[–] DaMan123456 1 point 10 points 11 points (+11|-1) ago (edited ago)
Pirate bay will never die. You can not kill an idea.
[–] bear_for_congress [S] 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
It's a hydra!
[–] sophrosynos 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I'll always learn about a new domain every few weeks. It's like being an internet world traveller.
[–] DaMan123456 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
Hahah true. Its like playing whack a mole with the internet. Once you kill it on this domain, on to the next domain. Each time it comes back stronger too!
[–] fickit1time 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago (edited ago)
Great news for the internet.
I remember Pirate Bay being up for sale after being taken down then magically up again so why not go after the company that bought Pirate bay instead of these 4 guys?
[–] bear_for_congress [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
I'm sure it's purely political and for show. It didn't seem like the prosecutors have much of a case considering one of the Founders was in jail during the time period the copyright violations occurred.
[–] Outamyhead 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
What do you mean technically, it's the court, where the judgement is final, and what they say stands.
[–] Fougare ago
You can also disagree with a decision a court has made. (Example: 'murica's response to the supreme court's decision not many days ago)
The case was more or less dismissed on a technicality, they couldn't prove the 4 were involved during the period that where they (whoever "they" is) had evidence that TPB was allegedly breaking the law, so they had to dismiss the case.
I guess it could be similar to catching Al Capone on tax evasion charges and the IRS realizing they did actually get a tax form from him right before he gets sentenced.
[–] clickbot ago (edited ago)
Technically, proof that the accused could not have done it is not a technicality.
The site had been sold off five years prior, and one of the accused was in prison at the time.