Print 27 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Jan 19 at 5:55 AM

Popular BitTorrent site shut down without warning

Yesterday afternoon, popular BitTorrent search site went offline without any advanced notice. The site was unreachable for hours until its site staff posted an explanation for the downtime.

“Lawyers from our primary ISP decided to pull our plug without any advance notice, as of 14:45 PST. No doubt related to our lawsuit brought by the MPAA, but we don't have more information at this time until people responsible come to work tomorrow,” the site notice read. “We will be back in operation once we sort out this mess with our current ISP, or we get new hardware ready at our new ISP.”

The entertainment industry has long targeted file sharing sites but with limited success. The Motion Picture Association of America last year filed lawsuits against a number of BitTorrent sites, among them, with information on how to download the latest movies. European-based has also come under fire from authorities, but so far has managed to stay afloat. In an effort to escape legal waters, is currently investigating the possibility of purchasing Sealand, a man-made island., however, is making it clear that it believes its operation is legal and has no intention of avoiding the authorities.

An update posted today on isoHunt reads: “FYI, since this is a common topic, no, moving servers to Sweden or Sealand isn't going to help. I have no intention of hiding our servers. BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy as a search engine and aggregator.” is now hosting its temporary page from Canada, and it is unclear when or if the site will resume operations from the U.S.

Comments     Threshold

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

Same ol' argument
By bighairycamel on 1/17/2007 3:55:48 PM , Rating: 5
You gotta know that knows illegal activities are going on in the servers they are searching.... but this is a search engine for God's sakes. Lets sue Google and Yahoo for allowing people to search the term "free movies". This is the site the MPAA suggested write an algorithm to filter out any illegal searches. Obiously, the staff over at the MPAA aren't web programmers. I side with ISOhunt totally.

RE: Same ol' argument
By Tsuwamono on 1/17/2007 3:59:59 PM , Rating: 2
I agree completely.

I personally dont download games or movies *shifty eyes*

But a friend of a friend of a friend does *shifty eyes* and he uses Google. All... HE.. does is type in "Name of file" then torrent right afterwards and it basicly turns google into the biggest Torrent search site on the net.

MPAA are retards... hurray!

RE: Same ol' argument
By thejez on 1/17/2007 5:54:18 PM , Rating: 2
the big difference here is that google just links to the sites that in-turn link to the actual torrent... they dont host links to torrent files and i think thats what is at issue here... i think the MPAA is going to try and somehow say a torrent of a pirated film is somehow protected by the law.... that is where its a tough stretch for them legally... last time i checked MPAA didnt have any ownership of a .torrent file... now that .torrent may again in turn provide links to data distributed across the net which then *may* when assembled become some property they own...

RE: Same ol' argument
By mindless1 on 1/17/2007 10:37:25 PM , Rating: 3
The big difference here is that Google has a little clout, isn't going to be shut down by persuading one ISP. MPAA likes soft targets.

RE: Same ol' argument
By jas8522 on 1/18/2007 5:55:23 AM , Rating: 2
Yes there's is indeed a difference. The point is that ISOhunt is standing up to forced shutdown of it's class of website. If nobody does it, then each site is going to get shutdown, and surely more are going to be put up, but there's always the possibility that they do not. So when all the sites hosting torrents go down, what will google searches reveal? Dead links.


RE: Same ol' argument
By Samus on 1/18/2007 12:39:26 AM , Rating: 2
If they [RIAA, MPAA] would let me DOWNLOAD non-DRM encoded content at reasonable (~iTunes) prices. I would.

But I'm not going to pay $1 a song or $10 an album when I have to install proprietary software to download and play it back, and use proprietary devices to transfer too and travel with it.

That's unreasonable, and as far as I'm concerned, should be illegal in itself. This is why I pirate music.

I love all the indie labels because they let you download MP3's for usually $6-$10 per album. Fortunate for me, the indie labels also carry the genre of music I listen too (acid punk, synthpop, heavy rock, etc)

RE: Same ol' argument
By MrSmurf on 1/18/07, Rating: -1
"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad
Related Articles Wants to Be Own Country
January 12, 2007, 8:39 AM Recap
June 25, 2006, 10:39 AM

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