of the job that Congress is doing. That's a lot of unhappy people. What is the approval rating of Parliament? I'd be surprised if it's much higher.
Re:Improper use of police powers and public funds (Score:3, Insightful)
It looks like they are trying to stop and prevent crime.
Right, the copying of certain data. Can't have the rich's government-enforced monopolies put in jeopardy, now can we? This is almost as serious as a child opening a lemonade stand without a permit!
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:define "serious" (Score:4, Insightful)
Because Hollywood has finally sunk to the point where there is nothing new worth downloading. I just looked over the DVD release date schedule for the rest of the summer and could not find I single movie coming out I would be willing to watch, much less go to the trouble of downloading.
Re:City of London is a private police force (Score:5, Insightful)
Linking is not (yet) illegal in UK, no matter what these tosspots say. Also, they are misrepresenting themselves as those in a position of authority. So, in response, I suggest the reply given in Arkell v. Pressdram.
Re:What are they trying to achieve? (Score:5, Insightful)
No need for conspiracy theories. This is a tool commonly used by police, particularly for traffic offences. It is meant to serve as a reminder that some offences are illegal and that the police can pursue them. (And they do pursue them on a regular basis, though not necessarily to the same degree because they have limited resources.)
I don't really agree with this method of law enforcement, but I can certainly understand why they use it.
Re:What are they trying to achieve? (Score:5, Insightful)
But let's face it... They aren't really putting overt effort. They're just focusing on what they think is low-hanging fruit, like traffic offenses.
Re:What are they trying to achieve? (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a possible conspiracy though.
The government (Cons) want to pass through the so-called "snoopers charter" to make note of all of our emails and web traffic. The LibDems and a few others have blocked this so far, but we've recently had a murder case (April Jones: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-22781411 [bbc.co.uk]) during which it was found that the killer had had child porn on his computer. There are now the requisite "block child porn from the internet" calls, as you'd expect (including the NSPCC saying there's a link between looking at kiddie porn and going out and harming children). Further, John Carr, the government's Internet advisor has said Google et. al should be logging actual humans to searches (not just IPs or pseudonyms) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22726004) - side comment: I should imagine Google is probably the worst place to find 'hard' porn of any kind, let alone kiddie porn, so this seems deeply flawed, regardless of your stance on such things).
So... the conspiracy here is that the government has pressured the police to have a bit of a crack down. When the police find it difficult, they too can join in the cries for "we need more monitoring on the internet, because otherwise crime fighting is hard". That'll bring the police in line with MI5, the Culture Secretary and the child-porn fighting public who are asking for action. Then, the government can re-propose it's draconian measures, and we'll all accept them because we don't want to be paedophiles.
I'll give it a month before the chief of police says something like "I wish we had more powers to monitor people's internet usage".
Re:What are they trying to achieve? (Score:5, Insightful)
The simple fact that they are using taxpayer money on silly victim-less crimes like this instead of more serious ones such as rape/murder. That fact says that they are "putting overt effort into enforcing one law and neglecting others".
But let's face it... They aren't really putting overt effort. They're just focusing on what they think is low-hanging fruit, like traffic offenses.
These are not victimless crimes. The victims are just huge multinational conglomerates that you do not give a crap about (I am not sure I do either to be honest). In this case though the the victims have lots of money and are constantly whining to the police and politicians about the crimes perpetrated against them. The police need to be seen to be doing something.
Also, it is worth remembering that the UK record industry does have a lot of employees and is one of the few things we actually export nowadays so it is no surprise that politicians wish to protect it from any perceived harm.
Finally, you need to remember that the vast majority of the UK voting population do not necessarily give a crap about repealing copyright law or whatever. The care more about our economy. I actually think if we had a referendum tomorrow about copyright law it would come out as a majority in favour of strengthening it thanks to all the old people voting, even though you and all your friends would disagree.
Re:What are they trying to achieve? (Score:3, Insightful)
They seem to be equating torrent sites with organized crime.
For some reason I'm skeptical of that categorization.
Some torrent sites make large amounts of money. They encourage paid hit-and-runners (VIP accounts) by the thousands, as well as regularly solicit for donations rewardedwith a star icon. They also sell slots on seedboxes. This isn't casual sharing, it's profit based on copyright infringement.