The Pirate Bay

The Pirate Bay (TPB from here on out) is one of the most popular bit torrent search sites in the world. On it one can find links to movies, television, music, books and many many other files. Both legal and copyrighted. Despite the sites massive popularity it has not yet been shut down, for two reasons. First: Because it does not actually host any of the files, and simply serves as a search engine for .torrent file types. Second: Becuase it is located is Sweeden, where the copyright laws are different. As a result TBP has fended off now countless depositions from major media companies demanding they remove their content (In a highly amusing manner, I might add).

However, along with Swedish law, this invincible status has changed. Now TPB is entangled in a major lawsuit with the RIAA and several other media companies who are sueing the site, and its owners, for absolutely everything they are worth.

To properly understand the full meaning of the trial one must have a rudimentary understanding of the bit torrent program (and Peer-to-Peer file sharing in general). Bit torrent works by linking a large number of users through a torrent program (there are many of these, they are not illegal). Instead of sending the file from a single host (like a website) instead the intended recipient of the file becomes flagged by other uses. Those with the file already complete (or partially downloaded) then send small snippets of it to the recipient, and they intern send them to others. Thus many people can get the same file with relatively low bandwidth usage. (For a full explanation, go here: http://computer.howstuffworks.com/bittorrent.htm)

As stated above: TBP is a simple search engine for these files. Since it does not directly host them, or profit from them in any way (Their Ad revenue is quite low, and used to fund the site) they argue that they have done nothing wrong. The conglomerated media, on the other hand, argues that, because they are deliberately running the site with the intent of spreading these files, they are committing major copyright infringement. They are claiming losses in the tens of millions as a result.

Now the true relevance of this as such: Should TPB be convicted of piracy, the courts will have set a precedent that ANYONE, who's service assists in the location of these files (like google, yahoo, or any other search function) can be held responsible for copyright infringement.

Naturally the stakes are extremely high. But lets look at both cases.

The Pirate Bay: Though their lawyers would claim otherwise, TPB is clearly a site intended for the proliferation of copyrighted material. Though they may not host it themselves, they are taking great steps to make such files readily available. On the other hand, even without this site the files are still present, and easily found. Which begs the question, is TPB truly making any difference to the downloading of these files, or simply making saving time for those who would.
The owners of TPB would certainly like to think that way, and argue that their service's assistance in the downloading of copyrighted material is incidental. And that the RIAA cannot (or at least seriously lacks the data) to prove that they have actually suffered losses as a result (This is the case, actually, but it is up for the spin-doctors and lawyers to make that obvious)

The Conglomerated Media: The RIAA (and friends) have not taken a good approach to this trial. They had limited understanding of the bit torrent program (they experts admitted to having no idea how it worked) and extremely bad data. This in mind they have still made an admirable plea as to the harm caused by TPB, and the obvious criminal intent (which was pretty obvious) of the organization. Their desire is jail time, the removal of the site, huge fines for their "losses", and a list of all users of the Pirate Bay (which they are simply not going to get).

So how has this turned out so far? For TPB, pretty good. The prosecution had to drop half the charges on the first day due to their astounding lack of understanding about the technical aspects of the site. However, charges against the owners, and the act of aiding in 'criminal activity' still remain and are the lynch pin of the trial. Despite what one might think about copyright law, they can see where a guilty verdict (especially an unconditional one) would be a massive attack against the entirety of the Internet.

I for one, am understanding of the RIAA's stance, however absolutely despise the methods and laws they use to get their way. Despite what they would like one to think, file sharing is not theft (nothing is taken from the owner). I am quiet confident that the outcome of this trial will be felt in many ways, though the verdict will be left to decide if this is a positive dispersion of ideas. Or a gestapo like enforcement of truly bandwidth drowning proportions.