OINK Probs???

i miss paying money to download pre-releases. i don't think i can do that anymore on oink.

Anti file-sharing laws considered

Lord Triesman called on internet service providers to take a "more activist role" in the problem of illegal file sharing.

(I'm suing the government because they own the road where someone drove too fast and crashed into my car. It's their road, so it's their fault.)

(except, that's not what he said, is it? nevermind)

I wonder if he backed up the db surreptitiously to some host far, far away. Would surely have been prudent. Cos it's a bad loss otherwise. Not quite library of Alexandria as I read somewhere, but money-grubbing vandalism all the same.

Apparently not:

http://tehpaine.blogspot.com/2007/10/sit-down-and-shut-fuck-up.html

hmmm

http://torrentfreak.com/oink-admin-released-from-custody-071023/#comment-194577

http://torrentfreak.com/oink-admin-released-from-custody-071023/#comment-194601

http://torrentfreak.com/oink-admin-released-from-custody-071023/#comment-194613

wow.

yikes.

none of them said what country they're in, huh?

cuz they're lying?

thousands of pounds of ebooks

when i logged in to my personal computerised desktop PC today there was an internet e-mail page from my ISP telling me i was a cunt.

aha i get it now!

i uploaded thousands and thousands of pounds of missy elliot. hopefully i'll survive :X

when i logged in to my personal computerised desktop PC today

Actually, my ISP does stuff like that too. Once you've used up 90% of your monthly Gigabytes, the next page you open will automatically go to a warning page of theirs, telling you that you need to watch out or pay extra. - I mean, it's pretty easy for them to put up something like that for any IP address they want to contact.

(this hasn't got anything to do with illegal stuff, by the way, just that my ISP has a monthly data limit) ("limit" was the word I couldn't think of when I wrote the previous message :-) )

aye, maybe so. but i very much doubt this is the case here.

i mean: a felonious user is still a user paying their subs, right? so until some kind of charges are brought, what kind of ISP is going to cut off a source of income? also: i'm pretty sure most ISPs have a vague notion of the phrase "innocent until proven guilty".

these are just two of the things that set off the GrimlyFishy-o-Meter about this one. sure, i could be wrong. it has been known, once or twice. but, eh ...

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/10/24/time_to_clear_up_the_murk_about_oink.html

Oink interview 1: http://dot-slash-csc.iblogger.org/oinkfaq.html
OInk interview 2: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/25/ninternet125.xml

I'm kinda hoping the industry is going to learn something this time, but I'm pessimistic.

I know that technically he's not doing anything wrong, and the argument about it being a choice to do something illegal, but I think it's really ridiculous to say it wasn't intended to be used or wasn't recognized as being used for illegal music downloads. I think the Oink model is good, I don't make a lot of money, so I need to know where it goes with CDs. I do go to more shows and buy more CDs because of Oink, because I find more things I truly enjoy.

It's preposterous to say that Oink is no more of an enabler of copyright violation than an ISP.

I am in a band who are trying to 'make it' at the moment. The fact is that I would be so happy if every person in the world wanted to download my music for free - as long as I could take home 30k a year from shows, that would be fine.

Thanks
Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment.

This guy's got it figured out

Enabling copyright infringement isn't a crime under English law:

While FACT's statement cited "offences relating to the facilitation of copyright infringement," Gloucestershire police told IT news site The Register that the man has been "arrested for supplying property with a registered trade mark without permission."

The first of these is not an offence and the second does not fit the circumstances, according to Kim Walker, head of intellectual property at Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM.

"We don't have an offence in the UK for facilitation of copyright infringement," said Walker. "Instead, it is possible that prosecutors could attempt to characterise this as an offence of 'distributing' infringing copies or 'communicating' copies to the public in the course of a business."

http://www.out-law.com/page-8568

Yes, fair point. My comment was ambiguous.

Instead, it is possible that prosecutors could attempt to characterise this as an offence of 'distributing' infringing copies or 'communicating' copies to the public in the course of a business.

What I meant by "enabling". I think demonstrating that the owner of Oink is liable for massive copyright infringement (and presumably some criminal charges under the Computer Misuse Act) is a legal open goal. Dude is going down. The idea that the distributed nature of BitTorrent means the owner of the tracker isn't liable is wishful thinking that is going to get absolutely shit on in court.

Anyone claiming there is no legal difference between how responsible for the illegal activity of its users are Oink and ISPs (who we all agree should not be held responsible) is either being disingenuous or simply doesn't understand the precedent.

[IANAL, but I did used to work for the Lib Dems on their policy for the internet, publishing and copyright, and then for an academic publisher, and now I own a record label, so I do know my way around the relevant UK law.]

It's all Pedro and Keith, this raid: http://oink.cd/index2.html (!!)

Strange.

You'd expect them to use more smileys amongst each other, wouldn't you?

http://i21.tinypic.com/2epr59e.gif

http://i23.tinypic.com/14j89ec.gif

I've been wondering about the legal side of it, too. I don't know how well the "I'm just the same as Google, me" thing stands up to the laugh test, however.

people does not understand internet, or people older than 40 should not be allowed to make any judgement about teh internet, unless they've got some form of education on the matter. i imagine it being surrealistically funny for that Oink guy to be questioned

yeah, that Oink-as-Google thing is pretty disingenuous to say the least, considering you had to maintain a share ratio or get your account deleted.

the fact that hes talking in detail about lots of this shit to, you know, the internet sounds crazy stupid to me. along with the part about not having hired a lawyer.

@deej, yeah, but he isn't charged with anything yet. So there's nothing a lawyer could do for him right now. Except being costly to someone who just got fired.

well, i would still prob stfu from the online convos/talking to the press

i would prob have not started an illegal filesharing hub

echoes of aphex lamenting the loss of audiogalaxy back in the day

if i had, i also wouldn't house it in the uk, and i would probably want the url to not be publicly listed w/ my name and address

also would not have called it "oink!" and made it embarrassingly twee

Wow, I had no idea OiNK was such a high-trafficked site. Did it really replace Slsk for you guys? (The only places I use to download entire albums are non-p2p venues like Sound Opinions Message Board and Sordo Music Archive.)

(I mean, I thought ILX just made fun of OiNK users.)

Did it really replace Slsk for you guys?

it did for me.

slsk was down when i tried it last night o_O

friggy> you just get bailed for free?
OiNK> yes
--
smartface> does the paypal account have any funds on it ATM?
OiNK> it had some, and the account has been permanently limited
smartface> did they actually question you?
OiNK> of course, for hours
OiNK> the police had very limited technical knowledge, which made the interview quite amusing actually.
OiNK> i wasn't willing to teach them how to use a computer
OiNK> they actually wanted me to teach them how to set up a website
OiNK> i just told them to google it.
smartface> have you become a millionarie with our donations?
OiNK> no
smartface> are you planned for a trial anytime soon?
OiNK> the earliest date for trial is 26th december - though highly unlikely
--
Xenafor> IS YOUR FATHER OKAY AS WELL?
OiNK> my father is fine.
OiNK> my father was not arrested, though they did take his work laptop
Xenafor> Are you a vegetarian?
OiNK> yes.
--
apelure> what does the carges about fraud mean?
OiNK> i've not been charged ...
--
knifeboy> Did they do the good cop/bad cop routine?
OiNK> no
--
Stormx2> Everyone is first and foremost concerned for you and everything, but at the back of our minds (I think) we're interested in what you think will happen the the pink palace. Obviously you won't have a starring roll, but will the backups be destroyed?
OiNK> why would backups be destroyed?
--
j2los> do you think at minimum the forums will be restored as a community for discussing music?
OiNK> i don't know
j2los> do you think it is absurd that only now that the site has been taken down has it been deemed notable enough for a wikipedia article?
OiNK> i found that amusing, yes
OiNK> i'm glad the article is staying neutral
--
guildmast> Are there any plans for an official OiNK donations fund we can feel comfortable donating to?
OiNK> not yet
--
ftdrs> seriously though, what did they accuse you of?
OiNK> conspiracy to defraud and copyright infringements
--
maxdoubt> do you have/need legal representation?
OiNK> i'm still deciding on legal advice
--
Kevix> did you have any warning before hand that the knock opn your door was coming?
OiNK> no
--
Yawg> did you anticipate a raid in the past? Did you take any precautions regarding site design and logs and whatnot to protect the community?
OiNK> the logs we store aren't enough to inciminate users
--
Gl1mw0rm> are you still the rigtfull owner of the oink.cd domain?
OiNK> unclear
--
Barth> what about the recent security/privacy changes to the site and the irc? was that a coincidence or did you see something coming?
OiNK> coincidence
--
midnightgt> (without incriminating anyone) is there any copy of the source anywhere? Would you be in support of a second coming of the website? How do you think this reflects on the war on file sharing? (Certainly I do not feel like we are losing)
OiNK> sorry, no comment :)
--
lhnz> Why exactly did the cops want you to make a website for them?:P :D
OiNK> dunno
--
ATF> did you get fired from work?
OiNK> yes
--
gleam> do you think you or anyone else will ever hear from tmt again? :)
OiNK> no
--
MooIsTooWrong> do you think most of the people in this channel are asking asshat questions?
OiNK> yes
--
uQ1> What grounds did your work fire you?
OiNK> i'm not going to go into that, sorry.

And now, something from this morning (after he'd seen the guardian article)
OiNK> they got my company wrong, but besides that, it's quite a good article
OiNK> the police were here around 30 mins ago, and they were not happy one bit when they left
OiNK> they asked me how i was coping with all the media coming around
OiNK> i said "i don't mind it at all, i'm just telling them the truth, unlike you"

http://tehpaine.blogspot.com

a true hero

no jaymc, we made fun of people who wanted be oink users but couldn't get an invite

http://socialjustice.ccnmtl.columbia.edu/images/0/05/Assata_Shakur_-_early_picture.jpg

Xenafor> Are you a vegetarian?
OiNK> yes.

i gave a googler an invite once

Cutty otm

xp

seriously this dude is being silly. when he gets threatened w/ real time he will flip on any users who were posting shit before the release date.