‘Pirate’ Site Admin Ordered To Pay Hollywood $12.8M

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If you had any interest in running a site that links to pirated content, this judgment for $12.8 million will no doubt dissuade you from following that career path. :eek:

The operator of a forum which linked to Hollywood movies, TV shows, music and software has been hit with a massive claim for damages. After previously being sentenced to one year in jail, the 26-year-old must now pay Hollywood at least $12.8m plus a further $4.4m to a pair of music groups and software giant Microsoft.
Click to expand...
 
OUCH!

gR2oeu0.gif
 
We have determined that x + (y * z) = garrrrrrrrrrrrjobbbbblemillinz in damages that you must pay our entitled selves for enabling that most heinous of crimes: the theft of intellectual property. Don't you know that piracy costs the US economy 10% in GDP growth annually?

:rolleyes:
 
I think I'm starting to see the scheme of bribes now. It's probably a percentage of what sentence is!
 
This shit just makes me furious. It's right up there in level to watching a Hollywood vid of actors smoking cigarettes in almost every scene and everyone who uses a laptop in a movie is using an Apple. The last movie I watched, in the first 5 minutes of the movie showed a dude on an apple computer smoking a cigarette. Jeez, movie paid for in the first few minutes. Hollywood can go straight to hell as far as I'm concerned.
 
Pirate-site Owner: Ok, I'll get right on that, let me see will you take a post dated check?
 
yea....like my dad always said when I asked for a bump in my allowance back when I was a kid: "You can't get blood from a turnip"
 
So they go after the easy targets instead of the people actually hosting the content.

Seems legit.:rolleyes:
 
If this was US I would recommend a flight to Venezuela and getting a name change.
 
cyclone3d said:
So they go after the easy targets instead of the people actually hosting the content.

Seems legit.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I wonder if the forum was monetized, I mean if you put up a site and are making a profit off people pirating movies or whatever it shouldn't be a surprised that your targeted in this manner.
 
Streiw said:
Good luck getting paid.
Click to expand...

yea i was just thinking that to. they will be lucky to get pennies on the dollar, probably 1/10th a penny on the dollar. The judgement looks good but bankruptcy will get rid of it.
 
Apparently the site is still up, too...

Clearly they don't even care about the actual piracy, it's just a money grab.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Pirate-site Owner: Ok, I'll get right on that, let me see will you take a post dated check?
Click to expand...

:D I was going to say nearly the same thing. I'm sure he's got that under a floorboard or something.
 
Arbit3r said:
yea i was just thinking that to. they will be lucky to get pennies on the dollar, probably 1/10th a penny on the dollar. The judgement looks good but bankruptcy will get rid of it.
Click to expand...

The problem here is.. depending upon the laws of the nation itself.. they will garnish his wages for life, or until its paid off. I doubt bankruptcy court will help, he will still be liable to some extent or another once he begins making money.

I dont see this is a deterent at all. I see these types of verdicts as more of a hatred towards the record industry and the court systems. They just dont understand downloading content, and until the laws are changed, a lot of what they can or cannot do with regards to settlements and cases.. ties their hands. Some justices have stood up and just destroyed anything associated with copyright infringement, others have stuck to the law but used it to diminish anything they have to order,, others have just sat back and done nothing. Why do you think certain types of lawsuits are brought ONLY in certain jurisdictions? Its not to be fair to the defendant, but to be unfair to them.

This wont change anything. Those who pirate, wont stop. Its to cheap and easy to get what you want, when you want, and HOW you want, to do with as you please, for it to ever be stopped.
 
If the person downloading the content had no intent of over purchasing the content, you can't count that as lost revenue.
 
There will be a case at some point in the future where Retard company XYZ goes after someone, gets a crazy judgement and ruins the life of an otherwise normal tax paying citizen... this person will be put through the system and after everything of value is taken, will go on some shooting spree, hopefully on the lawyers/execs/ceo of whatever company initiated the money grab.

I'm not supporting some mass shooting at all -- but over and over we see how a company will get a judgement for an amount that will NEVER be able to be paid back. If I knew for the rest of my life I'd be living with garnished wages and under some sort of court orders, I'd just self destruct, and take a few of the greedy crooked people out with me. Better that way than living the next 70 years a slave.
 
collegeboy69us said:
If I knew for the rest of my life I'd be living with garnished wages and under some sort of court orders, I'd just self destruct, and take a few of the greedy crooked people out with me. Better that way than living the next 70 years a slave.
Click to expand...

But, you were the one that broke the law first. If you didn't break the law and get caught, you wouldn't end up in that situation.
 
Zepher said:
But, you were the one that broke the law first. If you didn't break the law and get caught, you wouldn't end up in that situation.
Click to expand...

While true, the punishment does not fit the crime. Unless the guy made that much off his site, which is undoubtedly not the case. Real people did not decide on this as reasonable punishment for this type of crime. Execs at some record company or motion picture group did, and bought it into existence.

There should be punishment for breaking the law, but it should fit the crime and scale of the crime being committed, and should not just be put into effect because some company or group could pay enough for that to happen.
 
I like how they just take the number the rights holders give them and base judgments on that, it's a totally made up value. In a real legal system companies have to prove that each case of infringement actually occurred and it's valued at the retail value of the infringement.
 
Mike89 said:
This shit just makes me furious. It's right up there in level to watching a Hollywood vid of actors smoking cigarettes in almost every scene and everyone who uses a laptop in a movie is using an Apple. The last movie I watched, in the first 5 minutes of the movie showed a dude on an apple computer smoking a cigarette. Jeez, movie paid for in the first few minutes. Hollywood can go straight to hell as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

Why do you care what kind of computer someone is on? Are you mad they aren't on what you perceive as the "superior" computer.
 
i also grow tired of obvious product placement, regardless of the product.
 
silk186 said:
i also grow tired of obvious product placement, regardless of the product.
Click to expand...

How does it in anyway detract from whats going on in the movie? Sounds like you're looking for something to complain about for the sake of it.
 
OEM said:
How does it in anyway detract from whats going on in the movie? Sounds like you're looking for something to complain about for the sake of it.
Click to expand...

Because a lot of it is incredibly blatant and sometimes (in certain TV shows, anyway) the characters talk about the product/car/whatever at length in a really obvious commercial-like dialogue. It annoys the hell out of me because it's not even subtle anymore.
 
What shows? I've never seen something that obvious where they talk about it. Hell, even House of Cards has never mentioned the company Apple once even though they show Apple computers in the white house...which we know is BS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top