Internet Robin Hoods

[honorarybrutha]

Wednesday, March 9, 2005

Internet 'Robin Hoods' plead guilty, face prison


The Associated Press



Three men prosecutors dubbed the "Robin Hoods of cyberspace" pleaded guilty Tuesday to putting copyrighted computer games, movies and software on the Internet sopeople around the world could make copies for free.

All three said they made no money on the scheme and did it just for the sport of it.

Seth Kleinberg, 26, of Los Angeles, Jeffrey Lerman, 20, of New York, and Albert Bryndza, 32, of New York, pleaded guilty to federal copyright charges in court in Hartford, Conn. They are the first Americans convicted in what the Justice Department said was the largest-ever investigation of software piracy.

Investigators said software valued at millions of dollars was copied and sold for pennies in foreign countries between 1998 and 2004.

The investigation was aimed at an underground network known as the "warez scene"

"It's a competition of different groups racing to release pirated software over the Internet," Kleinberg said.

Prosecutors said Lerman edited the software so it could fit on a single compact disc, and Bryndza built servers that stored the software.

They were released without bail for sentencing in July. They reached plea bargains calling for sentences of about three to six years.


http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2005/03/09/sections/business/oc_region/article_434817.php

[EvilWizardGlick]

More anti-filesharing propaganda. Inflated numbers like drug arrests.
I'm surprised they were not described as "dirty" as well.

[AlecWest]

Investigators said software valued at millions of dollars was copied and sold for pennies in foreign countries between 1998 and 2004.

No doubt, software companies feel hurt by piracy. But every time I hear these millions of dollars claims, I can't help but wonder. Are the people who bought these copies for pennies the kind of people who'd have the dollars to buy it legally? I suspect they're the kind of people who don't have the money to buy it legally ... and that if a pirated copy wasn't available, they simply wouldn't buy any copy at all. In short, only a "phantom" loss that looks horrific on paper but, in real life, has no substance.

[RottenFoxBreath]

so it wont be piracy now,itll be robin hoodery!

[MOVIEGEEK]

"All three said they made no money on the scheme and did it just for the sport of it."


What were they thinking?

[Zisguy1]

<post removed>



You are in breach of the forum rules and are being issued with a formal warning. (no politics - see rules please)
/ Moderator BJ_M

[honorarybrutha]

so it wont be piracy now,itll be robin hoodery!

LMAO

[Zisguy1]

Oops... apologies to the mods (and everyone else), I was up all night last night and just wasn't thinking... It won't happen again.

Anyway, jail time for just distribution (with no selling) seems pretty extreme... even ridiculous.

[steve2713]

Oops... apologies to the mods (and everyone else), I was up all night last night and just wasn't thinking...

CLEARLY...

What's even here to debate? They're distrubuting content that hard working people spent countless hours and millions of dollars to create, just to have these idiots give the stuff out for free. It is STEALING, there's no difference. They know the laws, they got caught, they'll pay they're time. They're lucky they didn't get more time.

[Zisguy1]

Seems more to me like copyright violation, which is a bit different than breaking into a bank or private home and making off with tangible goods. That's why there are various terms like "piracy" and "copyright violation," and also why some people have to try and convince others that it's "stealing" (i.e. not universally believed to be equivalent to ripping off tangible assets). Not to say that it's right, or that they shouldn't have gotten in trouble. Jail time just seems ridiculously extreme to me... YOMV.

[Sabro]

Well first off, I don't think the 3 suspects could say they didn't know what they was doing was wrong. None the less ignorance is no excuse for the law.

However, are the #'s bloated? Sure they are, as they always have been! From hacks, to natural disasters to piracy the #'s are always bloated first off to make the headlines, 2nd tax breaks are wonderful when you can rack up that much LOSS, and thirdly the Federal Authorities (atleast here in the states) won't even begin to investigate unless a certain amount of damage ($ wise) has been incurred.

The greater the loss the more resources the Federal authorities will put forth in to the investigation and be compelled to make an arrest (for example makers or otherwise).

None the less, if your big enough to do the crime - you should be big enuff to do the time.

But I can remember the days when companies wouldn't dare report these cases and feared the public attention do to the investor relations and stock market flux's due to the bad word. WHOA they just lost 30 billion to piracy? SELL SELL SELL that 4th quarter return aint gonna be worth a chit!

Sabro

[EvilWizardGlick]

Tommy Chong goes to jail for internet bong sales.
Enron guys are where?
These guys go to jail for estimated theft.
Enron guys are where.
I guess it is alright to steal from average people.
Just more crap heaped upon the little guy while REAL corporate criminals walk the streets.
And, someone may wish to check the settlement for pricefixing collusion on cd's big media was involved in.
No one went to jail for that theft.

Someone explain to me how ANYTHING involving laws and legality isn't a "political" topic? It seems there is quite a bit of hair splitting going on as to what is "political" and what isn't.

[JohnnyCNote]

More anti-filesharing propaganda. Inflated numbers like drug arrests.
I'm surprised they were not described as "dirty" as well.

I have a little nearly firsthand knowledge of how the "authorities" inflate bust numbers. I used to be friends with the (in)famous Brownie Mary of San Francisco, who used to sell "special" brownies right out of her front door. When she was busted, they claimed she brought in over $10k a week. When I asked her about this, she said, "do you really think I'd be living here if I was making that kind of money?"

I had to believe her. She was not one who saw living in impoverished conditions as a virtue. However, they did bring in enough to buy some property up north of town a couple of hours, but it was hardly a resort, and not the sort of thing that would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's also noteworthy that she and her partner were never prosecuted by the IRS.....

[bazooka]

Arrgggghhh.

Those scurvy pirates are going to pay.

[Nilfennasion]

Sod them. When they compensate me for all the CDs and DVDs I've lost because they didn't make the bastards durable enough, maybe I will be inclined to agree with their idea that people steal from them. As it is now, they are stealing from the people.

[vitualis]

Someone explain to me how ANYTHING involving laws and legality isn't a "political" topic? It seems there is quite a bit of hair splitting going on as to what is "political" and what isn't.

There are no hard guidelines. However, you will get a warning for anything that is written in an obvious political viewpoint.

This rule has been around for a very long time and was written for good reasons. Prior to this rule, some topics would inevitably degenerate to a rabid flamefest.

If you don't like the rules, then the appropriate place for comments is in the Feedback forum. However, I can tell you now that this rule will not be changed. If you want to discuss political topics, there are many other forums for that.

Regards.

[AlecWest]

What's even here to debate? They're distrubuting content that hard working people spent countless hours and millions of dollars to create, just to have these idiots give the stuff out for free. It is STEALING, there's no difference. They know the laws, they got caught, they'll pay they're time. They're lucky they didn't get more time.

All you say is true and I certainly don't dispute it. My only bugaboo with the article (and other articles exactly like it) is how software companies quantify their losses ... millions of dollars (or billions and billions to Carl Sagan fans, hehe). If a company markets software for $400, and a person who doesn't have the $400 acquires it illegally, his acquisition of the software has no loss value since he wouldn't have bought it anyway. This is especially true since it doesn't deprive legitimate consumers of the right to pay the $400 to acquire the same software. A $400 crime, yes. A $400 loss, no.

[Gurm]

Hear hear, AlecWest!

I've been arguing this for some time.

Let's say that John Q. Public decides to pirate Photoshop. That's a $500 crime. But would John Q. Public EVER pay $500 for Photoshop? No. He has to pay the mortgage. If he couldn't get Photoshop illegally, he'd just make do with a freeware or shareware alternative. Maybe Paintshop Pro, a $50 piece of software.

So what is Adobe's "loss" to John Q. Public?

$0. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch.

Did he commit a $500 crime? Yes. Did Adobe take a $500 loss? No.

Now on the other hand, if a COMPANY pirates Photoshop, they WOULD have paid for it, because they use it to do business. In that case, their 20 seats of pirated photoshop IS a $10k loss for Adobe.

[Radixmind]

hey guys! ive got an ORANGE!!!

it's a beautiful round FRUITY ORANGE! YUM! i'm going to peel it RIGHT NOW and EAT IT!!

WOW! i LOVE oranges, there my favourite fruit!!!

err...sorry if that seemed a bit off-topic, but it's just how i feel. Errr...pirating is bad, yes.

(will thish do?)

[bazooka]

hey guys! ive got an ORANGE!!!

it's a beautiful round FRUITY ORANGE! YUM! i'm going to peel it RIGHT NOW and EAT IT!!

WOW! i LOVE oranges, there my favourite fruit!!!

err...sorry if that seemed a bit off-topic, but it's just how i feel. Errr...pirating is bad, yes.

(will thish do?)

[ViRaL1]

He DID comment on piracy. :P In the case of businesses using pirated software, don't they usually get stuck buying full price retail copies of it to avoid prosecution once they're found out? I agree the inflated numbers are BS, but they knew what they were getting into.

[Radixmind]

well, fer cryin' out loud...

everybody knows this. pirates think they're Robin Hood. Companies think we should pay for everything up to and including the air we breathe. and your average joe will pay as little as possible for anything he can.

none of this is new. it isnt even new to the world of Video or music. these are social truths.

i blame the ocean. you see, next time i'm at the coast, i'm going to go right down there and scream exactly what i think of it, right to it's face. boy, that'll make that bad old ocean feel stupid and ashamed, wont it?

anyone got anything new to say?

[adam]

Zisguy1 US copyright law has provisions for criminal sanctions if the infringements are severe and blatant, as I think was clearly the case here. It is not fasciest and it has been enforced consistently for all kinds of infringements since long before the first RIAA/MPAA suit was filed, and long before Bush went into office.

This is exactly the kind of behavior that the criminal sanctions are for. Blatantly willful copyright infringement. It doesn't matter how much the industry says they lost, it could easily be 1/10th of that or it could just as easily be 10X greater. Its impossible to estimate losses due to copyright infringement and that is specifically why copyright law almost completely THROWS OUT calculation of damages in determining a remedy. You get fixed damages per infringement because actual damages are impossible to predict in 99% of the cases. Its really tiring hearing people blaming the industry for inflating the numbers. The numbers mean nothing and it does nothing to justify the actions of the infringer.

These guys' actions were blatant and intentional. They deserve what they got. They are just idiots.

[ViRaL1]

well, fer cryin' out loud...

everybody knows this. pirates think they're Robin Hood. Companies think we should pay for everything up to and including the air we breathe. and your average joe will pay as little as possible for anything he can.

none of this is new. it isnt even new to the world of Video or music. these are social truths.

i blame the ocean. you see, next time i'm at the coast, i'm going to go right down there and scream exactly what i think of it, right to it's face. boy, that'll make that bad old ocean feel stupid and ashamed, wont it?

anyone got anything new to say?

Looks like the price of medication is sky high too.

[ViRaL1]

Zisguy1 US copyright law has provisions for criminal sanctions if the infringements are severe and blatant, as I think was clearly the case here. It is not fasciest and it has been enforced consistently for all kinds of infringements since long before the first RIAA/MPAA suit was filed, and long before Bush went into office.

This is exactly the kind of behavior that the criminal sanctions are for. Blatantly willful copyright infringement. It doesn't matter how much the industry says they lost, it could easily be 1/10th of that or it could just as easily be 10X greater. Its impossible to estimate losses due to copyright infringement and that is specifically why copyright law almost completely THROWS OUT calculation of damages in determining a remedy. You get fixed damages per infringement because actual damages are impossible to predict in 99% of the cases. Its really tiring hearing people blaming the industry for inflating the numbers. The numbers mean nothing and it does nothing to justify the actions of the infringer.

These guys' actions were blatant and intentional. They deserve what they got. They are just idiots.

I agree with you that the actual losses are hard to calculate and shouldn't factor in much as far as determing punishment or fines. I think the real issue with the inflated numbers is that the RIAA/MPAA always bring up how much they lost and cry broke when people complain about the high cost of movies and music. THAT is total BS.

[Radixmind]

i would like to apologise unreservedly for the tone of my previous post. it would appear that my sarcasm gland is overcompensating again, probably due to an overdose of MSG and stodgy thinking.

seriously though, i reccommend shouting at the ocean as really good therapy for whatever ails you. it gets the blood worked up, and you get bags of fresh air, too.

[AlecWest]

i blame the ocean. you see, next time i'm at the coast, i'm going to go right down there and scream exactly what i think of it, right to it's face. boy, that'll make that bad old ocean feel stupid and ashamed, wont it?

anyone got anything new to say?

Yeah. I blame the lawyers. Nah, not really. Once, I even acted as my own lawyer in a towing dispute ... and whooped an assistant state attorney general in a fair fight, hehe.

Its really tiring hearing people blaming the industry for inflating the numbers.

It's really tiring hearing the industry inflate the numbers, giving people a reason to blame them for doing so. But, my earlier post wasn't meant to absolve the wrongdoers. It was only meant to show my frustration with the "numbers" game being played since, as you said, the numbers mean nothing.

[Zisguy1]

Zisguy1 US copyright law has provisions for criminal sanctions if the infringements are severe and blatant, as I think was clearly the case here. It is not fasciest and it has been enforced consistently for all kinds of infringements since long before the first RIAA/MPAA suit was filed, and long before Bush went into office.

True, but jail time has generally only been given when the person in question was making money from the copyright violation. Now that *is* stealing, since sales of pirated goods can be much more directly correlated to loss of sales of the real thing. The person selling the pirated goods is taking money straight out of the pockets of the copyright holder.

I just think that jail time for an offense where no money was involved is absurd. Give the guys a hefty fine and a bunch of community service, but jail/prison is for people who rob liquor stores, steal cars, thump grandmothers over the head for their purses, etc. Going to jail for running a pirate FTP site?

[MOVIEGEEK]

I just think that jail time for an offense where no money was involved is absurd. Give the guys a hefty fine and a bunch of community service, but jail/prison is for people who rob liquor stores, steal cars, thump grandmothers over the head for their purses, etc. Going to jail for running a pirate FTP site?

I agree but I seriously doubt these bozos have any money.

[AlecWest]

I agree but I seriously doubt these bozos have any money.

The plea-bargained jail time doesn't mean they'll have to serve the time. If this is a "first offense" for them, they'll probably get a fine, community service work, and one of those rubber-band sentence suspensions - 4 years probation with jail-time invoked if they do something stupid during their probation period. Even so, these three young men will have felonies convictions on their records. Not a good thing to have for a job-seeker, young or old, especially if they want an IT career.