> TPB has hosted torrent files, they were not hosting content, so what they did was perfectly legal.
I think these arguments devalue the situation.
Dancing around a legal loophole in a grey area is fun to watch, but one can't complain when it turns out not to work. We (I) expect others to be judged based on obvious intentions as well. I don't want my gov't to tell me one day that they didn't violate my privacy, they just store some large integer numbers forever, who could blame them for that? They're not my numbers! Or that their CCTV system only compares hashes of faces, so it is legal etc. etc...
The only way to change things is to publicly discuss copyright (and US intervention).
The OP goes to great lengths to emphasize TPB's role in Wikileaks and similar cases, I think this makes more sense as a moral defense.
Comments
> TPB has hosted torrent files, they were not hosting content, so what they did was perfectly legal.
I think these arguments devalue the situation.
Dancing around a legal loophole in a grey area is fun to watch, but one can't complain when it turns out not to work. We (I) expect others to be judged based on obvious intentions as well. I don't want my gov't to tell me one day that they didn't violate my privacy, they just store some large integer numbers forever, who could blame them for that? They're not my numbers! Or that their CCTV system only compares hashes of faces, so it is legal etc. etc...
The only way to change things is to publicly discuss copyright (and US intervention).
The OP goes to great lengths to emphasize TPB's role in Wikileaks and similar cases, I think this makes more sense as a moral defense.