Print 57 comment(s) - last by dark matter.. on Jul 5 at 7:27 AM

It's the end of The Pirate Bay as you know it. The site's grizzled admins sold the site with nary an "argh" to a Swedish internet company that plans to turn it legit. The company claims the site will not change substantially when ownership transfers in August.  (Source: Wired)
Will people stick with the new Pirate Bay, or has it lost what they loved -- piracy?

Strange news broke today that Sweden's Global Gaming Factory X AB had purchased The Pirate Bay, the world's largest torrent site.  Among the internet's top 100 most visited properties, The Pirate Bay reportedly fetched a bounty of 60 million Swedish Krona or roughly $7.8 million.  The site will be handed over to its new captain on August 2009.

Global Gaming Factory (GGF), owner of internet cafes and gaming centers in Sweden, plans to compensate copyright holders for the first time in the site's history. “We would like to introduce models which entail that content providers and copyright owners get paid for content that is downloaded via the site," said  Hans Pandeya, CEO of GGF.

He elaborates, "The Pirate Bay is a site that is among the top 100 most visited Internet sites in the world. However, in order to live on, The Pirate Bay requires a new business model, which satisfies the requirements and needs of all parties, content providers, broadband operators, end users, and the judiciary. Content creators and providers need to control their content and get paid for it. File sharers 'need faster downloads and better quality.'"

In a related move, GGF also purchased a stake in Peerialism AB, a peer-to-peer technology firm.  GGF plans to deploy Peerialism's data distribution and distributed storage based P2P solutions on the Pirate Bay in what some are dubbing "P2P 2.0".  Reportedly the technology will allow for faster download speeds and more efficient content hosting.

The Pirate Bay's former owners, a group of Swedes, remain mostly enthusiastic about the move, viewing it as a necessity.  Faced with mounting legal expenses from their fight in Swedish courts and potential lofty fines, they risked bringing down the site if they held on to it.  Writes an admin in the site's blog, "We've been working on this project for many years. It's time to invite more people into the project, in a way that is secure and safe for everybody. We need that, or the site will die. And letting TPB die is the last thing that is allowed to happen!"

They warn, though, "If the new owners will screw around with the site, nobody will keep using it. That's the biggest insurance one can have that the site will be run in the way that we all want to. And - you can now not only share files but shares with people. Everybody can indeed be the owner of The Pirate Bay now. That's awesome and will take the heat of us."

That comment cuts to the heart of the issue.  The Pirate Bay's new ownership and keep-everyone-happy scheme certainly sounds nice.  However, details of how it exactly will work are scarce.  Other P2P-turned-legit services in the past have floundered, as evidenced by early poster-child of the P2P movement, Napster.  If the legit TBP can't make up for its content with advertising, who will it charge?  And if it starts charging customers will people keep visiting the site that has lost the thing they loved -- piracy?

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By astralsolace on 6/30/2009 11:42:28 AM , Rating: 2
is viewing the battle as a matter of the sites enticing normal people into casual theft. "If we could just get this site down, piracy would disappear!"

It's like popping zits--individual web sites--rather than treating the disease, which are the people who do it. Services and sites allow the disease to congregate, and even if you pop them--like SuprNova, TPB, Napster--other ones come back. Why?

Because Hollywood still hasn't found a way to successfully extract money out of that part of the consumer base. Simple as that.

Please don't try with the whole "try before you buy" argument. You're sampling something you have no right to, before you pay for it. Then, afterwards, if you ended up liking it, you might pay for an actual copy.

Admittedly a flawed analogy since the creator's copy isn't being destroyed, but that's somewhat like going into a grocery, opening up boxes and sampling random foods and, having liked one, decide to buy two or three boxes of crackers.

You're justifying your actions by essentially claiming a right to sample everything "because it exists and is (possibly) for sale," and paying after-the-fact, if the whim strikes you.

A rather stark contrast to the traditional concept, where the consumer makes a calculated risk: "Do past factors like previous enjoyment of the creator's works, general liking of the genre, outweigh the possibility of it being a dud? Does this risk justify my purchase?"

In the end, to cater to the casual entitlement kiddies.. content providors will probably capitulate and offer a free, easy-to-access, possibly watered-down version of their products to sample to entice you to buy the real thing. It might be futile, but I don't think they'll ever stop trying to solve their issues using the judicial system while at the same time trying to tap into the new, conceptual marketplace.

In the end, people have always been able to obtain things for free; the only difference is that it's now easier and the holder doesn't necessarily lose anything except a potential sale. Most people wouldn't call that "the same as theft," but would still admit it's wrong. I did it myself, quite a lot, until I got out of college and got a job.

But I can tell you I met completely unrepentant IP thieves that had stolen thousands upon thousands of movies, games and albums. There's no stopping people like that, and they're in such (comparatively) small numbers, it's not worth trying, really. Hollywood does, though, have a large interest in stopping the -casual- infringer.

By descendency on 6/30/2009 1:18:01 PM , Rating: 2
Tell me where all of the anger was when the scanner was introduced into the public marketplace?

I mean, you could do things with a scanner that basically killed a photographers main income (selling LOTS of prints.... 8x10, 5x7, 4x6, wallet-sized... etc.). I mean, what's the difference between scanning a picture, printing it, and sending it to your mom and copying a dvd and giving it to a friend?

Oh wait... they changed their business model. When companies act like dinosaurs...

By Chocobollz on 7/1/2009 12:23:26 PM , Rating: 2
They extinct ;-)

By bighairycamel on 6/30/2009 4:25:50 PM , Rating: 2
Please don't try with the whole "try before you buy" argument. You're sampling something you have no right to, before you pay for it. Then, afterwards, if you ended up liking it, you might pay for an actual copy.
I couldn't agree more, the "sampling" argument is totally ridiculous. I challenge anyone to name a single piece of media entertainment that can't be "sampled", more-or-less, before a purchase. Let's see...

Video games - you have professional reviews, user reviews, gameplay footage, demos, rentals
Movies - trailers, rentals, word of mouth, critic reviews, public reviews, many PPV channels let you watch 10 minutes free
Music - (so many choices here) thousands of sample websites or even websites that give 25 free listens per month like Rhapsody, borrow from a friend, Barnes & Noble or Borders music stations, music on demand

By dark matter on 7/5/2009 7:27:43 AM , Rating: 2
I couldn't agree more, the "sampling" argument is totally ridiculous. I challenge anyone to name a single piece of media entertainment that can't be "sampled", more-or-less, before a purchase. Let's see...

I can do better than name a single piece of media, I can name thousands. You should see my friends music/dvd/game collections. I get on the phone and I say "hey, do you mind if borrow that game/dvd/cd off you for a while?", their reply is "sure, as long as you give it back".

Is this wrong of me? Have you never borrowed a DVD/CD/Game from any of your friends? Of course you have. And there is your answer. I can name thousands of media entertainment, whatever is in my friends collection I can sample.

You don't seem to get this do you? Neither do the big corps.

Are these lost sales? Mmmmm... Wan't to know something, my friends are breaking some "contract" when they borrow me these items. If you read the print it says "no unauthorized borrowing, lending, blah, blah, blah". My friends are such criminals. We have to exchange them in the dead of night in a public place after trying to shake off any covert operations that may be spying on is. We wouldn't steal a handbag, we wouldn't steal a purse, but you can bet your boots we are dirty, dirty pirates sharing our warez like this.

By teohhanhui on 7/1/2009 7:31:16 AM , Rating: 2
Is it the people's fault for changing their behaviours, or is it the industry's fault for their unwillingness to change?

"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference
Related Articles

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki