backtop


Print 62 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Oct 27 at 1:28 PM


This is all that remains of OiNK.cd, one of the most prominent music sharing sites on the web.  (Source: DailyTech)
Second UK-based piracy closure in less than a week

OiNK.cd, one of the largest BitTorrent destinations for music online, was shut down today in a joint investigation between Interpol, the IFPI, BPI and local authorities in the United Kingdom and Netherlands. Authorities arrested an unnamed 24-year-old man suspected to be the site’s owner, as well as raided his UK residence, the office of his employer, his father’s house, as well as numerous facilities in the Netherlands where the site was hosted.

Much like many of the fallen sites before it, OiNK.cd’s front page was changed to a single message written by an unidentified party: “This site has been closed as a result of a criminal investigation by IFPI, BPI, Cleveland Police and the Fiscal Investigation Unit of the Dutch Police (FIOD ECD) into suspected illegal music distribution.”

Immediately following it is an ominous warning, informing visitors that “a criminal investigation continues into the identities and activities of the site's users.”

According to the IFPI, OiNK was responsible for leaking 60 major pre-release albums in 2007, with an unspecified numbers of albums in years past. OiNK’s estimated 180,000 users financed the site via “donations” paid by credit or debit card, and in return the site continued to host a staggering number amount of music, much of it in high-quality FLAC format.

“This was not a case of friends sharing music for pleasure. This was a worldwide network that got hold of music they did not own the rights to and posted it online,” said IFPI spokesman Jeremy Banks. “Within a few hours of a popular pre-release track being posted on the OiNK site, hundreds of copies can be found further down the illegal online supply chain.”



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: About time
By mdogs444 on 10/23/2007 7:45:41 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Umm, did it ever occur to you that even you were probably attracted to minors, when you were a minor?


Yes it did, and anyone who calls themselves a pedosexual is not a minor.

quote:
Until you have checked his ID to know his age, it's pretty silly to attack someone on the internet assuming you know their age.


According to some admins on this site, its not the first time he has made these comments.

Go ahead and defend the pedo's if you want, but I dont think you will be receiving very much backing on that.


RE: About time
By mindless1 on 10/23/2007 7:54:44 PM , Rating: 1
I disagree that anyone who calls themself a pedosexual is not a minor, necessarily.

Regardless, that does not make one a minor either, and since I have not been monitoring what he wrote I agree you could be right as this is not the kind of thing one would continually mention unless an unhealthy fixation rather than a natural attraction to peers one's own age.


RE: About time
By mdogs444 on 10/23/2007 8:02:19 PM , Rating: 2
There is a difference between someone who is, say for example, 16 yrs old liking a 15yr old - as that would be considered "normal".

Someone who is 25, 35, 45, 55, etc having those thoughts about someone who is 8, 10, 15, etc - is not considered normal. Its wrong, in every way, shape, and form.

And as a previous user stated on this topic, "Pedosexual" is a term that these sickos have created to try and coin a legitimate sexual orientation so that they dont have to fall under the "Pedophile" bracket. I had not ever heard that term before. Bottom line is that this person has openly admitted to be a pedophile (which as the term defines: they are of adult age, and targeting people not of adult age), and that is not accepted in this society, or any society, and should not be.


RE: About time
By themadmilkman on 10/23/2007 10:13:46 PM , Rating: 1
I don't condone this idea of "pedosexualism."

That said, you make the same argument against them that people make (or have made) against homosexuals.


RE: About time
By mdogs444 on 10/23/2007 10:22:03 PM , Rating: 2
My argument has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality.

Pedophiles commit crimes (or think about committing crimes) against children.

Homesexuals just want to "be with" someone of the same sex. Sure, some say that homosexual males like "little boys", but in a sense, that is not technically true. But lets not eliminate the fact that there are people who are both homosexual and pedophiles at the same time.

No one in society, except for the pedophiles, condone their activity, and in fact, everyone besides the pedophiles want to rid them of our society because its wrong and its a crime.

Not everyone is against homosexuality, including those who are not homosexual. The ones that are against it believe so because of religion, or because they deem it not to be morally accepted by them.

Homosexuality is something that some people accept, and some people do not accept. Pedophilia is something that is wrong on all accounts by all societies, and leads to crimes against children.


RE: About time
By themadmilkman on 10/24/2007 2:05:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
My argument has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality.


No, but it echoes the same argument used by anti-homosexual groups.

quote:
Pedophiles commit crimes (or think about committing crimes) against children.


At one point homosexuality was illegal, or at least the activities involved with homosexuality (sodomy, etc.)

quote:
No one in society, except for the pedophiles, condone their activity, and in fact, everyone besides the pedophiles want to rid them of our society because its wrong and its a crime.


Laws can be rewritten, and very often are. And not every pedophile actively searches out sexual activity with minors. Do they think about illegal activities? Sure. But last I checked (and I'm fairly up to date on criminal codes) it's not illegal to personally contemplate a crime. To plan it with others? Yes. But if personally thinking about something was a crime, I'd be guilty of dozens of murders, thefts, embezzlements, and many other crimes.

So what's my point? I agree with you whole-heartedly that pedophilia is wrong. But your manner of arguing it is poor at best.


RE: About time
By gramboh on 10/24/2007 3:28:08 AM , Rating: 2
Very good post. First I'll state I'm obviously against pedophelia. However, I am not against people having the right to think whatever they want. It scares me how this topic always drags up morons throwing out blanket statements (usually about castration or murdering pedophiles, because it is 'illegal' -- pretty hypocritical thinking). Also it is scary to see people incapable of thinking about laws in a moral sense. E.g. people that refuse to budge on the issue of decriminalization of marijuana even when the benefits are proven (for some reason, this irrational view is widely held in the U.S. so I guess the government's marketing works).

Bleh, off-topic rant.


RE: About time
By mdogs444 on 10/24/2007 7:19:19 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
But your manner of arguing it is poor at best.

I think many would say that my manner of arguing this off topic pedophilia is dead on.

quote:
No, but it echoes the same argument used by anti-homosexual groups.

No one before you mentioned homosexuality, and no offense, its probably because you are homosexual and have had arguments made against you. However, I am not one who did that.

quote:
At one point homosexuality was illegal, or at least the activities involved with homosexuality (sodomy, etc.)

And many people dont care about homosexuality one way or the other , they just dont want to allow homosexuals to get married and/or raise kids.

quote:
And not every pedophile actively searches out sexual activity with minors.

Point being that are they mentally unhealthy for even having those thoughts. If they are unhealthy enough to have the thoughts, who says they will not act on them. Just because they have not acted yet, doesn't mean they wont.

quote:
Do they think about illegal activities? Sure. But last I checked (and I'm fairly up to date on criminal codes) it's not illegal to personally contemplate a crime. To plan it with others? Yes. But if personally thinking about something was a crime, I'd be guilty of dozens of murders, thefts, embezzlements, and many other crimes.

Big difference between theft and child rape. If you sit around and honestly ponder your murder thoughts as well, then you are sick too.


RE: About time
By themadmilkman on 10/24/2007 11:14:26 AM , Rating: 1
Do you not see how you're arguing? Here's the basic outline. It goes something like this:

1. I think something is wrong.
2. Because I think something is wrong, everyone agrees that it is wrong.

Honestly, do you have any backing to your arguments besides your own thoughts and what you've seen on Dateline? To what degree do people find "pedosexualism" wrong? If a 21 year old is dating a 17 year old who graduated high school early and has already left school, is that wrong? What if she hasn't graduated yet? What if he's 22? This is a very hard topic to draw a hard line as to what is right and what is wrong, and is entirely dependant on a person's own ethics and morals. While you try to say that people are adamantly against pedosexualism, I'm not sure the actual boundaries are that well defined.

And as to calling me a homosexual: I'm married (to a woman, thank you) and have two kids. I'm making these statements because I abhor the poorly made arguments that permeate the internet.


RE: About time
By mdogs444 on 10/24/2007 11:32:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
While you try to say that people are adamantly against pedosexualism, I'm not sure the actual boundaries are that well defined.


Yes they are clearly defined. Do some research because there is a difference between Pedophilia and Statutory Rape.

Pedophilia is defined as an adult being sexually attracted to prepubescent youths. The APA goes to define it as such:
The APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition, Text Revision gives the following as its "Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia":[24]

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger);
B. The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty;
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.

quote:
To what degree do people find "pedosexualism" wrong? If a 21 year old is dating a 17 year old who graduated high school early and has already left school, is that wrong? What if she hasn't graduated yet? What if he's 22? This is a very hard topic to draw a hard line as to what is right and what is wrong, and is entirely dependant on a person's own ethics and morals. While you try to say that people are adamantly against pedosexualism, I'm not sure the actual boundaries are that well defined.


The scenario you are bringing up is called Statutory Rape, which is defined as the crime of sex with a minor under the age of consent (AOC), the age at which individuals are considered competent to give consent to sexual conduct. Statutory rape laws are based on the concept that a young person may desire sexual intercourse but may lack the experience possessed by legal adults to make a mature decision as to whether or not to have sexual contact with a particular person.

quote:
To what degree do people find "pedosexualism" wrong?


If you even have to ask this question, then clearly there is something wrong with you. Also, lets refer to it as Pedophilia, there is no such thing as pedosexualism and will not give the liberals the ability to coin a new term for social acceptance.

quote:
And as to calling me a homosexual: I'm married (to a woman, thank you) and have two kids. I'm making these statements because I abhor the poorly made arguments that permeate the internet.


I was not meaning to say you are homosexual, I was just drawing inference that maybe you were homosexual because you brought that arugment into the discussion which had no relevance.


RE: About time
By Treckin on 10/24/2007 1:27:01 AM , Rating: 2
This is a valid point... figures that it would be downrated on DT...


RE: About time
By Adonlude on 10/24/2007 4:30:55 PM , Rating: 2
If you think a point made by comparing the oppression of homosexuals to the oppression pedophiles is valid then society has no room for you either.


RE: About time
By FITCamaro on 10/23/2007 10:47:53 PM , Rating: 2
While I agree with you, the sad thing is that some of society has started to accept teenage girls(15-17) dating 28 year old guys. Any guy past his junior year in college(or age 21) still dating a chick in high school just needs to have his balls removed because they are obviously so desperate for p***y that they have to reach back into high school since they can't get a chick in college.


RE: About time
By mindless1 on 10/27/2007 12:22:37 PM , Rating: 2
Who are you to judge, really?

100 or more years ago, there were not these taboos. Does having modern appliances and conveniences make it more of a problem, or less of a problem to date someone of significantly different age?

I am not suggesting it's ok to attempt a relationship with a minor, under 18 is too young. ON the other hand, the idea that an age difference is an excuse to cut someone's balls off is just stupidity. Yes we have laws to protect minors and they should be inforced, but physical mutilation because of a few dates or even (gasp!) sex? You are a prime example of someone who should be locked in a prison cell and left there forever.

The key is that your thoughts don't matter, to the extent of imposing punishment on others. You are not god and won't ever be. If two adults consent to something, you're just an idiot to pass judgement and suggest a cruel punishment. This is in reference to an age difference, not to dating/more a minor. Minors should be left alone to decide their own course in life without predators interfering.

On the other hand, once one is physically mature, has spend enough time past puberty, they should be entitled to make adult decisions regardless of an arbitrary age limit.

DO you realize that your ancestors almost certain include women who chose to be girlfriends/mothers/wifes/etc before age 18? Today youth mature at an even faster pace, are more emotionally and sexually mature than your ancestors were at age 18. The moment you try to play "you know better", your god complex is impeding on the very rights that founded all free society.

There are two important factors:

1) Parents do not psychologically stunt their child's developement. The child should be left to mature and make life decisions appropriate to their age.

2) Soemone who is sexually mature has all the rights you do to make decisions regarding mates. If they were oppressed or abused and it stunts their emotional ability, the answer is to retrain the parent, as it is the cause and the solution until the child is of legal consent age. Once that child is of legal consent age, it's not up to anyone except that individual who they date, marry, etc.

I pity you for your random idea someone should be limited to marrying only among a small group of those having similar age. It is not a matter of feeling you are superior to be conservative, it makes you a puppet instead. At the same time, finding the right mate who is similar in age could be considered an ideal, but if that ideal isn't realized, your artificial limits are just foolish, and criminal if acted out in the manner you suggested.

So you advocate criminal activity. What a good example you are of someone who should never be allowed to date, marry or propigate if we're going to play god about it.

Look yourself in the mirror and realize how low you have sunk. Even if you were kidding about castration, a measure of a man is not what he really means, it is what he really DOES, his works and communication. Thinking good thoughts means nothing, it's your outward impact that matters. Chew on that for awhile.


RE: About time
By Trippytiger on 10/23/2007 11:55:25 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Someone who is 25, 35, 45, 55, etc having those thoughts about someone who is 8, 10, 15, etc - is not considered normal. Its wrong, in every way, shape, and form.


Indeed. These crimethinkers should be reported to the Thinkpol.


"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki