Pirate Bay founders found guilty

[Jovvi]

Also Harry, New Democracy was a legitimate party (right wing by swedish standards, probably not by for example american standards) that acually was (briefly) part of the swedish riksdag (parlament) and one of the founders of that party was Bert Karlsson, owner of Marianne Records (now a part of Sony/Bmg or Warner I think).

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Good God, Sparrow, I do hope that you're joking. Having the extreme misfortune to live in a part of the country where the BNP are "active", I have had the "pleasure" of personally seeing a number of their "rallies" in the city centre where I work, complete with skinheads, Nazi salutes, "Blacks Out" banners, and all their other unpleasant racist paraphenalia. Please tell me that you don't really feel that they have a "legitimate" agenda?

Interesting New Statesman article.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Nate: "The Register", whose article I linked to, are a British Newspaper. They are not allowed, under UK law, to knowingly post false articles.

Didn't the 'Sunday Sport' publish a front page story about a double decker bus being found on the moon?

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

One interesting similarity between Europe and the US is that you throw around the term "neo-nazi" in much the same way that some in the US use "socialist".

Or "homosexual" in other quarters. Or "Jewish".

Yes, attatch a label of something you don't like to someone high in the food chain of any business or organization and use that as a big club to bash everyone who works or does business there. The ideals of Fred Rodgers are truely dead.

[Ned]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

Interesting New Statesman article.



Didn't the 'Sunday Sport' publish a front page story about a double decker bus being found on the moon?

What about Freddie Starr ate my hamster?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ned

What about Freddie Starr ate my hamster?

I believe that Mr. Starr did eat the unfortunate hamster, did he not?

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I believe that Mr. Starr did eat the unfortunate hamster, did he not?

According to Wikipedia no:

Freddie Starr gives his side of the story in his 2001 autobiography Unwrapped. He says that the only time that he ever stayed at Vince McCaffrey's house was in 1979 and that the incident was a complete fabrication. Starr writes in the book: "I have never eaten or even nibbled a live hamster, gerbil, guinea pig, mouse, shrew, vole or any other small mammal." The man behind the hamster story was the British publicist Max Clifford. When asked in a television interview with Esther Rantzen some years later whether Starr really had eaten a hamster, his reply was "Of course not." Clifford was unapologetic, insisting that the story had given a huge boost to Starr's career.

[Riocaz]

I misread that quote as being from Freddie not Max Clifford. ignore me

[HarryT]

I happily stand corrected on the hamster front .

[Riocaz]

Of course it's not quite the same situation... Freddie Starr was employing Max Clifford at the time to boost his public image ahead of a national tour.

Max lied to the press and got a false story printed. Not quite the same as the press lying directly.

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by Riocaz

Of course it's not quite the same situation... Freddie Starr was employing Max Clifford at the time to boost his public image ahead of a national tour.

Source?

[Riocaz]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7923415.stm

Amongst many others.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I happily stand corrected on the hamster front .

There's a Hamster Front? How do they hold up their signs at rallies?

(It's a joke, Harry. Just trying to lower the temperature a bit....)

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Nate: "The Register", whose article I linked to, are a British Newspaper. They are not allowed, under UK law, to knowingly post false articles. If they did, anyone could complain to the "Press Complaints Commission" (the "watchdog" of the British press), and they could be fined as a result, or sued for libel. I therefore trust the veracity of their articles without having to independently personally verify the truth of what they are saying.

Harry, The Register made allegations. They did not make a statement; someone else did. They don't have to prove the statement, they just have to prove that someone made it.

You, on the other hand, repeated the allegation as fact. You have to provide support for the so called facts you stated.

[Riocaz]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

There's a Hamster Front? How do they hold up their signs at rallies?

(It's a joke, Harry. Just trying to lower the temperature a bit....)

I can just see the banners now. "Guinea pigs out. Richard Hammond for king!"

[b0rsuk]

Nice ad hominem there, HarryT.

Even if they go to jail for one year, they'll be martyrs of the new movement. Actually, I think a single year of jail would be a very good advertisment for these guys. Good job.

Meanwhile, Pirate Bay Supporters Throw Street Party in Moscow

The organizers of ‘The Street Pirate Party’ are confident that the final verdict in the trial will demonstrate the relevance of justice not only to The Pirate Bay, but also file-sharing as a whole. “The trial of the Pirate Bay is an excellent example of how ugly, stupid companies motivated only by their greed and inertia, want to prevent people sharing music, movies, or anything, on a purely altruistic basis,” they said in a statement.

http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-s...moscow-090416/

It would be curious then, if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and stable property. If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.

Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Isaac McPherson, Monticello, August 13, 1813