Welcome to Pirate Google!

[LazyLion]

No but if i can see someone who cannot see the obvious i tend to tell them over and over until it sinks in, with a few people though it never works. Just got to keep hammering the nail into thick wood i say. It will eventually sink in.

ah, I see you just got back from your ice cream

 

[LazyLion]

Pirate Bay is more than an indexing service, they host the .torrent files, which Google don't.

what is the difference where they are hosted if Google offers the download without every opening another site? It's as good as!

 

[killadoob]

what is the difference where they are hosted if Google offers the download without every opening another site? It's as good as!

OMW that is funny gary. You fail to understand the easy to see difference, when i say easy i mean like 1+1 easy, what is 1+1 one gary?

 

[LazyLion]

OMW that is funny gary. You fail to understand the easy to see difference, when i say easy i mean like 1+1 easy, what is 1+1 one gary?

we'll leave that up to the court case Those lawyers are a bit smarter than you.

Oops, I mean... a lot.

 

[killadoob]

The answer was 2 BTW, now if you cannot do simple math i would not expect you to understand the dynamics of what has been discussed.

 

[LazyLion]

The answer was 2 BTW, now if you cannot do simple math i would not expect to you see understand the dynamics of what has been discussed.

mathematics is a precise and technical subject. A lot like the law. It requires defined terms and quantifiable theorems. It requires technical proof. Get used to it.

 

[ponder]

Pirate Bay is more than an indexing service, they host the .torrent files, which Google don't.

So if the torrent files were hosted on a seperate server registered to a seperate entity & TPB linked to them it would be ok then?

Doing a Google search with the filetype:torrent parameter will give you direct links to torrents without even opening a site first.

Anyway, wtf is the difference between a link on a site and a text file containing a link, it boils down to the same thing as there is NO content hosted.

 

[ginggs]

what is the difference where they are hosted if Google offers the download without every opening another site? It's as good as!

The difference is if the (Recording / Motion Picture) Ass. of America succeed in closing down all the sites hosting .torrent files, Google won't have any .torrent files to link to.

 

[LazyLion]

The difference is if the (Recording / Motion Picture) Ass. of America succeed in closing down all the sites hosting .torrent files, Google won't have any .torrent files to link to.

Doesn't change the fact that they assisted in the copyright infringement. They served up the files through their service that allowed users to download infringing material. They were part of the channel. But nobody wants to take on Google's lawyers.

 

[milomak]

It would be interesting to know (though I guess know one will take the chance to find out) how google handles the issue of links to child porn sites. I wonder if they have an active vigorous method of trying to ensure that to the best of their ability their service doesn’t link to such sites. If they do it would be interesting to find out why they do not do the same with torrents.

This is all of course speculation unless we get google’s policy on child porn.

 

[LazyLion]

It would be interesting to know (though I guess know one will take the chance to find out) how google handles the issue of links to child porn sites. I wonder if they have an active vigorous method of trying to ensure that to the best of their ability their service doesn’t link to such sites. If they do it would be interesting to find out why they do not do the same with torrents.

This is all of course speculation unless we get google’s policy on child porn.

Well we do know that Google blocks content where an order has been issued under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (A DMCA take down notice). So we know that they are aware that some of their links are infringing. But they have not taken any steps to take down all of the infringing links. so we must conclude that the decision to leave the torrent links up is a conscious decision.

Read here for the news surrounding Google and the DMCA...
http://www.google.com/dmca.html

The fact that infringing material is still up there means one of two things.
1) Google does not actively search for infringing material, but only takes down on request
2) The content owners have not issued take down requests for the infringing material

which makes you wonder if the content owners actually ever bothered asking the Pirate Bay to take down links to certain material... and what the response was.

 

[milomak]

TPB has been asked to take down torrents. You can see their responses in the legal section I think it is called. they scoff at any letters from content owners as you will see there. something that probably didn't aide their cause.

 

[killadoob]

Milo i think child pornography is something sick and horrible like murder and rape and so i doubt google links to those sites although i am not sure as i will never in my life test it out hahah. May end badly

Grings is 100% correct if the torrent sites where taken down google would have nothing to link to, you could take google down but go to TPB and search their index for all your goodies which are hosted on their servers . Arguing that a .torrent files does not contain content is just a loop hole that is being exploited. I know when i load that .torrent file in vuze that the torrent file goes from windowsxpsp3.torrent to windowsxpsp3.iso, so the .torrent file once loaded into a torrent reader is giving you content, it may not actually have the content in loop hole terms but the content is there for you to download. An NZB for instance does not contain content but once loaded into grabit your pulling down the content.

 

[LazyLion]

TPB has been asked to take down torrents. You can see their responses in the legal section I think it is called. they scoff at any letters from content owners as you will see there. something that probably didn't aide their cause.

They probably did that because the knew the letters should have been directed at the uploaders rather than the indexers.

If you knew a street vendor was selling fake DVDs at an intersection, are you going to send him a Cease and Desist letter, or are you going to try and find out who actually pressed the fake DVDs?

In this case it was just more convenient for the industry to go after the big guys (Which is fine), but they have completely neglected to go after the source.

 

[LazyLion]

Grings is 100% correct if the torrent where taken down google would have nothing to link to, you could take google down but go to TPB and search their index for all your goodies which are hosted on their servers .

That's not going to happen. If you take one site down... another will spring up somewhere else and those links will then also appear on Google. As we saw, the pirate bay is not planning on taking their site down, it is not even hosted in Sweden anymore. So is the industry then going to go after Google? Google indexes thousands of torrent sites, game and console crack sites, program warez sites, etc. It would be easier for the industry to force Google to police itself.

 

[milomak]

Milo i think child pornography is something sick and horrible like murder and rape and so i doubt google links to those sites although i am not sure as i will never in my life test it out hahah. May end badly

i know. wouldn't want to try and explain to people that i was doing research on torrents and piracy and in the process investigated google's policy on child pornography. the mix there raises eyebrows.

 

[killadoob]

Yes they can go after google but they never did so you cannot rock up in court and having an opening statement:

Google does it so why can't we. So while of course Google plays it "part" it still does not detract from the fact that if google stopped linking you, you could still go to TPB and get all the stuff you need.

As i said take google out the equation and you still have an easy way of finding your stuff on TPB, take TPB and other torrent sites off the net and you have no way of finding them that i think is the point of not going after google. People know the sites and use them more than google for searching.

 

[Pyro]

There is one crucial part people seem to be forgetting.

Torrents usually depend on a tracker. Google does not supply a tracker. TPB does.

Without a tracker, you're not going to get very far in downloading your content, as you won't know where to find sources.

 

[PeterCH]

Thanks Garyvdh, interesting.

Another side-theory is that if MPAA and RIAA up the conviction rate on individuals, then the individuals will go underground (as it was before), and suddenly all the people MPAA and RIAA have hired will be jobless.

I think they want to discourage casual downloaders who either do not have the time, the will or the knowledge to use the 'darknets' to download pirate content.

The other danger is that if they do force many casual users to use the said 'darknets' they'll expose them more to criminal activities such as blackhat hackers, illegal pronographers and other criminals. That's more of an argument against cracking down on casual downloaders/uploaders.

As is already, the German RapidSearch site is providing uploader details of people who upload copyright content.

 

[PeterCH]

There is one crucial part people seem to be forgetting.

Torrents usually depend on a tracker. Google does not supply a tracker. TPB does.

Without a tracker, you're not going to get very far in downloading your content, as you won't know where to find sources.

True, but Google also provides links to direct download sites and warez sites and what-not. It enjoys a type of common carrier status, although they've also started to
remove links.