Those of you who support copyright may want to rethink what this ruling actually means in practice. From Groklaw.net newspicks:
Quote:
# In this case, The Pirate Bay already moved most of its servers to the Netherlands, a move that could keep the site running even if The Pirate Bay loses its appeal....
The bad news for copyright holders is there is obviously a market demand for this type of content distribution model. And while the entertainment industry seeks compensation via lawsuits, other similar services... will continue to thrive.... And then there is always new technologies on the horizon. Hollywood might want to start looking at a budding new peer-to-peer tool called OneSwarm that aims to let file swappers preserve their privacy by cloaking their IP address.
(PJ: What I hope they think about is this: if they push P2P into the hands of criminals only, then what happens? There is a market for P2P and by refusing to satisfy that market, they are driving it underground, where no accommodation will be possible for them. Unless, of course, that's the actual goal.) - PC World
|
http://www.pcworld.com/article/16336...ort_lived.html
Quote:
|
"Due to outrage over the verdict in The Pirate Bay trial, the Swedish Pirate Party has gained 3000 members in less than 7 hours. It is now bigger than 3 of the 7 parties represented in the Swedish parliament. 'Ruling means that our political work must now be stepped up. We want to ensure that the Pirate Bay activities — to link people and information — is clearly lawful. And we want to do it for all people in Sweden, Europe and the world, continues Rick Falk Vinge. We want it to be open for ordinary people to disseminate and receive information without fear of imprisonment or astronomical damages.'"
|
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../04/17/2041208
Emphasis mine.