DHS arrests man because his web site had a hyperlink to copyrighted material (DVD, server)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
channelsurfing.net was a huge warez site with an Alexa ranking of 8400 and link to 1000's cracks and streaming video.
It wasn't linking to copyrighted material. It was linking to illegal cracks of copyrighted material and providing links to illegal movie downloads. They try to get around it by saying that the embedded video is a "link" even though the movie is displayed on their site.
Ok, I 'm confused... first, why is the DHS or even a part of them "ICE", empowered to investigate and make such arrest for this? ICE = immigration and customs enforcement,,, exactly what jurisdiction of immigration and/or customs is this offense? Even if they were 'helping' the DoJ.
Secondly, embedded or linked or whatever else it may be called, what exactly was the crime that this guy/site break? Per what law or statute? Just linking/embedding other sites upon your own makes you guilty? Even if you profit from such a site? [Ummm, $90k / 5 yrs ~ $18k per year,,, wow!] Or,,, is it that you profited, and didn't pay any taxes and/or fees???
Lastly, removing this site via all the investigation and legals cost the government [ie: our taxes] how much?
PS: just soooo glad that this master mind criminal is off the streets, off the 'net, causing such harm to the good citizens of this country, while all those nice helpful good bankers and friendly druggies and the lobbyists and the Congressmen that helped all of those poor people into homes just to be foreclosed are free... Oh, and speaking of such... yea to us, what with the DHS and their brethrens,,, I feel soooo much more Free and Safe and Secure with Liberty and Justice in this great land.
Ok, I 'm confused... first, why is the DHS or even a part of them "ICE", empowered to investigate and make such arrest for this? ICE = immigration and customs enforcement,,, exactly what jurisdiction of immigration and/or customs is this offense? Even if they were 'helping' the DoJ.
Customs, the sites with the actual content would be overseas.
Quote:
Secondly, embedded or linked or whatever else it may be called, what exactly was the crime that this guy/site break? Per what law or statute? Just linking/embedding other sites upon your own makes you guilty? Even if you profit from such a site? [Ummm, $90k / 5 yrs ~ $18k per year,,, wow!] Or,,, is it that you profited, and didn't pay any taxes and/or fees???
It's been while since I looked over the law but I beleive it's distribution. For example is this image was CP:
I may not possess the image but linking to it is distribution.
Quote:
Lastly, removing this site via all the investigation and legals cost the government [ie: our taxes] how much?
Sites like this cost media companies billions of dollars, tens or 100's of millions of dollars in taxes and thousands of jobs.
Hollywood has this administration's ear and Hollywood is fearful that its business will evaporate due to piracy the way the adult video business has. That's why enforcing copyrights of movies and TV shows is on the front burner now. I'm not saying that's good or bad, but it is an explanation.
Hollywood has this administration's ear and Hollywood is fearful that its business will evaporate due to piracy the way the adult video business has.
Somebody is making a killing on porn. They might not be selling video tapes but they are cashing in on distribution over the interent, advertising and anything else they can make money on. They have embraced it and are making a fortune.
What Hollywood is fearful is digital media in general, it no longer has "shelf life". They lose control of the content and can no longer sell you the same thing over and over.
Customs, the sites with the actual content would be overseas.
It's been while since I looked over the law but I beleive it's distribution. For example is this image was CP:
I may not possess the image but linking to it is distribution.
Sites like this cost media companies billions of dollars, tens or 100's of millions of dollars in taxes and thousands of jobs.
Just how many of the links that were on his site were overseas?
And actually, isn't that kind of a stretch - "customs"?
Also, reread / remember what the Government's case is based on the following: "the criminal complaint alleges that McCarthy did engage in the 'reproduction and distribution' of copyrighted material". So,,, linking [or 'embedding'] to another site is "reproduction and distribution"?
Even removing the first two words "reproduction and", again, how is linking to another site "distribution" (of copyrighted material)?
Where's the independent proof, showing just how much is being "lost"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PITTSTON2SARASOTA
I'm still trying to figure out what THIS thread has to do with our Science Forum; seems more appropriate for The POC Forum IMO.
IMHO - this topic is relevant to both P&OC and this S&T forum,,, since quite a few people create web sites and/or have interest in this matter from a technology and/or internet view, there is viable interest in having this discussion here. Again, that is just my thought - that would be interesting to have discussion more related to the technological side of the issue, not the political aspects. Fine careful line, with that line having quite a bit of grey to it.
Last edited by ShadowCaver; 03-16-2011 at 06:38 AM..
Just how many of the links that were on his site were overseas?
I don't know but I would imagine all of them. Someone serving content like that from US server can be shut down by the content owner by serving DMCA notice. It's very powerful tool even in the hands of the little guy.
Quote:
And actually, isn't that kind of a stretch - "customs"?
It has to fall under someones jurisdiction, seems appropiate that customs would be dealing with copyrighted material being "imported" into this country via the internet.
Quote:
Even removing the first two words "reproduction and", again, how is linking to another site "distribution" (of copyrighted material)?
It's fine line, you'd ahve to get a lawyer for better explanation. I know a video site I belonged to years ago removed all direct links to DVD decrypter and instead had to link to the site itself.
Quote:
Where's the independent proof, showing just how much is being "lost"?
Those numbers were off the top of my head, trying to calcualte losses is really impossible because there is so many variables. The user may not purchase the title if they can't get it for free so the media company hasn't lost a sale but their product has been devalued. Certainly it' a substantial amount of money, I don't agree with many of the practices of large media corporations but they have a right to protect their content just like anyone does.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
