To clarify a bit..

TPB has been owned by a company for the last years since the raid so nothing there will really change except the names of the owners. The talk about TPB are going to be a pay site is wrong, the CEO that said that does not know what he is talking about.

Now, the BIG change is that the tracker is going to be outsourced to a new formed company that wont know what they track, just that they connect peers, and the torrent listings will be handed by an other new company that will have torrents but they will not know either content or who is using the torrents. This setup will be practically impossible to take down or find anyone liable to sue.

The 3d party company services will have APIs, so you can on your blog or whatever have your own small torrent listings just as you now pull in twitter feeds. remember how the twitter design totally havoced the iranian attempts to block it as ppl just used another side that pulled in the feeds and read it there instead? well that goes for torrents and TPB to.

All in all, this is not the end of the world as some are seeing it but a rather interesting technical improvement.

And dont worry, not a dime will go to the media industries spectrial prize money what i know of but a really nice fund for doing cool stuff.

/krs - co.founder of TPB and PB, not involved in TPB anymore and have no stake in any cash.

Verglichen mit dem Netz ist das Leben ein Sündenpfuhl. Das Gerede vom "rechtsfreien Raum" kann also nur von Menschen kommen, die sich nicht einmal entfernt mit dem Internet und den Urteilen zu Störerhaftung, Urheberrecht, Markenrecht usw. befasst haben. Der Kampfbegriff des "rechtsfreien Raumes" wird exzessiv genutzt, obgleich er erwiesenermaßen falsch ist. Hierbei wurde die Tatsache, dass Länder versuchen, ihre Rechte auf sämtliche Inhalte des Netzes auszudehnen, nicht einmal erwähnt. Ebenso wenig wie die Tatsache, dass z.B. bei YouTube je nach Landesauswahl manche Videos nicht zur Verfügung stehen. Im realen Leben wäre dies so als würde eine Disco in den USA die deutschen, französischen, italienischen... Gäste bei manchen Stücken herausbitten.

Manches Verhalten ist im Netz weitaus gefährlicher als im realen Leben. Wer sich ein Fahndungsplakat ansieht, wird nicht vom nächsten BKA-Mann beschattet, wer sich dagegen eine Webseite des BKA ansieht, muss schon einmal damit rechnen, dass die <!--LINK-->

<!--LINK_ICON--><!--/LINK_ICON--><!--LINK_TEXT-->digitale

James Gordon Bennett, Horace Greeley, E.W. Scripps and Joseph Pulitzer were not just earlier versions of Woodward and Bernstein. They were entrepreneurs, visionaries and risk takers who experimented and explored the capabilities of new technologies with a goal of meeting readers needs and growing audience.

They put ads on their front pages. They ran straight murder trial transcripts. They sent row boats out in the harbor to meet incoming ships so they might be the first with the news Europe. They produced multiple editions in the race to build reader loyalty. With the penny press, they disrupted the incumbent six-penny newspapers. They pushed partisan positions. They crusaded, some times to the point of unjustly influencing the course of events.

It took a long time for newspapers to build the cash flow to afford big time, expensive investigative journalism, and for publishers to recognize its value (and some of them still aren't convinced) in helping to retain readers.

So if it took newspapers more than 100 years to build the business and content models that we all now cherish, why do we expect a fully formed online model to emerge in just 10 years?

Bei welchen Online-Aktivitäten man in Deutschland juristischen Ärger riskiert, zeigt schon ein flüchtiger Blick auf die
IT-Recht-Rubrik bei SPIEGEL ONLINE: Wenn ein Webseiten-Betreiber (und das ist auch ein Vogelzüchter, der in seinem Papageien-Blog Kommentare zulässt) in Deutschland vorm falschen Gericht landet, haftet er für Schimpftiraden Unbekannter auf seiner Seite - egal, ob er sie übersehen oder sofort gelöscht hat.
Veröffentlichung genügt.

Wer in den USA verdächtige
Ed-Hardy-Markenklamotten ersteigert, kriegt statt der Ware womöglich eine Abmahnung und wer "
Das erotische Rowohlt Lesebuch" im Online-Antiquariat verkauft, sowieso. Wer in Deutschland eine Homepage betreibt, muss sich mit Impressums-Regeln herumschlagen, wer bei Ebay verkauft, sollte sich genau über
Vorschriften zu AGB und Widerrufsbelehrungen informieren.

The first clue of where all those downloaders are really spending their money came in searching for games statistics: year after year ELSPA had hailed "a record year". In fact if you look at the graph above, you'll see that games spend has risen dramatically - from £1.18bn in 1999 to £4.03bn in 2008.

Meanwhile music spending (allowing for that * of adjustment in 2004 onwards) has gone from £1.94bn to £1.31bn.

DVD sales and rentals, meanwhile, have nearly doubled, from a total of £1.286bn in 1999 to £2.56bn in 2008.

If we assume that there's roughly the same amount of discretionary spending available (which, even allowing for the credit bubble, should be roughly true; most of the credit went into houses), then it's clear who the culprit is: the games industry. By 2009, the amount spent in games and music is almost exactly the same as 1999 (though note that the music industry changed its methods from 2004).

Yes, downloaders aren't spending money on the music industry, and in that way they are hurting it. But I'd argue that the true volume of "lost" sales is nowhere near the claims made. Assume that music couldn't be copied (as many games can't). I don't think that the volume of music sales would equate to all those downloads. At best, it would be £600m larger.

Create your own podcast.







1. Find links to audio files on the Web.


2. Huffduff the links—add them to your podcast.


3. Subscribe to podcasts of other found sounds.