The Pirate Bay's 'Lawsuit' Against Anti-Piracy Group More About Exposing Double Standards In Enforcement
from the looks-like-it dept
We stayed away from the story that made the rounds last week, concerning the claims that The Pirate Bay was going to file a lawsuit against Finnish anti-piracy agency CIAPC for setting up a site that parodies The Pirate Bay, using a copy of TPB’s stylesheet. Knowing how TPB operates, we assumed that this was not an ordinary situation, even as eager reporters mocked the site for its apparent hypocrisy. Having seen how TPB has acted in the past, we figured there was more to this, and this week the details are starting to come out.
TPB has now said that it has reported the parody CIAPC site to the Economic Crime Unit. Why? Well, it appears the whole thing is really about exposing the double standard by Finnish law enforcement. You see, recently, Finnish prosecutors went after a parody site by Finnish “software developer, researcher and internet activist” Matti Nikki. So, TPB, is noting that it just wants to see the law applied equally (by which it means, showing how farcical the law is, knowing that law enforcement will never prosecute this):
“In a similar case, the prosecution and the Helsinki Court of Appeals have found that a parody site can violate the moral rights of the original author. Changing the logo or making slight edits to the text are not enough to remove this liability,” they informed the police.
The Finnish EFF supported this claim, explaining to TorrentFreak (in the link above) that seeing how prosecutors reacted would be quite telling:
“It’s interesting to see, how the police reacts to Pirate Bay’s demands. On facts the case is indeed very similar to Matti Nikki’s case, in which the prosecutor decided to bring the charges on behalf of Save the Children.
“The law should be the same for everyone so now the objectivity of the Finnish police is going to be tested. Anyway as others have already pointed out, even if Pirate Bay loses the case, it’s a victory for their cause.”
So, while others were mocking, it appears there was a much more serious thought process going on here. One of the following possibilities are likely to occur:
- Finnish prosecutors do absolutely nothing, thus exposing their complete double standard in enforcing the law.
- A lawsuit happens, and TPB “loses” the case, as it’s an obvious parody situation which should be allowed — and thus, TPB reinforces the protections for parody.
- A lawsuit happens TPB actually wins the case, which most people would equally recognize as preposterous after seeing the initial press coverage of the story.
It’s looking like this was, yet again, a more clever move than many gave them credit for initially.
Filed Under: copyright, double standards, finland, law enforcement, lawsuit, moral rights, parody
Companies: ciapc, the pirate bay
Comments on “The Pirate Bay's 'Lawsuit' Against Anti-Piracy Group More About Exposing Double Standards In Enforcement”
All about Sharing
TPB is sharing, not only culture, but ideas. It wouldn’t surprise me if they were sharing ideas with the users to find the best way to go about winning on ANY outcome. It just shows how sharing IS caring… about many different things and POVs
Excellent!
My incredibly complex plan is coming to fruition. At the rate this is going, win or lose, it doesn’t matter, I still win.
Re: Excellent!
DAMMIT TVTROPES! I was going to be productive today…
Re: Excellent!
There is no way you win this. I set this plan in motion, to get you to set your plan in motion.
Of course.
The big question is: How deep with the Finnish gov't dig?
Will they quietly ignore this and for the “fringe” media be the only ones to champion this story? Or will they kick up a fuss and get everyone talking? *gets popcorn and hopes for the later…”
great move by the crew
Youtube: Original Dramatic Chipmunk
the chances are the Finnish police will ignore it completely and then simply throw the ‘double standards’ out. the next time that CIAPC brings another case, then the standards come back into force. we all know the rules. when it’s the general public or someone standing up on their behalf, the law is biased against them. when it’s governments, industries, corporations or rich/famous individuals, the law is biased for them. whatever the case is about, the people lose, end of story! the jibe from CIAPC about them wanting TPB to sue them could now mean they get a severe arse-kicking. if only!!!
Actually they want TPB to sue them… so they can force their names out of secrecy. They do not know who is behind TPB, despite claims it is still the original people, and they want a new set of heads to collect in a kangaroo court.
It is sad that once again we see the high court low court treatment in the world and the powers that be seem to have no problem with it. I wonder if they might have a problem with it when those condemned to the low court rise up.
Re: Re:
I don’t know if Finish law allows this, but they could just work with the AFK equivalent of proxies.
As you pointed out the pirate bay is sending a message about the double standard.
Other issues aside, I’m not sure the CIAPC site qualifies as “parody”. Though what constitutes parody is largely subjective, I don’t really see any attempt being made to “lampoon” or “mock” The Pirate Bay; it is merely a replication of the webpage with re-direction of the links.
That being said, I’m very much in favor of a generous interpretation of parody, and would be entirely satisfied should the courts accept CIAPC’s send-up as fair usage.
I think this is great stuff !
Fuck the MAFIAA !
Can they Sue for each time someone “Clicked” on that fake Website ?
Can they Charge them up to $150,000 USD per Click ?
I would say that the worst case scenario here would be that the case gets ignored and CIAPC is successful in using the media to turn the attention away from their double standards and over to TPB, without TPB getting a word in and explaining their side and the reason for this lawsuit.
It has happened before.
But the other scenarios do sound quite positive, so that’s what I will be hoping for.
Library
TPB is no more dangerous, and very similar to a library. That’s also one of the main reasons libraries are damaged by the rules minimalists want.
Xanatos gambit
Oh boy… we got an apprentice of Xanatos here….
We’re all screwed…
In a good way. :p
*maimed with a 2×4 to the head.*
Odin: Shut up, NEET.
TPB is organized crime period
A library pays the people who wrote the books. TPB sells ads to enable people to consume products without compensating the owners and creators. All ad networks are in the process of pulling ads from organized crime sites like TPB. 99.99% of the content indexed by TPB is there without the permission of the people who made the content. In The US, consuming that content is against US Federal law 17 USC 106 and 200,000 people have been sued since 2010 for doing so.
Re: TPB is organized crime period
In other news, the postal service, the phone lines, automotives, the internet, and many other things are also used in illegal activities, and yet rational people realize that the blame for an illegal activity rests on the person, not the tools they use.
Also, if you’re going to go for hyperbole, might as well go all the way and just go with something like ‘112% of the content indexed by TPB…’, as you’d have just as much proof either way.
Re: Re: TPB is organized crime period
_________________________
| |
| do not feed the troll |
| |
————————–
||
||
||
||
||
Re: Re: Re: TPB is organized crime period
nom nom nom nom 🙂
Re: TPB is organized crime period
Oh, for fuck’s sake! The US isn’t fucking Finland. Are you that much of an incalculable moron that you cannot understand the basic concept of sovereignty?
Re: Re: TPB is organized crime period
no. as in apples are not oranges
then again.. I thought the US was fucking everyone.
Re: TPB is organized crime period
Really, now? My family recently donated a bunch of books to our local library – you’re telling me that the original authors got paid somehow?
200,000 people sued? Is that “sued” or “subpoenaed”? Are those people named or just random John Does assigned to IP addressed you magicked out of your ass?
Re: Re: TPB is organized crime period
Not sure how it works in the US but in Sweden the authors gets payed a small sum every time book is borrowed from the library. So in that case yes the authors do get paid.
Re: Re: Re: TPB is organized crime period
So libraries in Sweden have to pay another “you are a pirate” tax? No wonder Terry Deary is so pissed off.
Re: TPB is organized crime period
A library pays the people who wrote the books.
Beyond buying the copies, no, they don’t. The users of TPB buy copies, too – otherwise the material couldn’t be on TPB at all.
So, a copy is bought at retail price by a distributor, multiple people consume that copy for free, and the distributor doesn’t charge or make a profit. Sounds pretty much like a public library to me.
In The US, consuming that content is against US Federal law 17 USC 106 and 200,000 people have been sued since 2010 for doing so.
Merely “consuming” that content is not against the law. What is against the law is copying and distribution (and other activities, which aren’t relevant to users of TPB). So, for example, buying a bootleg DVD from a street vendor is not copyright infringmenet – even though that puts money directly into a for-profit infringer’s pocket.
Ironic, then, that users are punished – and punished unreasonably – for infringement that does not make the infringers any money whatsoever.
TPB uses kopimi.
TPB says “copy me” and they got copied. Not a parody, just copied, just as TPB told them they could.
So, there’s a fourth outcome. The case gets thrown out because they had permission to use TPB’s CSS.
Re: Re:
Are CIACP going to plead that kopimi is a valid license?
Re: Re: Re:
Let’s not forget. The RIAA and their alphabet clones are very keen on prosecutions even where legality is proven. Hell, they DMCA their own stuff and can’t even tell what stuff is theirs on YouTube. License be damned; throw the book at them, as they have demanded for so many others.
Re: Re: Re:
It’s a license? I thought it was just a blanket, “Do whatever.” and not a license in the sense that there’s a long text written out that makes it legal.
Hahaha epic win. I was actually digesting the move too trying to figure what was the true meaning behind it. These guys are simply awesome.
win win win
“?Finnish prosecutors do absolutely nothing, thus exposing their complete double standard in enforcing the law. “
Only problem is, the double standard couldn’t be any more exposed, it’s already widely known and expected that copyright law is only for it’s buyers, so this choice is just business as usual.