Early-Morning Raid Sent To Confiscate 9-Year-Old's Winnie The Pooh Laptop For Downloading Music

from the a-question-of-priorities dept

One of the biggest problems with the current approach to dealing with alleged copyright infringement is the totally disproportionate nature of the action undertaken in response to it. The “three strikes” collective punishment of households that is available in France, New Zealand and South Korea is one example of this. From Finland, we learn about another completely over-the-top action:

CIAPC, the company that had The Pirate Bay blocked by ISPs in Finland, tracked an alleged file-sharer and demanded a cash settlement. However, the Internet account holder refused to pay which escalated things to an unprecedented level. In response, this week police raided the home of the 9-year-old suspect and confiscated her Winnie the Pooh laptop.

The specific details are worrying:

Tuesday morning the doorbell of the family home rang around 8am and the man, who works in the hospitality sector, had quite a shock. Police were at his door with a search warrant authorizing the hunt for evidence connected to illicit file-sharing.

This kind of early-morning raid would be more appropriate for dealing with serious and dangerous criminals than 9-year-old girls (barely even mentioning that the girl’s father claims her attempts at downloading failed, leading them to go purchase the music legally anyway). Similarly, the fact that for such a trivial case the account-holder’s name and address were obtained from the ISP, and a search warrant issued, shows how out of control the law has become in this area.

Under the malign influence of the copyright companies, it would seem that the police force is now little more than a bunch of heavies sent around at ridiculous hours of the day to frighten people who refuse to pay the arbitrary sums demanded. It’s hard to square this colossal waste of police time and public money with the deadly threat of terrorism that we supposedly live under: is intimidating members of the public in this way really such a priority for the Finnish state? It’s also disappointing to see the legal system in Finland and elsewhere acquiescing in this terrible perversion by powerful lobbies of what is supposed to be even-handed, proportionate justice for all.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Early-Morning Raid Sent To Confiscate 9-Year-Old's Winnie The Pooh Laptop For Downloading Music”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

something else that is worrying is the artist concerned, Chisu, claims she knew nothing about this and had not authorised it. where that argument falls over is that she must have agreed to CIAPC taking whatever measures they want ‘to protect her copyright’, even if it was via Warner music. her best bet would have been to not agree to anything in the first place. i gather the backlash on her Facebook page is quite severe. to me, it serves her right!

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: Re:

You seem to think there is a tick box on a contract where they can opt in or out of the enforcement arm of this crap.

The better question is, how much of the money demanded ($600 Euro IIRC) went to WB from the pirate hunters, and of that how much finally makes it to the artists?

$600 euro penalties and they can’t figure out why people keep ignoring copyright.

FuzzyDuck says:

Re: Re:

Sorry, but she (Chisu) agreed to this, it’s the consequence of the contract that she signed with her label handing them the rights to the music and all the power to enforce those rights. She could have demanded the right to authorize any action, but didn’t, she could have kept control of the copyrights, but didn’t.

Her failure to negotiate a proper contract put that little girl at risk.

Her desire to sign up with a corporate vulture put that little girl at risk.

It’s about time some of the artists face the consequences of their choices, rather than only their fans suffering.

Richard (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

She could have demanded the right to authorize any action, but didn’t, she could have kept control of the copyrights, but didn’t.

Yeah, she could have refused that tempting advance, that was offered with the veiled threat that “if you don’t sign you’ll remain a nobody for ever.”

You see the tactics that WB employ towards their artists are really rather similar to those they use on their “customers”.

MrWilson says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Despite the name, copyright isn’t a right. It’s a government-granted monopoly and the companies are the intended beneficiaries of all the latest legislation relating to copyright since they’re the ones buying the laws. Some have argued that publishers, rather than authors, were the original intended beneficiaries of the earliest copyright laws.

Mason Wheeler (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

…which is ridiculous historical revisionism, since all you have to do is look at the text to see the purpose. From the Statute of Anne, the original copyright law:

Whereas Printers, Booksellers, and other Persons, have of late frequently taken the Liberty of Printing, Reprinting, and Publishing, or causing to be Printed, Reprinted, and Published Books, and other Writings, without the Consent of the Authors or Proprietors of such Books and Writings, to their very great Detriment, and too often to the Ruin of them and their Families: For Preventing therefore such Practices for the future, and for theEncouragement of Learned Men to Compose and Write useful Books; May it please Your Majesty, that it may be Enacted, and be it Enacted…

The slightly archaic language and spelling conventions notwithstanding, that’s about as plain as it can possibly be: it was designed to protect the authors against the depredations and abuses of publishers.

It was a good idea at the time, and it remains a good idea today. The problem is that we aren’t following it today. Copyright has been corrupted and twisted into an Orwellian mockery of its original form.

The Statute of Anne was designed to prevent publishers from using their wealth and power and expensive modern technology (the printing press, in this case) to abuse people. The DMCA and subsequent acts are designed explicitly to *enable* them to do so.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Copyright isn’t a “right” in the same way that speech is. With speech, you have a natural right to express yourself and speak your mind. That’s not granted to you by anyone (unless you believe in god), that’s the ability you have unless someone restricts it. If it’s restricted then rights are taken away from you, hence the 1st amendment’s protections to stop the government from doing so.

With copyright, it actually works the other way around. The “natural” state is that once you create a work, everybody else is able to use it as and how they wish. Copyright is a temporary monopoly granted to enable the creator of the work to be the first one able to profit (and thus, in theory, promote the creation of further works). It’s possible to reject some or all of these copyright protections (by releasing something as public domain, creative commons, etc.) or sell/transfer them as desired.

So, while you can defer your copyright to someone else on your behalf, you can’t defer your natural rights that haven’t been restricted.

AB says:

Re: Re: Re:

Actually, she could/should slap them down hard for this. While her contract may not specify limitations, I’m sure the majority of courts would agree that she had no way to foresee or reasonably expect such excess behaviour. If you sign a contract to pay someone for delivering your pizza, you don’t expect them to use a tank and detour through peoples living rooms. This might even be considered sufficiently outside ‘reasonable’ behaviour to break the contract.

I, for one, will wait to see what actions she takes in response before judging her.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

When the copyright fascists say the want to protect someones copyright, they usually mean the ones that the industry owns. Chisu is not the owner of her music, her label is. She can do jumping jacks till the end of time , she will never ever have ownership of her music.

In fact, any who make music for labels does not own their music. Thus no one can stop the labels from being douchebags.

MrWilson says:

Re: Re: Re: WTF?

No, in America, the swat team that served the search warrant would do so in full tactical gear and wouldn’t politely knock on the door or wait for someone to answer it
Downloading music is a gateway crime that leads to pot use, STDs, and terrorism. You have to curb it immediately at the business end of an automatic rifle.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 WTF?

… in America, the swat team that served the search warrant would do so in full tactical gear and wouldn’t politely knock on the door or wait for someone to answer it

In America… ?Grenade burns sleeping girl as SWAT team raids Billings home? by Zach Benoit, Billings Gazette, Oct 12, 2012

BILLINGS A 12-year-old girl suffered burns to one side of her body when a flash grenade went off next to her as a police SWAT team raided a West End home Tuesday morning.

“She has first- and second-degree burns down the left side of her body and on her arms,” .?.?.?.

That’s what happens in America.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 WTF?

… in America, the swat team that served the search warrant would do so in full tactical gear and wouldn’t politely knock on the door or wait for someone to answer it

In America… ?Police Send SWAT Team, Break Into Wrong House (With TV Film Crew) In Response To Internet Troll? by Mike Masnick, Techdirt, Jun 22, 2012:

We’ve heard of police very frequently overreacting to things and sending in SWAT teams when they aren’t necessary.

?.?.?. the SWAT team and a TV news crew to the home of Ira and Louise Milan — whose front door was open. Now, they could have rang the doorbell and spoken to them. But, instead, they broke down the screen door, broke the front window, and tossed a flashbang into the living room.

That’s what happens in America.

PaulT (profile) says:

“barely even mentioning that the girl’s father claims her attempts at downloading failed, leading them to go purchase the music legally anyway”

Erm, forgive me if I’m wrong but isn’t the excuse for the totally disproportionate punishments that they’re directed at seeders rather than downloaders (although torrents make it difficult to make a real distinction)? Assuming that the account given is correct, they were raided for an action they hadn’t carried out. Fair enough if it’s a failed terrorist operation, not so good for a corporation not getting some profits they imagined they should have.

On top of that, this proves that the market solution works – you know, the one I and many other have been advocating for years that doesn’t involve wasting police time and criminalising innocents. The girl tried piracy, then found that the legal option worked better. That’s all that’s really needed – make legal options better than the illegal ones. Assuming the pricing is affordable for her parents, she’s almost certainly going to pay as her first option in future. Or, at least would have been before she had her property stolen.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

That is another can of worms. If the legal option is better than the illegal option, you are essentially encouraging the industry to do nothing about piracy or do what they can to harrass illegal downloads. Doing nothing about piracy is completely incomprehensible for the industry.

Doing something includes, but is not limited to, seeding conciously corrupted material, spread of vira, trojans and backdoor, tracking all activity on p2p-networks and try to push for DMCA-like requests for p2p. I think the illegal market around enforcing paywalls, copyrestrictions and rights is increasing and encouraging it seems like a bad idea. The true tragedy is that the police are as bad as they are at stopping any unwanted behavious on the internet. Only thing worse is the way of increasing their ability to do so would be far more crippling for societal trust in authorities.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

“If the legal option is better than the illegal option, you are essentially encouraging the industry to do nothing about piracy or do what they can to harrass illegal downloads.”

Erm, that makes no sense really. If the legal option is better then people are more likely to use it. That in itself reduces the problem of piracy to begin with. As for the industry “doing nothing about piracy”, what would the problem be there? It’s only being enforced like this because they demand it, what would be the problem if they realised that they didn’t need to?

Also take note, I didn’t say “don’t use other methods to stop piracy”. It’s just clear that only attacking the supply end without considering the reasons people demand the pirate options is doomed to failure.

“Doing something includes, but is not limited to, seeding conciously corrupted material, spread of vira, trojans and backdoor, tracking all activity on p2p-networks and try to push for DMCA-like requests for p2p.”

It also includes making the product available to buy, in the desired format, DRM-free and without usage and regional restrictions, at a reasonable price with as little hassle during the purchase as possible. Strangely enough, not only is my list more palatable, it’s almost certainly more effective.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

‘If the legal option is better than the illegal option, you are essentially encouraging the industry to do nothing about piracy or do what they can to harrass illegal downloads.’

Actually, not quite. As has been demonstrated time after time after time, if you make the legal option the better option, (via things like reasonable pricing, convenience, and no insane restrictions), it has a very noticeable effect on piracy rates, namely causing them to nosedive.

Conversely, just about all the efforts the *AA’s have come up with to attack piracy directly(DRM anyone?) either has no effect at all, or actually drives more people to piracy.

So as strange as it may seem, the better option is to, for the most part, ‘do nothing about piracy’, directly at least, and instead focus on making the legal option the better one. Do that, and piracy rates will take a huge hit

Richard (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

You also have to remeber that their are two kinds of pirates. The old fashioned “for profit” type and the customers who share with their fellows without financial reward.

The point is that the biggest enemy of the first type of pirate is the second type.

On the principle of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” you should embrace the second type because:

i) They do not (in these digital days) propagate sub-standard versions of your work (ruiniung you reputation.

ii) They act as unpaid puiblicists – proving exposure that would cost a huge amount if you had to buy it….

Josh in CharlotteNC (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

If the legal option is better than the illegal option, you are essentially encouraging the industry to do nothing about piracy or do what they can to harrass illegal downloads.

If the legal options are better than piracy, then the industry doesn’t have to do anything different – they would be winning!

Doing nothing about piracy is completely incomprehensible for the industry.

No argument from me, but the list of things also incromprehensible to the industry also includes any understanding of economics, common sense, patience, and probably any form form of human decency.

The Rufmeister-General says:

Re: Re: Re:

I’m not sure whether you’re trolling or seeing the bigger picture differently than I do.

You talk of legal vs. illegal when it comes to listening to music. And then you talk of ways to curb the “illegal option”.

But let me inform you (depending on jurisdiction, YMMV):
– spreading viruses is illegal (“vira” is not a word)
– spreading trojans is illegal
– spreading backdoors is illegal
– tracking all activity on p2p networks is morally reprehensible and possible illegal

And not just illegal but despicable too.

Jaywalking is illegal, yes. But shooting a jaywalker in the leg with a gun is illegal too.

Have some sense of proportionality. Oh, and while you’re at it, irony too. 🙂

AB says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Very true.

It always irritates me when I hear someone fall back on the lame old ‘but he/she broke the law’ technicality. I can only assume that these people are unaware that every person in the US/Canada/UK (probably other western nations as well but I am only certain of these three) breaks the law at least once a day even if they simply stand still. There are actually laws specifically intended for the purpose of ensuring this (I learned this and some other interesting facts during a stint I spent working as an outside contractor with the police department). These laws were used to arrest serious suspects when no other evidence could be found. Sometimes just arresting someone will lead to a confession. These days they just make up false charges instead.

The truth is that ‘breaking the law’ is a meaningless concept and a really stupid excuse for excessive police activity.

The sad fact is that this situation should never have involved the police (at most one officer might have been present to ensure cooperation while examining/confiscating the computer. There was certainly no justification for the presence of a fully armed squad.

Depressing note: Did you know that if you stop at a stop sign you can get a traffic ticket? All that is required is that your wheels stop turning. Period. Words straight from the mouth of a bylaw enforcement officer. And if you’ve ever had to deal with one of those people you know just how ridiculous the law can be when read by the letter rather then the intent.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

But that is what they’re doing.
Making the “legal” option better by coming down hard on people not using it.

Unfortunately it turns out that the people who use the illegal options are often some of the biggest users of the legal options too and most people feel more sympathetic to 9 year old girls than umbrella organisations for publishers who seem to hate their customers.

Chronno S. Trigger (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

“But that is what they’re doing.
Making the “legal” option better by coming down hard on people not using it.”

That’s not making the legal option better, that’s attempting (and failing) to make the illegal option worse. This is their problem, they’re focusing on the wrong end of the scale. If they actually attempted to make the legal option better, the illegal option would fade into obscurity.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

True but by by making the legal side better they enable piracy. For instance, when I buy a digital track, I’d like to play it anywhere on anything. When I buy a bluray disc, I’d want to be able to burn a backup and play it just as the original, why? Because my 4yr old likes to play with them. In their minds that makes piracy easier, something they don’t want to do. So we’re left with harsh punishments because they fail at delivering what consumers want.

The Rufmeister-General says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

“When I buy a bluray disc, I’d want to be able to burn a backup and play it just as the original, why? Because my 4yr old likes to play with them.”

You should try this new supplier called Piracy(TM). Products acquired through Piracy(TM) will never break since they are digital-only, unlike discs. Also, if you download something through Piracy(TM) and you accidentally delete it, you can usually (no guarantees implied, your milage may vary) download it again for free!

Regular suppliers of content have yet to catch up with this level of service and technological flexibility.

Not an Electronic Rodent says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

True but by by making the legal side better they enable piracy.

No, no they don’t.

“Piracy” in the technical sense of making an infringing copy of something is in no way enabled or hampered by making the legal option better. There is not one format or technical restriction that has ever or will ever prevent copies being made and obtained. As technology advances this can only become cheaper and easier when it already costs next to nothing for circumventing the most complex “protection” available and is accomplishable by anyone with minimal skills.
Unless laws literally mandate (and fund of course) the total and constant monitoring of everyone’s life and enforce harsh punishments making the smallest infringing of copyright approximately equivalent of violent crime there will be little effect on copyright infringement and even then I doubt it would stop. Conversely, I’d imagine that if enforcement of copyright was dialed back to cover only the most gratuitous for-profit infringement, the amount of infringement would likely also change very little.

On the other hand, making legal offerings better, easier and cheaper would very quickly reduce the amount of infringement and also make more money. The problem is the corporations currently holding the strings know they’re too old and slow to actually compete in a marketplace like that because they’ve long since forgotten how and so they’ll do anythign they can to avoid it even if it means less money than they could have.

Oh, and:

When I buy a bluray disc, I’d want to be able to burn a backup and play it just as the original

Please don’t refer to things like this as “piracy”, you’re just playing their game. The obvious aim is for anything other than each an every person who “consumes content” paying each and every time they do to be declared illegal. Every time you refer to something that any sane person would consider a perfectly reasonable use of something that you’ve paid for as “piracy” you’re vailidating a step towards that worldview.

Richard (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Making the “legal” option better by coming down hard on people not using it.

No – because that would entail sonmehow coming down hard on people who don’t purchase their products because they don’t like them – or maybe have never even heard of them.

What they mean is trying to make the illegal option a lot worse by making the legal option a little worse.

Unfortunately only the second half of that sentence actually happens in reality.

Anonymous Coward says:

I’d be scared to death if my doorbell rang at eight in the morning, and a bunch of MAFIAA thugs stormed into my house and started taking my 9 year old’s toys, like her Winnie the Pooh laptop.

Merry Christmas kiddo! Now hand over your Winnie the Pooh laptop. What’s that? You need it to do your homework? Too bad, Winnie the Pooh is going to jail, and you’re Daddy might too.

out_of_the_blue says:

Classic example of appeal to emotions.

And since from last week, also an only too typical Techdirt re-write. Do you really believe that you’ve added anything?

You toss in: “is intimidating members of the public in this way really such a priority for the Finnish state?” — YES, YES, it is. Just not in the ironic way that I presume you intend.

JWW (profile) says:

Re: Classic example of appeal to emotions.

You know what ootb? Just fuck off.

The retail industry writes off their losses due to shoplifting, while the content industry desires a full police state to recoup their losses.

Writing off the losses to piracy would make all our lives easier and without the police state monitoring and raids (home invasions).

The RIAA’s actions are nearly indistinguishable from a criminal protection racket.

btrussell (profile) says:

Re: Re: Classic example of appeal to emotions.

“Writing off the losses to piracy…”

I like this!

Let the IRS decide just what their losses per year are.
They will want to know how the fuck they have stayed in business for so long while steadily losing money.

They want “property” rights and privileges while paying no “property” tax and expect law enforcement to uphold a civil matter?

Start paying “property” tax you freeloaders.
What’s that? Oh! That songs’ copyright isn’t worth $100 000 000?
(Just for you, into the black)

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Classic example of appeal to emotions.

Yep, not only does he not come up with anything to justify the actions of those he worships, he’s now attacking the site for daring to have taken a public holiday. In the meantime, I’ll bet he hasn’t paid a cent to read any of the content he’s complaining about, he just wants them to work for him “for free” in the exact same way as those fantasy strawman projections he attacks the rest of us for being. Interesting, huh?

Hardly surprising, given that he hasn’t managed to squeeze through his tiny skull the fact that this is an opinion blog based on stories broken elsewhere, not a primary news source (so of course they will be rewritten, dumbass). If he’s managed to spend that much time here without understanding the basic purpose of the site, it’s hardly surprising that every other argument he makes fails just as badly.

Trails (profile) says:

Re: Classic example of appeal to emotions.

“is intimidating members of the public in this way really such a priority for the Finnish state?” — YES, YES, it is. Just not in the ironic way that I presume you intend.

Thanks for making such an excellent and well supported argument. Your contributions here are valued by all.

I’m curious though why you’ve not yet decried the enabler of all this: Big Pooh.

Big Pooh continues to profit by enabling piracy off of the back of starving artists. Also, I heard Mike, the author of this blog articles, had dinner with Big Pooh and is funded by Big Pooh.

All the freetards here complain about Big Content from their parents’ basement while popping pimples all over their fritos, but you and I know the truth. We know who really takes home the honey.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Winning the Hearts and Minds

Well, some good did come out of this. The pop artists she was downloading music of responded that she would personally send out a BitTorrent tracker to make the album that the girl was downloading available for free for all little 9 year old girls everywhere 🙂

You will have to read the TorrentFreak article on the matter to fact check.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Winning the Hearts and Minds

True, you have to admit though that it shows the artists’ view in a very stark way.

God it feels good to be able to have a proper question put to my statement. This is EXACTLY why I plug TechDirt when it’s appropriate. We have a non-petulant crowd that respects rational thinking without the mob mentality.

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Winning the Hearts and Minds

> How will they know if it is 9 year old girls doing the downloading?

The way that the legal process normally does. Seize the 9 year old’s laptop. Keep it in evidence until years after it becomes hopelessly obsolete. When she reaches, oh say, age 29, return it with a letter explaining that they have determined that the laptop was not involved in illegal downloading.

See how that works? Fair. Just. Everyone happy.

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Winning the Hearts and Minds

They could serve you. But the legal case against you may be classified in order to protect, um, national security. Yeah, that’s it. National Security.

These guys show up. Bust down your door. Steal your 9 year old’s laptop. And say that you are being investigated by some unnamed government agency for some classified crime. The laptop must be seized as evidence for the recording industry.

Now just a few years ago I would have called the previous paragraph the ravings of a lunatic paranoid nutjob. Now I would call it “something exciting coming soon to a neighborhood near you!”

We’ve got to steal 9 year old’s laptops to protect national security. After all, think of the children!

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Winning the Hearts and Minds

In copyright cases, it’s a must. Illegal drugs require a warrant or, in rare cases, any criminal activity in plain sight during the apprehension of a person on probation (while in violation therein) is admissible in the US court of law. It falls somewhere between Habeas Corpus and Probable Cause if I’m not mistaken. For what it’s worth, what happened in Finland, is exactly the direct definitions for bribery and extortion.

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Winning the Hearts and Minds

Considering the immediate and severe danger that potential copyright infringement represents compared to criminal activities such as illegal drug use, burglary, murder or terrorism, I think we can all agree that we should make the rules for law enforcement more flexible. Trade liberty for security from copyright infringement. Why should a warrant be required when we’re talking about something as heinous as allegations of copyright infringement?

Wally (profile) says:

After being banned for asserting my opinion by ArsTechnica users’ apparent mob mentality, I am glad to be back to a place where you don’t get banned for not just voicing your opinion with reason and rationell, but for telling the truth. I’m Wally 2 over there.

Anyway gripes aside I read about this story in detail and I’m honestly flabbergasted and disgusted (though admittedly not suprised) that this would happen. The girl is freaking 9 years old for God’s Sake. What makes it even worse is that even in Finland’s over the top copyright laws still requires a warrant.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Isn’t it interesting that in a non-Apple related article (not even remotely related) YOU had to go and throw in an Apple related bit?

Yeah, I can’t see why they may have banned you. /s

Because you’ve never stated factually inaccurate information. /s

There’s nothing wrong with liking products made by ANY company, but there is taking it to an extreme. At which point you become a fanboi. You passed that point long ago. As a fanboi, and your comment history is testament to you being one, facts and rational thinking waved bye bye a long time ago. When you defended a patent on page flipping and said others can just defend themselves in court… you showed your true colors. And that’s ignoring the remark you made that basically went, “Well Samsung is just being childish with countersuits.” Really?! Apple is suing everyone over everything and getting smacked down in non-U.S. courts but Samsung is being childish?! Sheesh.

btrussell (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

“Isn’t it interesting that in a non-Apple related article (not even remotely related) YOU had to go and throw in an Apple related bit?”

To be fair, someone gave the girl an eye mac pro. Unless “eye mac pro” is Finnish for “Big Mac.”

But I agree with you. And well said. Thanks for saving me the labor!

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

btrussle, you know how I get when I’m trolled. The link I provided is simply a way of expressing my gratitude towards this community’s attitude towards open thought. even if I did “show” a “bias” towards Apple, as this AC says with his cherry picked the quote. I merely pointed out early on that Samsung is just as bad. Don’t let the AC show you half truths though…I did eventually even it out…if it is whom I think it is, he doesn’t have the balls to use the same user name here that he does at ArsTechnica. You will notice I was banned for ONE moderated comment where I simply stated that Samsung’s Executives were not allowed to see the agreement as it was for “Lawyers’ Eyes Only”.

The AC commenting to you is infact a member of ArsTechnica, where a lot of the majority of users have a SEVER bias against Apple because Apple let Microsoft in to their world in 1997.

You want true colors? Look at the statement that got me banned.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

The AC commenting, that’d be me, in NOT in fact a member of ArsTechnica, nor has ever been.

I am an AC who visits this site daily and takes note of all comments, even the troll ones and sees how people view different things. Now, as I pointed out above, there’s nothing wrong with liking and using products by any company. Nothing at all. But your comment history reveals you to be an Apple fanboi, sorry to say. And I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that, if done so with a bit of humility. As in, hey I think Apple rocks, but they fuck up occasionally and there are other competitors who Apple could stand to take note of and maybe learn to do things from. But YOU go out of your way to defend Apple even when they’re in the wrong, you also on more than one occasion have stated things about Android that were as far from truthful as could be, you’ve also been caught out as posting under different “AC” names and then claimed it wasn’t you that people were responding to (even though the snowflakes were all the same). And as is rather obvious, you seem to have a persecution complex. Assuming I followed you here from Ars. And you DO NOT just get banned from Ars for having one moderated comment, especially not one where you per your comment I’m replying to “stated that Samsung’s Executives were not allowed to see the agreement as it was for “Lawyers’ Eyes Only”.” If you were banned it had to be for something more than that, and given your history here I wouldn’t doubt that you were banned for excessive fanboi-ism in the same vein as you’ve done here (lies, distortion, etc.)

And sorry, but your link is irrelevant to the article at hand. And as I pointed out, leave it to YOU to bring up Apple in a non-Apple related article. You could QUITE EASILY just have said, “You know what, I love TechDirt. The community here is quite reasonable and respectful, even when it comes to differences of opinions, as opposed to other sites I’ve visited.” And left it at that. But no, you just had to throw in Apple related nonsense in a non-Apple story. Which again, is part of your fanaticism. Save it for when it’s called for, Apple related articles (and even then, try not to spin everything too “poor Apple, always being picked on sh*t on… because they’re the best”, which is how your comments come off as for those who can read between the lines).

TL;DR version: Wally, you’ve got issues. You aren’t being followed, and you’re an Apple fanboi (and not the kid that just like Apple products, but the kind who flip out when others point out Apple’s shortcomings). If you got banned, you probably deserved it and I’m sure there’s more to your banning than you’re revealing here.

“you know how I get when I’m trolled” HA! You don’t get trolled. Ever. Your definition of “trolled” is “people are saying things about Apple that I don’t agree with and I will take what they say to heart and respond as if I’ve been personally attacked”.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

“The AC commenting to you is infact a member of ArsTechnica, where a lot of the majority of users have a SEVER bias against Apple because Apple let Microsoft in to their world in 1997.”

See Wally, this is where you get called out for being a liar and your own words are used against you. You just said that the AC, me, was someone who they were not. You made this claim and basically, reading between the lines, were saying that someone from Ars is now here on TechDirt hounding you.

No, sir. The one looking like an arse and a liar is you. And I am not trolling you. Again, you don’t know the definition of trolling. I merely pointed out, originally, that you brought up Apple in a non-Apple story. Then you went off from there, and are STILL defending Apple in a non-Apple article. If anything, the one trolling here is you. Bringing up Apple in non-Apple articles is something an Apple fanboi/troll does. Proof lies across countless number of websites, to the point that a large number of sites resorted to moderating comments and banning people who did exactly that. Essentially spamming non-Apple articles with Apple comments (and they instituted the same ban on Android and Windows and etc fans, so don’t go start saying you’re being persecuted against… which you’ve already pretty much stated… one comment DID NOT get you banned, regardless of your beliefs, common sense and logic pretty much say that, so you did something else).

Also, keep in mind that I didn’t call you an Apple fanboi for liking Apple’s products. I even stated REPEATEDLY that there is nothing wrong with liking ANY companies products/services. I stated that where you crossed that supporter to fanboi line was when you defend Apple when they’re in the wrong, make provably false claims and assertions about Android, go out of your way to bring up Apple in non-Apple articles, claim you’re being persecuted against (banned by Ars) for making a “simple statement”, and so on and so forth.

Basically, you’re a fanboi because you’re acting and doing all the things fanbois do. Not because you just like Apple products.

And I’m just basically replying to all your other replies to me in this one comment. No need to keep replying back and forth. You aren’t getting trolled, you’re doing the trolling. You’re a fanboi, that’s already proven and your own comment history backs up my assertions that you are one, and so on and so forth. No need to go back and forth over this. You got called out, you’ve done nothing but prove said calling out as true. Now just drop it. We get it, Apple rocks, Wally was wronged by Ars, blah blah blah. Move on already, fanboi.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Lol. Never. At least never from an Apple fanboy. I’ve seen people who liked Apple products say, “Man, they fucked up with this or that” or “Man, maybe Apple should stop suing and start innovating” or “Well, if Apple products were better than they shouldn’t sue, because the competitors are offering inferior products… but if they’re suing it means maybe they’re not so inferior”. Things like that. But never once have I seen an Apple fanboy own up and say anything along those lines. And definitely not Wally for sure. Of course he’s definitely spread lies and misinformation about Android, but that’s neither here nor there on the part an Apple fanboy.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

Oh Apple had screwed up over the years mind you…iOS 6 was a huge cockup and was so bad it got people fired for rushing it….however, there are quite a few here and there that stuck in my mind….like freezing my ass off in the 1st grade using an educational program called ZigZag…there was a reason I did…it was the Apple///

And I always pointed out that Apple is no angel. And insulting me on that scale is a bit dangerous. The reason I feel iOS is superior is because it suites my needs the way I like them….to each his own.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Re:

“And I always pointed out that Apple is no angel. And insulting me on that scale is a bit dangerous. The reason I feel iOS is superior is because it suites my needs the way I like them….to each his own.”

No, you’ve never pointed out that Apple is no angel. And if you have, when you rarely have, it’s been followed by something along the lines of, “EVERYBODY ELSE IS DOING IT!” Which again, proof lies in your posts. Apple is filing ridiculous lawsuits, and actually started the whole ridiculous lawsuits thing. But you go and say, “Samsung is doing it too! So ha! It’s not just Apple!”

As for insulting you on that scale? I did not insult you. I merely pointed out what you have in fact done on numerous occasions. This is not an insult, it is a verifiable fact. Nor is it any way dangerous. Unless of course you don’t like having our your behavior and actions pointed out and commented upon, and feel threatened when someone does so. In that case it might be dangerous, but if by dangerous you mean, “I will get riled up for you daring to have the nerve to call me out on my BS and attempt to insult you!” Then yeah, dangerous it is. But you’re not that witty and you can’t actually push my buttons. I can’t say the same applies for you.

And that’s fine, feeling iOS is superior for YOU based on YOUR NEEDS. But attempting to discredit operating systems based on your limited knowledge of them, as well as completely fabricated and false information is in no way acceptable. I have and will continue to call you out for such behavior. I’ve said so time and time again. And superior is in the eye of the beholder. If you need to make things up about Android to make iOS sound superior, which you have, again, done on numerous occasions, then we have a problem. And it’s not with Android, but with possibly you having an inferiority complex as it pertains to your mobile OS of choice. It’s not hard to say, “I like iOS because of reasons X, Y and Z. I think iOS is superior because of reasons X, Y and Z. But that is my own personal preference and to each their own. End of statement.” If you have to make things up or spread already debunked lies then you aren’t allowing to each their own, you’re going out of your way to create and perpetuate falsehoods. If you believed in to each their own there would be no reason to do so. Again, possible inferiority complex.

G Thompson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

No, you’ve never pointed out that Apple is no angel. And if you have, when you rarely have, it’s been followed by something along the lines of, “EVERYBODY ELSE IS DOING IT!”


Wally and I have had numerous discussions regarding Apple v Samsung etc, and he has always come across as yes someone who likes Apple but also someone who also thinks that they are being complete iDiots (pun intended) in a lot of situations to do with the patent wars (and other marketing weirdness too)

Looking at the public comments he has left on ARS, in this context (I do not have access to anything else that may have or may not of occurred) I am left with a sense that ARS has been absolutely unreasonable based on Wally2 actually providing cited and reasonable critical discourse on the current situation.

In fact for ARS to have actually moderated one of the specific posts he made based on “trollike behaviour” is freakin ridiculous and inequitable in the extreme having seen some of the other comments on the same thread and others throughout ARS by others who absolutely are trolling and never ever get sanctioned… ARS is NOT the best community if you have a differing (and backable) opinion.

Why we have had a whole thread just to discuss this ‘wally likes TD better than ARS” is strange, though a testament to his original claim that ARS is better than TD in respect to the community allowing and wanting discourse.

and Samsung and other things

Wally says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

Well, see the thing I noticed with Ars is that the ban system run by bots based on number of complaints about a comment, voting systems based around people’s bias and are not required to justify your comments or speculation with out some sort of proof….even when you have the proof, you’re still considered a liar amongst the bias in the community.

I find it much more relaxing here because arguments I’ve gotten into here, I’ve always met middle ground and learned something new without flat out being told I’m wrong with no explanation.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

You must be a very successful troll to get me to come here and comment on your sad petulant little post. Here goes.

Remember all those AC trolls going “pirate Mike!!!”? The following is giving me reason to believe they come from Arstechnica.

“Just fuck off from here as well would you?”

Now before you decide on what you wish to do with the rest of your life, make sure your career path is not trolling. Your job ends up making you live under a bridge near a sewer drain in a bog out in the middle of nowhere.

btrussell (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Wylma, don’t assume I am being led by an ac commenter. I moved out of my mothers’ basement before you were born. I’ve read enough of your posts myself.

I have no idea how you get when trolled. All I know on that subject is that you are the self-appointed king troll-buster.

P.S. Neither the ac comment nor mine are troll comments. Simply stating facts and opinions. If you think they are trollish, take a look in the mirror.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

First, please don’t accuse me of being a fanboy. All I’m really saying is that Samsung is doing the same thing as Apple…claiming ridiculous ownership of things they don’t own.

My main gripe about the ban is that it was based automated, unchecked, “number of complaints limit before we give you the boot” system. Fanboy or not, I did not let my bias get in the way. Here, the only punishment is that your comment gets reported as abusive and gets hidden while you still maintain your word.

A lot of the anti-Apple sentiment there has nothing to do with Apple vs. Android. I was told on good authority that a lot of the French users there have a bias because Apple was once so “exclusive” and “unique” and they were upset that Gass? being fired and Jobs replacing Gass?’s business model. So when I said “hey, wait a minute, look here at Samsung’s recent executive level litigations, they are just as crazy as Apple now” I got dogpiled upon. Whenever I am asked/pushed to look for evidence on pure rational thought and reason, that’s where I got extreme.

I’m not a fanboy for at least mildly supporting a company I grew up on. If you are not from the US, I’m aware you might not understand the nostalgia behind it. Most schools in the US while I was in grade school and jr. high, had Apple computers. So really it’s more that I know from their products that I’m used over the years, I have a legitimate reason for showing a little support for them.. Though I’m not happy about OSX.

Anonymous Cow Art (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

I’m the guy who wrote about Apple bashing on a French Mac site on ArsTechnica, and I’ve been an Apple user since 1991.
You’re misquoting me and you’re telling nonsense.

The thing that was irritating about you was not that you stated that Samsung was doing the same thing as Apple. It was that you were doing the same kind of bullshit that Fandroids do.
Fandroids repeat over and over that Apple has a patent on all rectangle devices with rounded angles, which is incorrect, you had this weird claim that Samsung supposedly used a patent against every device with variable volume and sound output.
In the debate, you chose to dumb it down. On AT, we get irritating people, but not people who reduce the case to rounded angles stuff. I didn’t ask for moderation but I don’t feel you had relevant contributions to the discussion.

Then, the French Apple bashing, on MacBidouille/HardMac. You totally distorted my comment. I mentioned another group of Apple haters that weren’t your average Open Source enthusiasts. I was pointing out that some of the complainers had been traditional Mac users for a long time, some of them even at a time Apple was truly beleaguered (wow… remember when you had to add “beleaguered” to Apple?), in the mid-90s.
I don’t know where you got your Gass?e crap from, but if it’s legal, I’d like to know where I can order some. This had nothing to do with Gass?e or Spindler, or Amelio. And it has everything to do with Apple moving on other fields during the noughties, on the portable audio player, smartphone, and tablet businesses, with some success.
A few prosumer Mac users feel estranged by the new Apple. Besides being understandably bothered by how Apple doesn’t take care of their needs (the aging Mac Pro, Final Cut Pro X…), some of them have moved towards total bitterness and nastiness, including the site editor in chief, while his site might be the 2nd one in terms of traffic in France and French speaking European countries.
As a a result, the news coverage has been surreal for one or two years. In my opinion, the forums are full of disgruntled guys who felt that they were members of the elite 1% in the 90s and early 00s, when they were physicians or “creatives” who used Macs for their needs, even if was more a symbol of status the way a BMW or a Rolex is.
Now that Apple is also a consumer brand, they see the value of using Apple products severely reduced and thus their own sense of importance. Hence, in my opinion, the nastiness.
They idealize how “great” Apple was in the early ’00s, even if they fail to remember that the OS 9 – OS X transition was a rough one, the G4 was a true lame duck and Apple mostly survived thanks to the iPod being such a big hit.
They will bitch endlessly about the focus on iPhone and iPad in Apple strategy compared to the Mac (and there, the focus on laptops against desktops) while failing to understand all the stats and news about the slump in the PC market, its own move from desktop to laptop and the booming market of tablets and other mobile devices.
To sum it up, they bitch because Apple tries to fight on the battle front while disregarding their home turf from a decade or 15 years ago. They fail to see that the entire industry is now disregarding this, Apple being just more blunt than the others.
As a result, we have on the forums for this French board tons of guys who claim that they got rid of every Apple device they had, and then still keep on writing a dozen posts every day on an Apple centered forum, just to bitch about the company that made their former computer. This is a ridiculous love-hate relationship, and I just used it as an example of how Apple was a target of passion even outside of the Android/Free Software community. You can’t put everybody in the same sack.

And, on the same principle, I don’t think that your views were just one of a harmless Apple user. You were deliberately attacking Samsung with fabricated arguments that had little to do with the situation, in order to incense Android fans there and make the discussion even more lowbrow than it already was. You were rightfully flagged for that.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re:

In some ways, the fact that she’s a 9 year old girl is almost irrelevant to the story’s substance (although it does make the story more memorable and newsworthy).

Assuming it’s been reported accurately, we have an “investigation” launched on flimsy evidence (no, IP addresses still don’t identify people, the file supposedly downloaded apparently wasn’t) that led to an attempt at extorting a 3rd party (the account holder isn’t the “offender”), followed by a raid far more appropriate for targeting dangerous criminals, then confiscation of private property whose value far exceeds any losses caused by the “crime” (if indeed it did take place). All because the record label had apparently failed to make the legal options accessible and easier to locate (the suggestion seems to be that she found the Pirate Bay link via a Google search, and that the legal option they reverted to was a physical store purchase rather than iTunes/Spotify/whatever else is available in Finland – SEO rather than police raids may have been the real solution here).

The age and laptop decor seem to be getting the headlines, but anyone who thinks that the newsworthiness ends there is missing most of the real objections. As usual.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

I know exactly what you mean. They accessed the house network and did illegal taps on the traffic coming in and out of that house.

Scenario 1: Let’s assume for a moment that she’s using iTunes to rip a CD. It’s a fairly common thing to do. This means to gather evidence, they would have to commit to a physical data beech (viewing her desktop). So that would mean that there was illegal access to the computer. Would it be possible to gain access to files and folders on someone else’s computer through a local DHT connection? That explains why my ISP (time warner) no longer allows them.

2. Assuming she did use a torrent, how many legitmate digital distribution systems (like Steam, GOG.com’s downloader, or anyone familiar with how StarCraft 2 and WoW are updated) do you know of that are known to use BitTorrent protocol? Quite a few.

Either way you look, there’s more evidence of criminal activity from the police than there is any evidence that this 9 year old girl actually pirated songs.

Dreddsnik says:

Translation of Chisu’s ‘answer’ from Warner Music ….

“Warner Music’s CEO Niko Nordstr?m commented on this as follows: “Carey has not been aware of the issue and it is unconscionable that he is in fact picked on. This could have happened to any recording artist or record company. TTVK drive on a centralised basis, among other things, the music creators, artists, record companies and publishers. The assertion that TTVK and the record company would have tuned the trap is baseless.
TTVK has determined that certain IP addresses are distributed pirated music files. After this, the TTVK has asked the Court for permission to disclose the information of the holder of the IP soitteen. The IP address does not indicate, for example, the user’s age. This procedure is currently the only way to tackle illegal downloading. The power of the State is requested to provide for alternative and softer approaches. ” T: Chisu team “


Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

The best thing would be to ignore him, but you should seriously be careful when calling others “poor petulant child”. I only say this, because I’ve previously had discussions with you, where you started them by making false statements about Android and I called you out on such, then went on at length to explain how and why you were wrong, which usually ended with you saying and I quote, “Fuck you, stop picking on me.” Which sounds like something a “poor petulant child” would resort to when they realize that they aren’t going to get away with making uninformed or flat out false claims about things they obviously know nothing about.

It’s quite simple, DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS. You don’t want to get “trolled”? As I’ve said before, stop bringing up Apple in non-Apple articles. Don’t want to get “picked on”? Stop making false claims and spreading misinformation about operating systems you, quite obviously, know nothing about. And so on and so forth.

You need to be mindful of your own behavior before you start chastising others about theirs. I also had this interesting remark I was going to make about a 26 year old (which I’ve seen you say you are) acting like a child, but the truth is I only recently turned 27 myself (4 months ago) and it kind of pains me to realize there are other people so near my age that can’t act mature online that I decided to spare you the witty remark. Well that and I was a bit nervous it would seem as if I was picking on you.

But yes, don’t get too harsh on him. /s (Just fyi, as I said before I pay attention to what others write on this site. I’ve seen your “harsh” responses to “trolls”. They’re anything but. In fact, I see them for what they are. Responses from someone whose skin is quite thin and whose buttons are beyond easy to push. But “harsh”? Hardly.)

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Ignore me then. What lie did I spread about android???? Android is like Linux, its kernal is the same but its interface varies from device to device. You are defending someone who crapped on a previous post on here or two. Maybe you should be mindful and more aware of your surroundings before you blindly defend trolling from either side. You’re still huffing along angrily at me. Please just stop, you’re not helping by encouraging me to respond to you, or proxying your comments.

You’re being TL/DNR and honestly I don’t have the time or energy to read your posts. You are being no better than as you claim me to be so just drop it.

Anonymous Coward says:


When did spying become legal or the law of the land?

The INTERNET works with packets. If you use phone terms, each packet has the called phone number and the calling phone number and the voice(DATA). The packets bounce through the Internet In a direct route. This message packet went, My computer to my isp, to isp … to Techdirt.

So CIAPC had to be SPYING or part or a member of the download conversation! I think most people call it SPYING when someone makes it a point to be a member of a conversation uninvited!!

Anonymous Coward says:

This is the action that copywrong enforcement dreads. Any possible recoup of extortion is outweighed by the damage the publicity brings.

Its happened in the past with paraplegics and people in ill health or even dead. There’s been a few in the past that were dropped because the bad publicity was so bad there was no way to justify the action. The equivalent of continuing to dig the hole deeper.

It demonstrates just how out of control these enforcement actions and extortion attempts are.

Anonymous Coward says:

Been a while since I heard the name ARSTechnia.

I quit going to that site the day they decided that running adblockers was stealing their income. I’ve heard many others say they dropped the site too and never returned.

I hear now-a-days they don’t seem to mind so much adblockers because that error caused their readership to drop hence their ad income wasn’t worth as much anymore.

Ah, I’m good with that. Don’t plan on returning to such a place. I can find news elsewhere without the harassment.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re:

It’s gotten worse. The banning system is basically controlled by trolls and the banning system there is automated and doesn’t have anyone moderating it. The smallest thing can be reported by ANYONE once and moderators are now ranked by up votes in their comments. The admins will ban you without the slightest care for free speech which is what was once constantly promoted on the site. I’ve been permabenned because I used a second account to circumvent my initial unjust ban (which violated my First Amendment rights) which would have been unbanned 1:47 AM my time on December 3rd

Soy attitude towards them is now that of Eric Cartman “Screw You Guys, I’m going home”.

Piglet says:

We live in a sick world

I felt sick and disgusted after reading this story about a 9 year old girl having her Winnie The Pooh laptop taken from her. Then I read that the Finnish Thugs try to extort money from her father, telling him “Christmas is a luxury”. Theft, extortion, home invasion… this all sounds like the work of the Mafia. That poor family.

Anonymous Coward says:

Shooting themselves in the foot

It’s this kind of over the top enforcement that is going to get public opinion turned completely against copyright holders. If they don’t back off, they’re going to be left with nothing.

If your business model requires a police state to implement, then you need a new business model, no matter how morally justified you feel.

Sasha says:


I’m sorry, I must have gotten a different impression of the word “raid” as a child. If what this article is proposing – that ringing the doorbell of a home at 8am a very reasonable time for a household with kids to be awake is one – then I’m raided on a weekly basis. Is this the scenario we picture when we here the cops raided a drug house – them calmly ringing the bell for a chat? Or is a raid when they kick down the door with guns pulled and lots of shouting and stuff? I really don’t like the fact that word was used or the description of the child’s laptop in an attempt to take focus away from the fact the father was contacted about all of this in the first place BEFORE cops came and instead of saying “I’m really sorry it was my 9 year old and I’ve spoken to her” he ignored them and the police were only doing their job investigating a crime called in by another citizen.

Kevin (profile) says:

My wish

If only department.
If only the unions that control the radio announcers and radio/TV technicians put a ban on playing or showing any product made by members of the RIAA and stuck to music from Independents and non RIAA record companies then there would be a complete change of guard in a few days.
Without radio or TV artists associated with the RIAA companies would see their sales drop to Zero.
Watch the multies change their approach big time.
Nice to dream sometimes.
I hope this girl’s parents sue big time and demand the removal of whichever judge granted the warrant.
No back to reality and find a place to hide my Micky Mouse laptop.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...