The Pirate Bay to Fly 'Server Drones' to Avoid Law Enforcement

Stumbled across this news article and I would have to say that The Pirate Bay has some pretty big cajonas. I use The Pirate Bay a lot, for everything so to me this is pretty unbelievable, so read for yourself here is a snippet from the article. Feel free to move mods to the proper section, i thought it might be suitable here though.

The world’s largest and most resilient BitTorrent site plans to redefine “cloud computing” with a plan to move at least some of its servers onto unmanned drones miles above Sweden. In a Sunday blog post, The Pirate Bay announced new "Low Orbit Server Stations" that will house the site's servers and files on unmanned, GPS-controlled, aircraft drones.

Heres the full story

www.usnews.com...


Fake?I dont think so, but sounds like a clever idea.

I think it's funny that they'd spend so much money to steal something that they could probably buy for less. I think it's a pretty neat idea though, but there comes a point where spending this much money to protect stolen goods is a wash.

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
I think it's funny that they'd spend so much money to steal something that they could probably buy for less.

I think it's a pretty neat idea though, but there comes a point where spending this much money to protect stolen goods is a wash.

It's not stealing, no loss is made to the "copyright owner".



What is the price of freedom?

Hmmm what an idea.
Unmanned drones.
You never have to give them food as they are machiines and they are in the air so a police car cannot catch them.
They will have in flight unmanned refueling too right?
Seems like a hoax or a distraction to me.

How long will it be before these drone based servers are attacked by multiple countries?

Hope the fight against Piracy continues long and hard. I only started using TPB last night and downloaded 13 new albums in one night so that I can enjoy them "for free" in my car, saving me £100's.

reply to post by InsideYourMind

If you don't buy the CD, then BMI doesn't pay the artist. It's theft. My dad recorded with Capital in the late 50's, and still gets a check (a couple dollars is all) from time to time. However, if someone copies it, he won't get paid, therefore it's theft.

Good for them, sounds expensive, I would think an offshore operation would be more cost effective, but they would lose their protection under the swedish government.

Piracy is not stealing, the concept of intellectual property rights is just preposterous. The sharing of art, music, poetry, knowledge is part of the human experience, nobody should be barred from these forms of culture because they cannot afford it.

A piece of cheese on the other hand, it is not a product of thought, and it is impossible to copy, so if you take it from me, I am at a loss, not a 'potential' loss (of income )

I'm an artist, I understand what it's like to have my work ripped off, printed and sold, it has happened. Dont get me wrong it doesnt feel nice, but I recognize people wanted to share my work, and thats awesome!

reply to post by navy_vet_stg3

Hard to steal something intangible.. How can downloading music be considered theft when nobody is losing anything?
One can argue that the artist did not get paid, but there's no way to prove that the downloader would have paid money if these things weren't freely available in the first place.

Theft = taking something from somebody, thereby denying them access to something they own, this is just not the case with software/music/video piracy.

reply to post by navy_vet_stg3


Welcome to the new millennia! New economies, new technology! Some flourish some die. Sales of music will die but concert sales should go up making the artists millions by eliminating the crooked middle men (like Colonal Tom Parker)
If an artist is popular enough ticket buyers will happily pay $500 to $2500 per seat and when arenas hold 50,000+ seats, I think the performance artists will survive just fine.
Just my opinion.
brice

reply to post by navy_vet_stg3


just because someone downloaded something doesnt mean they would have bought it if that was their only option.

besides, id rather support a band by going to their concert where they actually make money. Buying the cd just pays the record company basically. the actual musician gets a very low cut of that.

From the OP article...

One of the sites administrators, MrSpock, said with the advent of miniature computers such as the Raspberry Pi, a $35 micro computer the size of a thumb drive that includes a WiFi and SD card slot for storage, the site can take its servers far from any law enforcement.

Taking the giant leap from copyright violations to Airspace violations and potential threats to passenger aircraft does not seem logical, MrSpock.

Perhaps this is just viral advertising for the Rasberry Pi. (I had never heard of it until today)

reply to post by VonDoomen


Right on, if we were paying directly to the artists the equivalent of what they are paid, we would be spending $2 on every album we buy, I wouldn'y even bother downloading.

reply to post by Zarniwoop


Nice thought, I looked it up shortly after reading the article. And it didn't cross my mind until now that it might be marketing for it. But anyways most have different opinions on this matter (Everyone always does) And my opinion is that the corporations are making way to much money off artists. and charging so much for cd's isn't fair. Its a money making scheme that effects both the artist and the buyer. Pirating just cuts out the big guy and also making the middle man famous. Like movies, i remember a movie ( forgot which one) but it was like the most pirated movie, then turned into the most sold dvd of that year or something along those lines. Pirating helps us all, and throws a middle finger to the money making schemers. Anywho that's my opinion on this matter, thanks to all who gave an opinion.

Drones have to be built and purchased and take off from somewhere. There are specific laws coming in covering civilian drones all around the world, and even now they still have to obey airspace rules.

ain't gonna happen, wouldn't make a skerrick of difference if it did, but is a good story to excite the fanboys.

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by navy_vet_stg3

 

. Buying the cd just pays the record company basically. the actual musician gets a very low cut of that.

Lots of muso's self-publish now.

It costs thousands of $$'s to make their own CD to a high standard if they do not have the ability to do it themselves - even with friends volunteering studios & engineering time - I've got 3 friends who have done so - 1 of them 1 album for a charity, the other 2 2 albums each of their own and cover music.

They charge $25/CD & AFAIK none of them have made their money back.

They definitely is two sides to this story.

On one hand, what PirateBay is doing is effectively killing (albeit slowly with little jabs to the ribs!) the music industry, or at least killing the ambition of future music artists that want to jump into the market. The less money the artist makes, the less music that's going to be produced for our entertainment. That's the concept. Do the record labels really care about this though? Of course not, they're in it for the money, and that's why PirateBay refuses to give up on this battle.

On the other hand, the future of the music industry started changing as soon as the Internet launched. If there's a way for somebody to attain free music, it's always going to happen, period! iTunes, Spotify and many others have tried to become the middleman and sell music readily available to download for pence and cents, but still this makes no difference. People want NEW music they hear on the radio NOW, and they want it for FREE.

Humans are so accustomed to music that they don't physically feel a monetary value to what they hear. In other words, music is taken for granted, and therefore the value must be deemed worthless.

Do Facebook and Twitter users get in trouble for "Sharing" and "Liking" YouTube and other content on they're social profiles....NO. But why not...what really is the difference between "Sharing" content/information over the Internet and doing what PirateBay is doing and "Seeding" content? They isn't any.

The Digital revolution is here, and the old-timers don't like it. Unfortunately this isn't going to get any better for them, so they may as well adapt and change and start making revenue by othermeans. ie, charge more for Concerts, etc as another user simply suggested.

Go PirateBay!

Originally posted by hombero
Theft = taking something from somebody, thereby denying them access to something they own, this is just not the case with software/music/video piracy.

So, if you work all week, and I intercept your paycheck before it hits your account, that's okay? After all, you didn't actually own your labor, nor the money. It would simply be paycheck piracy. Nice.

Originally posted by Just Chris

Do Facebook and Twitter users get in trouble for "Sharing" and "Liking" YouTube and other content on they're social profiles....NO. But why not...what really is the difference between "Sharing" content/information over the Internet and doing what PirateBay is doing and "Seeding" content? They isn't any.

That's a pretty silly thing to say.

Any system that allows you to share something does exactly that - it ALLOWS you to share.

If an artist specifically says they want payment then that is clearly something completely different.

suer the internet has changed the music industry - but that's no excuse for taking away people's property rights.

Originally posted by VonDoomen
just because someone downloaded something doesnt mean they would have bought it if that was their only option.

I won't buy a Ferrari, but if I just took one, it's still stealing. Your logic is flawed.

Ever since I was a little boy I copied music by sitting for hours and waiting until the radio station played the most popular song. I then pressed play on my cassette, usually got some DJ chatter, but it recorded (legally) that song. Later in life I borrowed my buddies records/cd's and recorded assorted cassettes for myself and my girl of the day.
Then in the 80's video cassettes came out and boy was there law suites to try to stop people from recording television programming. Disney was the biggest corporate plaintive trying to stop the sale of home recorders. It turns out Disney ended up being the largest financial beneficiary of home videos with release of their movies on cassette.
Now there is the internet, what is the difference? Somebody is going to make tons of money and it may not be who is expected like Disney found out. Besides look at examples like Justin Beiber who's whole career started by posting on YouTube. Everyone just needs to adapt to the new paradigm, just like they did in the past. Out with the old entrenched corrupt companies and in with the new.
Go Pirate Bay!
Just my opinion
brice