backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 60 comment(s) - last by xphile.. on Jul 6 at 10:01 PM

The US DoJ announced the takedown of EliteTorrents on May 25, 2005.  (Source: Wikipedia)
Uploaders beware: prison time awaits those that are caught

26-year-old Clintwood, Virginia resident Daniel Dove was convicted of conspiracy and felony copyright infringement by a federal jury Friday, due to his role as an upload administrator at the popular BitTorrent tracker and search engine EliteTorrents.


For his crimes, Dove could face up to 10 years in prison. Sentencing is scheduled for Sept 9, 2008.

Federal authorities singled out EliteTorrents for takedown on May 25, 2005, after the site leaked a workprint of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith six hours before the movie's theatrical release.

Dove's conviction is the first jury trial and last remaining conviction in EliteTorrent's takedown, which the FBI dubbed Operation D-Elite. The raid netted two other arrests: fellow administrators Scott McCausland and Grant Stanley, with both pleading guilty and skipping the jury trial process. McCausland and Stanley received the same sentence: five months in prison followed by five months of house arrest, with Stanley facing an additional $3,000 fine.

A press release published by the Department of Justice claims that EliteTorrents attracted more than 125,000 members, who downloaded 700+ movies more than 1.1 million times.

"[EliteTorrents'] wide variety of content selection included illegal copies of copyrighted works before they were available in retail stores or movie theaters," it reads.

Despite the severity of Dove's punishment, Slyck writer Thomas Mennecke notes that his involvement with the site stands far beyond the average BitTorrent user.

"The overall impact of this conviction breaks little new ground," writes Mennecke, "as uploaders have always been the historical target of copyright enforcement." Other high-profile P2P cases, such as the massive $222,000 penalties levied against KaZaA user Jammie Thomas, took place in civil courts.

It should be noted that some of the legal details surrounding Thomas' judgment are currently under judicial review, and Thomas may get a second chance to try her case. The RIAA says it is prepared for that eventuality.

Generally speaking, criminal investigations in piracy usually seek the big fish: the release groups that circulate pirated movies and media, or the leakers close to the media they provide. Similar criminal proceedings are currently underway in the UK, where Interpol shut down music BitTorrent tracker OiNK and arrested administrator Alan Ellis, along with a handful of of the site's biggest uploaders.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
CRIME?
By Treckin on 6/29/2008 1:22:43 PM , Rating: 5
Crime? Yes.

The greater crime than stealing a movie, or even 100 movies, is that you can go to jail for longer for that than for molesting a child.

The reason why is because politicians take big money from the interest groups.




RE: CRIME?
By Duwelon on 6/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: CRIME?
By cparka23 on 6/29/2008 2:06:53 PM , Rating: 2
Kid Rock, is that you?


RE: CRIME?
By BZDTemp on 6/29/2008 2:21:25 PM , Rating: 5
Copying IS NOT stealing!

Stop buying into the PR of the ยค%&&##" lawyers.

I have yet to see anyone prove that a torrent site has actually made any copyright holder lose money. Sure you may be able to prove something was downloaded some NNN times but that still does not tell if even one sale of the copyrighted item did not happen because of it. In fact one could just as easily make the case that copies increases sales.

Usually the copyright holders use their current and past sales figures as prof but that does not hold any water. For starters there is a much richer variety of entertainment to chose from today than even just a couple of years ago. Also the reselling wave due to new media formats (like LP -> CD) has passed.

Finally even if we accept that lets say a million people making a copy of movie means say 100,000 less movie tickets sold and 30,000 DVD's less sold (just using random numbers here). The cost to the copyright holder is surely not 100,000xTicketPrice+30,000xDVDprice as the real loss is much lower. Retail prices are far beyond what the copyright holders get plus they also save having to make the DVD's and so on. But of course using the inflated numbers bring more PR it's just wrong that any money brought in by law suits are not shared with retailers.

Also ten years for copyright infringement is insane but unfortunately the criminal "justice" system works like that.


RE: CRIME?
By Duwelon on 6/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: CRIME?
By walk2k on 6/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: CRIME?
By lagitup on 6/29/2008 3:53:46 PM , Rating: 2
walk2k could you do me a HUGE favor? Turn off the bold? And also...

quote:
STEALING IS THEFT.


Move your left pinky finger about an inch (2.5cm if thats how you swing...) to the left and press down? Ah, yes, much better!


RE: CRIME?
By cochy on 6/29/2008 5:36:03 PM , Rating: 5
If I steal a $600 pair of Prada shoes off some store on 5th ave. How many years in prison do I serve?

Punishment doesn't fit the crime here. Classic example of how the criminal justice system is all messed up.


RE: CRIME?
By GaryJohnson on 6/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: CRIME?
By cochy on 6/29/2008 9:36:33 PM , Rating: 5
Last I checked Star Wars was $13 at Best Buy.


RE: CRIME?
By GaryJohnson on 6/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: CRIME?
By Yawgm0th on 6/30/2008 5:18:00 AM , Rating: 2
How the hell can you steal a copyright? If he "stole" the copyright, the original owner of the copyright would now longer have any copyright, and it would be his to use as he sees fit.


RE: CRIME?
By GaryJohnson on 6/30/2008 5:59:18 AM , Rating: 3
To steal means to take without the owner's consent. A copyright is the exclusive right to control how a work is copied and distributed.

The infringer took the original owner's right to exclusively control how the media was copied and distributed without his consent. He did copy and distribute the original work as he saw fit to do so.


RE: CRIME?
By Pudro on 6/29/2008 6:43:43 PM , Rating: 5
Don't be so ignorant. Their is a clear difference between copyright infringement and stealing.They are not the same, and just because you say so doesn't make any difference.

And I am 100% right and you are wrong, because my view is supported by the Supreme Court. Can you think of a higher authority on US law than that? Because there isn't one.

To be clear: yes, infringement is a crime that you will be punished for if found guilty of. But it is not stealing and it is not theft. End of story.


RE: CRIME?
By GaryJohnson on 6/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: CRIME?
By myocardia on 6/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: CRIME?
By DarkElfa on 6/30/2008 7:54:24 AM , Rating: 1
Actually, I believe copying isn't stealing, its counterfeiting. They're making sub standard copies of the original source material. That isn't stealing, thats counterfeiting.


RE: CRIME?
By GaryJohnson on 6/30/2008 8:50:25 AM , Rating: 2
If they're copying VHS tapes, but digital copies shouldn't be 'sub standard'.


RE: CRIME?
By DarkElfa on 6/30/2008 3:34:25 PM , Rating: 2
Still, a prefect copy of a dollar isn't theft, its a counterfeit bill.


RE: CRIME?
By mikeyD95125 on 7/1/2008 3:26:44 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Copying a product without paying for it, is stealing. It couldn't be defined any more clearly.


Really so if I get the supplies for a let's say, a Toro lawnmower, and build it myself and only for personal use, that is stealing?

The problem is that digital media is very easily copied. Very few people go out and build their own Toro lawn mower because it is very difficult. Now if I built 10 lawn mowers with Toro badging and sold them, that would be copyright infringement.

Copying a product is not stealing it.


RE: CRIME?
By Funksultan on 6/30/2008 7:43:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have yet to see anyone prove that a torrent site has actually made any copyright holder lose money.

Common sense plays a part here. If you serve up tens of thousands of movie downloads, you've got to assume that people aren't downloading it, and then immediately deleting it.

They are WATCHING them, meaning they aren't going to the theatre, renting or buying the DVD, all of which are profits to the copyright holder.

Clearly, wrong. and definitely not...
quote:
the PR of the ยค%&&##" lawyers

I think the most embarrassing part for me is the ratings I see coming down. I'd like to think that DT readers are some of the more enlightened posters out there, but on this topic, anything along the lines of...

"ZOMG ZOMG, ToRrentz ar teh sHIz!"

Is getting rated up to a 5, and anyone in the camp of...

"It's wrong, and we all know it, even though most of us do it." is getting downrated.

ZOMG. Hope things turn around. :)


RE: CRIME?
By sweetsauce on 6/30/2008 12:32:24 PM , Rating: 2
Common sense tells you that these people had no intention of buying what they downloaded. Whether that's wrong or not is not the point, its the fact that a dollar amount gets estimated as loss is wrong when clearly there would be no loss to begin with. But i guess its easier to get the FBI involved when you attach a ridiculous dollar amount as a loss.

On another note, i can guarantee you every geek and nerd that downloaded that early copy of star wars did it on wifi while waiting in line for the 12:00am first showing. No money lost, just some eager fans wanting to watch something early.


RE: CRIME?
By Funksultan on 6/30/2008 2:59:04 PM , Rating: 2
Hoping you're not really believing this.

People download things because they WANT to watch them, not because they DON'T WANT TO. If you couldn't wait a few days and download a recent movie, and you wanted to see it, you'd have to rent/buy/go to the theatre. Once you've downloaded it and watched it, there is no appreciable value in those alternatives.

Your statement about the "geek and nerd" population is inane. I'm sure there ARE hardcore fans who downloaded it, watched it, and still went to the movie, but they are most assuredly in the minority.


RE: CRIME?
By xphile on 7/6/2008 10:01:58 PM , Rating: 2
The silly part is they could end all of this overnight in four short sweet steps:

* Spend all the RIAA and MPAA anti piracy budget on storage hardware and bandwidth to and from it.

* Put all movies up for download at 99c each - no DRM, no limits - it's yours.

* Put all TV series up at $4.99 a series, or 99c an episode - no DRM, no limits - it's yours.

* Put all CDs up at $4.99 a disc, or 50c a song - no DRM, no limits - its yours.

When they finally get it through their super f#$king thick heads that the only way to STOP piracy dead is to defeat any value in anyone doing it, then it will end.

And when that day comes two things happen:

1) Nobody cares to download illegally because the legal version is so simple and so cheap.

2) The RIAA and MPAA find themselves rolling in so much money from downloads they cant ever remember what all the fuss was about and give themselves all 10 million dollar bonuses for being so smart.


RE: CRIME?
By AntiM on 6/29/2008 3:40:24 PM , Rating: 4
You've got that right. The biggest crime here is how our government is ran mostly by corporate interests. I'm pretty sure that when a government official accepts money in exchange for political favors, it is a criminal offense. As far as I'm concerned, the US Government doesn't have enough credibility to be able to charge anyone with any crime.

Plus, if you don't won't your movies stolen, then don't distribute them in a format that can be digitized and copied. If you can't do that, then stop making movies. If you're losing so much money, then by all means, stop making them. The truth is, good movies make tons of money for the industry, despite piracy.


RE: CRIME?
By exploderator on 6/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: CRIME?
By MamiyaOtaru on 6/29/2008 9:01:23 PM , Rating: 5
I don't think fascism means what you think it means.


RE: CRIME?
By GaryJohnson on 6/29/2008 9:20:06 PM , Rating: 1
That would be capitalism (or a capitalocracy maybe?). If it was facism, then the government would be run by government intrests.


RE: CRIME?
By SharkManEXR on 6/29/2008 9:45:06 PM , Rating: 2
no that is called a corporate oligarchy.


RE: CRIME?
By AntiM on 6/29/2008 11:10:53 PM , Rating: 3
Or maybe it's called corporatism. We are not citizens, we are consumers. Whatever you want to call it, I don't like it, no sir, don't like it at all. If Ralph Nader were president, maybe he could straighten out this mess. However, many people think he's a kook.
In The Good Fight, Nader writes "Giant corporations roam the Earth, pitting societies against one another in search of the lowest costs from serf labor...pulling down standards of living in more democratic countries.


RE: CRIME?
By P4blo on 6/30/2008 7:34:09 AM , Rating: 2
The American justice system is obviously for sale to he with the deepest saddle bags. Oh dear. The sentencing seems to paint a clear picture of where priorities lie.

What's even more sad is that the apparently impotent? US Gov has done nothing to protect the people. They've sat and watched this digital monster called the Internet grow and flourish to the point where people are now able to swap digital media with ease.

This is the solution that appears to be coming to the UK and is already in S. Korea. At least it's a start, not a 10 year prison sentence as part of an attempt to criminalise an entire generation of youngsters:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/26/music_serv...


I was worried for a moment...
By maverick85wd on 6/29/2008 11:14:33 AM , Rating: 5
... that they were going to let him off. God knows all these piracy advocates need to be put behind bars before they share the wrong file and someone ends up getting killed. I hope they manage to clear out enough room for them all - I'm sure they can do it if they let all the rapists and murders out on good behavior.

/end sarcasm

what the hell is the world coming to? As technology advances, industries are forced to adapt or go under. Unless, as in this case, they can make the government do something about it




RE: I was worried for a moment...
By Treckin on 6/29/2008 12:32:56 PM , Rating: 3
QFT.

Big business sucking off politicians FTL :(


RE: I was worried for a moment...
By fxyefx on 6/29/2008 12:41:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
As technology advances, industries are forced to adapt or go under. Unless, as in this case, they can make the government do something about it


Ahh but see... making the government do something about it IS the adaptation, in this case... :-/


RE: I was worried for a moment...
By johnsonx on 6/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: I was worried for a moment...
By abzillah1 on 6/29/2008 2:03:32 PM , Rating: 3
I will give you an example how they can "adapt":
First, have an online movie rental that is 720P or better for $1.00 per day. (I get $1.00 DVD rentals here where I live).
Second, simply have the government shutdown any illegal sites off the net. If any illegal files are found on a webpage, have them taken down or face shutdown.
This is very simple, the majority of people would rent their movies online rather than pirate them. Those that continue to pirate, they will continue till hell freezes over. Making the punishment for a crime longer will not stop the crime from happening.
With how much money the movie industry has, even if a fraction of the money spent on lawyers was spent on implementing better business marketing targeted towards those who watch movies on the internet, they would be successful in making large profits.


RE: I was worried for a moment...
By BladeVenom on 6/29/2008 2:47:53 PM , Rating: 3
The publishing industry came out with the paperback to fight piracy. They made a version of the product cheap enough that almost no one will bother pirating it. The publishing industry has been around for hundreds of years so I think they might have something to teach the RIAA/MPAA.


RE: I was worried for a moment...
By walk2k on 6/29/2008 3:07:40 PM , Rating: 1
Well, it's also a lot more work to xerox a paperback than to copy a digital music/movie file.

Still, good point. The music/movie industry does need to come out with a cheap enough alternative that makes stealing not worth the effort. I feel like iTunes/Amazon/etc is a step in the right direction (especially the DRM-free iterations), though probably still need to get even cheaper.

People need to pay attention to the article though - this isn't the case of the **AA going after some teenager or grandma for downloading some music. This case is about someone who stole a copy of a workprint (or got possesion of that stolen property) AND then uploaded it originally. Very very different case. I think most people would agree that sending someone away for 10 years or fining them thousands of dollars for downloading a couple of movies is ridiculous, however this guy not only did YES PHYSICALLY STEAL SOMETHING , he also was the one who uploaded it and thus allowed millions of people to make copies of it.


By maverick85wd on 6/29/2008 3:23:37 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
he also was the one who uploaded it and thus allowed millions of people to make copies of it.


Yes, I'm sure because he put this on the internet Lucas lost millions due to all the die-hard Star Wars fans that not only didn't go see the movie int he theaters 8 times also didn't buy all the crap that goes with the movies, as well as causing all fast food chains to re-consider their negociations with Lucas for Star Wars happy meal toys.

Look, I'm not saying he didn't do something crappy. What I'm saying is putting extensive FBI resources on someone who uploaded a movie is a waste and could be put to better use. Plus, think of all the resources that will be wasted to keep him in prison for 10 years. Then add on what the economy doesn't increase because he's not working for 10 years. It adds up and it's just not worth it.


RE: I was worried for a moment...
By JustTom on 6/30/2008 1:29:30 AM , Rating: 2
If they could make money doing this how come none of them are?

I would love to see cheap hi-def rentals but it isn't going to end or even greatly lessen piracy. People like free things, free is not 2 bucks, or 1 buck, it is no bucks.

quote:
Second, simply have the government shutdown any illegal sites off the net. If any illegal files are found on a webpage, have them taken down or face shutdown.


Yeah, cause if the government starts shutting down websites wholesale there won't be outrages netters crying censorship.


RE: I was worried for a moment...
By DM0407 on 6/30/2008 12:33:14 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Theft is a crime, regardless of whether some industry adapts or not.


If i leave my windows down in my car in the middle of the city and someone steals me Ipod. The cops are going to say "maybe you should have locked your doors and rolled up your windows". There not going to chase down a random crook and spend millions trying to convict him to make a point. There just going to call me an idiot for making it so easy to steal from me.

That thief will get whats coming to him though, my ipod has tons of illegal songs on it which should net him more jail time then the theft he committed Muh Ha ha ha ha!

Adapt or die, the government shouldn't play "mommy" for these businesses.


The Worst Part
By SteelyKen on 6/29/2008 11:11:17 AM , Rating: 5
I would hate to sit in for prison 10 years knowing I was there because I distributed one of those awful Star Wars prequels.




RE: The Worst Part
By Dark Legion on 6/29/2008 12:29:30 PM , Rating: 1
Or because he didn't plead guilty; his friends that did got off much easier than he will.


RE: The Worst Part
By ajdavis on 6/29/2008 1:06:02 PM , Rating: 1
That's a matter of opinion. Not pleading guilty means he could get off completely. You're just another example of the sheeple believing anyone charged of a crime must be guilty.


RE: The Worst Part
By Dark Legion on 6/29/2008 1:49:55 PM , Rating: 2
Good point, though I neither said that nor do I necessarily believe it. The point is that he did get convicted, whether he actually is guilty or not, and that's what my comment was based on.


RE: The Worst Part
By cparka23 on 6/29/2008 12:49:20 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I would hate to sit in for prison 10 years knowing I was there because I distributed one of those awful Star Wars prequels.
In that case, George Lucas and Rick McCallum should share a jail cell with this kid.


Stupid jury
By IvanAndreevich on 6/29/2008 2:18:01 PM , Rating: 3
If one of us was on that jury, the guy would have walked.




RE: Stupid jury
By Duwelon on 6/29/2008 3:29:14 PM , Rating: 2
Don't be so sure. Developers are making a lot more money in Consoles where the end user isn't as savvy to go copy everything and DL everything they please on a whim. A backlash is coming against pirates as more and more companies go to consoles only because of the high piracy rate on the PC.


RE: Stupid jury
By IvanAndreevich on 6/30/2008 12:01:59 AM , Rating: 2
Whatever happened to modchips? Besides, you need a valid copy for online gaming anyway.


This guy deserves to be behind bars
By pillagenburn on 6/29/2008 5:59:27 PM , Rating: 2
In this guy's case, he deliberately stole and made available a copyrighted work before its theatrical release; this is stealing and it is extremely wrong.

I think the severity and harshness of the crime should be based upon a for-profit motive. If it's a casual downloader who only downloads for pleasure (even if it's a lot) then little to no harm done, and there's little that one can do to prove otherwise.

As far as piracy ruining PC gaming - go to tell that to Blizzard Entertainment or the owners of Valve/Steam; they don't have nearly the problems other makers do. Blizzard/Valve were smart, Crytek and the others were not and suffered for it. It comes down to average PC Gamers being a good deal smarter than average console gamers. You can't fool PC Gamers with a crappy game.




By UnlimitedInternets36 on 6/29/2008 9:29:43 PM , Rating: 2
then why did over 150,000 people bother Downloading it when a perfectly good Demo was available LOL

it must wasn't that bad.


EVERYONE ......
By dvlcake on 6/30/2008 3:35:16 AM , Rating: 2
STOP COMPLAINING (for those who are US Citizens on this thread).

Stop complaining and start writing your Senators, Congressmen and whomever that governs. Tell them you are aware of whats going on and you dont like it. Your vote definately counts considering politicians would rather keep their power than take money from that specific interest group!

I am sick of this people keep bitching....FREAKIN DO SOMETHING! This government has lost all its common sense and we as American people are going with it. There is no real activism nor real desire to correct what these past administrations have done.




RE: EVERYONE ......
By DM0407 on 6/30/2008 2:08:15 PM , Rating: 2
Best comment today! Too bad its at the bottom of the page.

Listen to this person!


See
By BruceLeet on 6/29/2008 1:33:30 PM , Rating: 1
Thats why I only use torrents for the porn, and the lulz.




RE: See
By UnlimitedInternets36 on 6/29/2008 9:31:02 PM , Rating: 1
I call those Internetz FTW!


By jediknight on 6/29/2008 9:51:50 PM , Rating: 2
See ya there, scumbag.

To borrow from Nelson Muntz..
HA, HA!




Azzbackwards...
By IcePickFreak on 6/29/2008 11:31:05 PM , Rating: 2
It's not as if they're losing money on file sharing, they're losing profits.. there's a difference. Apparently filthy-rich people not being out of pocket by theft, only lower profits, is a much more important crime to fight than politicians and big business ripping the consumer off, out of pocket, time and time again without even fear of repercussions.
Excuse me if I don't shed a tear for their lower profits, they'll surely cut a bunch of middle-class jobs so the execs still get a nice fat bonus.




punishment or slap on the wrist?
By Screwballl on 6/30/2008 1:18:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
five months in prison followed by five months of house arrest, with Stanley facing an additional $3,000 fine.


I bet they made hundreds of thousands of dollars off their ventures so they can pay the fines and still live a very comfortable life... and house arrest? What better way for them to jump right back in to the torrent sites by being stuck in their house for many months?
After the jail time was served, it should have been 5 months community service at 12 hours per day away from the house.




Throw all the librarian in jail!
By Chosonman on 6/29/2008 10:09:41 PM , Rating: 1
For copyright infringement.




"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki