Topsite Operator, Who Admitted To Operating Servers With Tons Of Pirated Movies, Gets Off With Just Probation

from the compare-that-to-the-pirate-bay dept

Mon, Jul 27th 2015 9:27am — Mike Masnick

TorrentFreak reports on a somewhat unexpected end to a criminal case against an (oddly unnamed) 50-year-old Swedish man who was accused of and admitted to running the servers for the topsite known as Devil. As anti-piracy folks always like to remind us, topsites "sit at the top of the piracy pyramid" in the warez scene, as that's where pirated content is usually first leaked, before making its way out to the wider internet. In this case, investigators seized the actual servers with 250 terabytes of content and arrested the guy who ran all the servers out of his home. Slam dunk case, right? So that's the odd part: He ended up receiving just probation and some community service.

Given the scale of the case it was expected that punishments would be equally harsh but things did not play out that way.

Despite admitting that he operated servers at his home and in central Stockholm and the court acknowledging that rightsholders had suffered great damage, the man has just been sentenced to probation and 160 hours of community service.

The article admits that the guy may still face civil trials which could come with huge damages, but it's instructive to look at the results of the criminal case here and compare it to another case.

Remember, this is the same country that sued four guys who were no longer associated with The Pirate Bay -- which hosted no infringing content and was more of a search engine -- and not only found them guilty, but gave them jail sentences and millions of dollars in fines.

That seems... weird. The case against this topsite operator seems like exactly the kind of case that's actually a slam dunk. It's not going against a third party or intermediary. It's going against the people actually doing the infringing. One can question whether it's a worthwhile business strategy, but the legal strategy against this guy seems to make perfect sense -- as compared to the weird nonsensical legal strategy against The Pirate Bay -- which, again, hosted no infringing content and only acted as a search engine.

So why the different results?

If you've ever watched the documentary about the trial, TPB AFK, it quickly becomes clear that a big part of the trial against the four people loosely associated with the site was more about the fact that they didn't "respect the system." The situation with Peter Sunde is particularly striking. He had really, really strong legal arguments for why he was innocent. Beyond the fact that the site didn't host any infringing content, his role was as a spokesperson for the site, and he had little to do with the site's actual operations. But -- and this is the important part -- he recognized the whole trial was a joke and treated it as such, making fun of the proceedings and of the lawyers and judges for not understanding very basic things about how the internet worked.

To some extent, you could argue that he and the others were convicted for being smartasses in responding to the "very serious" lawsuit from a bunch of lawyers who clearly didn't understand the technological issues at play.

However, in this case -- involving an actual infringer where it was quite clear that he was, in fact, breaking the law -- things were different. This guy cooperated and treated "the system" with the deference it thinks it deserves:

According to Mitti.se, two key elements appear to have kept the man’s punishment down. Firstly, he cooperated with police in the investigation. Secondly – and this is a feature in many file-sharing prosecutions – the case simply dragged on for too long

The Pirate Bay case dragged on for quite a long time as well. Yet it still ended with huge fines and jail time. It's hard to look at the results of the two cases as anything other than the tax one pays for actually calling out a ridiculous system for being ridiculous, rather than sucking up to the system whose own credibility is called into question.

I'm a big supporter in the idea of an impartial judicial system with due process, and especially the idea that the judicial system is "blind" to all but the facts before it. But we all know that's an ideal that is too frequently not met. The widely different results in these two cases further highlights that divide. Play along with the system and get a slap on the wrist -- even if your actual activities clearly violate the law. Don't play along and mock the system, get a huge sentence -- even if your actions don't actually violate the law. In the end, all that seems to matter is the "proper respect" for a system whose own actions shows it deserves none.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, crime, devil, prosecution, sweden, topsite
Companies: the pirate bay

54 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 9:01am

Why, isn't it the same with Dotcom? It's about making them examples. It failed quite hard with TPB. I'm hoping it fails double as hard with Dotcom. After the high profile, defiant examples are dealt with the rest is ''easy'. This guy doesn't yield flashy headlines. He even cooperated with the police instead of mocking the whole thing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:15am
  
  Re:
  Dotcom was a show trial as a demonstration of how deeply the MAFIAA has corrupted the US government. It was motivated by the death of SOPA / PIPA. Look at when the Dotcom thing happened, and when the day that SOPA / PIPA died.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - tqk (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 11:04am
    
    Re: Re:
    Dotcom was a show trial as a demonstration of how deeply the MAFIAA has corrupted the US government.
    
    Since they'd already badgered Aaron Swartz into suicide trying mfgr. such an example, KDC was next on their list of potential victims. Business as usual.
    
    I wonder what Diaz and Heymann are up to nowadays.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - MadAsASnake (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 11:08am
    
    Re: Re:
    Pretty sure DotCom hasn't come to trial yet...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - That One Guy (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 2:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      And I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter, the example has already been made. His business destroyed, millions stolen from him, his house raided by armed goons as though he was a drug kingpin with stashes of weapons, him and his assets tied up in court for years...
      
      "Mess with the US 'entertainment' industries and we will destroy you, no matter where on the planet you live" was the message intended, and whether it ever makes it to a US court or not, I'd say it's been pretty successfully sent.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2015 @ 1:06am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        He defied the US so he got the full treatment from a country that purports to be a free democracy but in reality is an autocratic police state
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 7:13pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Pretty sure DotCom hasn't come to trial yet…
      
      No, but his stuff has.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
DigDug, 27 Jul 2015 @ 9:35am

Nice - no one else can every be charged with copyright violations again...
By not convicting a "known" violator of the law, they've just made the criminal side of the copyright law invalid.

If you don't "treat" all violators the same way, the law cannot be upheld as valid.

Either guilty party members are charged and spend their time and fines, or they are let off with probation and community service. When a known and admitted guilty person gets the lighter penalty, that just made the highest penalty that lighter penalty - otherwise it's prejudicial and invalid.

At this point TPB and DotComm's lawyers now have legal grounds for reversing any and all charges levied against their clients with this decision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 9:42am
  
  Re: Nice - no one else can every be charged with copyright violations again...
  Since when did Swedish laws and precedents apply in New Zealand or the US?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Baron von Robber, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:06am
    
    Re: Re: Nice - no one else can every be charged with copyright violations again...
    Maybe thru 'corporate sovereignty' since 'corporations are people too' =b
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 12:54pm
    
    Re: Re: Nice - no one else can every be charged with copyright violations again...
    the US government picks and chooses what laws to follow, ignore or enforce.
    
    It's a real banana republic court system
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:37am
  
  Re: Nice - no one else can every be charged with copyright violations again...
  The copyprotection extremists here, who regularly infringe themselves (ie: Hollywood was built on piracy), would want any other infringers hung. Only those that bought and paid for their politicians should get treated differently, they paid for the privilege, everyone else should be hung.
  
  So the question is did the Topsite Operator pay for the privilege of preferential treatment?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DigDug, 27 Jul 2015 @ 11:11am
  
  Re: Nice - no one else can every be charged with copyright violations again...
  Sorry, should not have included Dotcomm's case as that is not in Sweden.
  
  We could wish it applied to the Corporate States of America, long live our Bribery Coerced Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches. May their wallets never be empty, or their consciences be a burden throughout the rest of their immoral and unjust lives.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 1:18pm
  
  Re: Nice - no one else can every be charged with copyright violations again...
  Either guilty party members are charged and spend their time and fines, or they are let off with probation and community service. When a known and admitted guilty person gets the lighter penalty, that just made the highest penalty that lighter penalty - otherwise it's prejudicial and invalid.
  
  Why, because the Swedish courts are going to suddenly be very concerned with applying the law consistently?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Median Wilfred, 27 Jul 2015 @ 9:42am

You're just wrong, Masnick
As an amateur student of armchair law, I feel that this was the best possible outcome. After all, the Swedish legal system is very different from the USA's. Since the (justly) unnamed 50-year-old cooperated, we will see more prosecutions as the notoriously efficient Swedish police force (hats off to Martin Beck!) clean up the viper's nest of piracy and theft, which only profits Big Search. I imagine that just shutting down the AdWords carried by this so-called topsite made GOOG's profits a bit less.

Masnich just hates it when lawyers enforce law enforcement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rich, 27 Jul 2015 @ 11:52am
  
  Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
  I found this comment when I looked up "hyperbole" in the dictionary.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 12:04pm
  
  Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
  Well obviously, since it's prosecutors who should be, you know, enforcing the laws.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ottermaton (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 12:19pm
  
  Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
  I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, but closing sentence stands out as being very much wrong.
  
  Masnich just hates it when lawyers enforce law enforcement.
  
  First, how is anyone supposed to enforce law enforcement? Maybe you meant to just say "enforce [the] law." But the bigger problem is that lawyers are in no way obliged or expected to enforce laws. That's the job of the police, aka Law Enforcement Officers.
  
  Where did you get such a silly idea?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 8:54pm
    
    Re: Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
    Read his pseudonym; it's someone parodying average_joe. "Median" is a type of average.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 1:19pm
  
  Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
  Voted funny! This is satire, right?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 5:58pm
    
    Re: Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
    Pretty sure. I think "median" in particular is intended as a poke at the word "average".
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JMT (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 6:06pm
    
    Re: Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
    It's a great example of Poe's Law in action. You hope it's mildly amusing satire, but...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:50pm
  
  Re: You're just wrong, Masnick
  Who's this Masnich guy you're babbling on about?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 9:44am

"As anti-piracy folks always like to remind us, topsites "sit at the top of the piracy pyramid" in the warez scene"

Lets see, they say/said this about:

Google
Megaupload
Cassettes
VCRs
DVDs
The Internet
Just about all technologies

Is there a good reason why anyone should ever take them seriously?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Baron von Robber, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:07am
  
  Re:
  And the printing press! Damn technologists!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:35am
    
    Re: Re:
    The printing press, record press, etc, along with very expensive cameras are the foundations on which the maximalists built their business. They are happy with such technologies, because it mean that they can act as gatekeepers, gain control of others copyrights, and keep most of the money from selling content. Indeed the printing press, via censorship, is what led to copyright laws, and so is the foundation technology of the maximalist industries.
    What they always object to is any means by which people may distribute what they create without handing control and most of the profits to them.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:17am
  
  Re:
  MP3 files and MP3 players. Don't forget the RIAA sued Diamond Rio just for making mp3 players. Not for any actual piracy.
  
  Player Pianos. (Will be the death of sheet music.)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 9:50am

Perhaps Sweden realized, post TPB, that putting its sons in prison on the sayso of foreigners makes as much sense as eating lutefisk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:05am

In the end, all that seems to matter is the "proper respect" for a system whose own actions shows it deserves none.

And Mike explicitly admits that he has absolutely no respect for the judicial system whatsoever. Kudos on the honesty. Care to admit that you have absolutely no respect for the copyright system too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Baron von Robber, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:09am
  
  Re:
  Kinda hard to root for a system that rips off artists so they can pay for their prostitutes...I mean attorney generals.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 12:32pm
    
    Re: Re:
    That's just not a fair comparison. On the one hand, you have a job where you take money, and in exchange, perform illegal and immoral acts. On the other hand, you have sex workers.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:16am
  
  Re:
  Respecting the copyright system is analogous to respecting street thugs.
  
  Any system dependent upon fear for compliance is doomed to be torn down.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - DannyB (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:21am
    
    Re: Re:
    Copyright is a system dependent on fear to prevent people from doing what comes naturally, what has been done since the dawn of man's ability to put ideas into a fixed tangible medium of expression.
    
    Copyright is only a recent development.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:51pm
  
  Re:
  Respect has to be earned.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:09am

Me thinks Lady justice is not so blind as she would have you believe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:22am
  
  Re:
  Wake me when there is an investigation into the Google smear campaign and/or AG Hood.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PRMan, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:44am
  
  Re:
  This happens here too. Look at Kent Hovind's case. He got put in jail for "structuring" without any other criminal activity behind it and continues to be punished because he doesn't respect the court more than for any crime he has actually committed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Baron von Robber, 27 Jul 2015 @ 12:11pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Naw, he went to jail because he lied to investigators and tax evading on a momentous scale.
    
    "The Pensacola News Journal said, "The saddest thing: Had they cooperated with the agents, they probably wouldn't be worrying about prison sentences now."
    
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind#Legal_problems
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 11:04am
  
  Re:
  Oh she is blind! But she can hear you mocking her! She also has a great sense of how much stuff weights f.e. if you put 1,000 or 10,000 in her hands.
  
  Did you never hear that if you lose a sense the remaining ones increase?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Violynne (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:46am

The unnamed man probably works for the Swedish equivalent of the MPAA or any of its "copyright" law enforcement.

What an embarrassment this would have been.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 11:18am

The Pirate Bay trial was a show trial, a lot of eyes were on it. Past history has shown, in the US at least (the same is probably true of Sweden), that in any case that gets publicity the defendant will have the book thrown at them so that the prosecutors can look tough on crime.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Martin, 27 Jul 2015 @ 11:58am

First off, I agree that this seems like a strange balance.

making fun of the proceedings and of the lawyers and judges for not understanding very basic things about how the internet worked.
[...]
responding to the "very serious" lawsuit from a bunch of lawyers who clearly didn't understand the technological issues at play.

I listened to large parts of the TPB case proceedings and I feel the need to object to this commonly held view that the judges didn't understand the technical matters. There really wasn't much to indicate any technical misunderstandings and the technical walk-throughs by experts were clear enough.

I think the real misunderstandings were of culture - not technology. For example, for the old school judges it was difficult to comprehend how it's possible for a very loosely coupled and leaderless group to achieve concrete results via the internet. They tended to instead use a traditional hierarchically run business as their frame of reference.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JoeCool (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 2:30pm
  
  Re:
  I think the real misunderstandings were of culture - not technology. For example, for the old school judges it was difficult to comprehend how it's possible for a very loosely coupled and leaderless group to achieve concrete results via the internet. They tended to instead use a traditional hierarchically run business as their frame of reference.
  
  In other words, they didn't understand the technology.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pronounce (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 2:05pm

Yeah, Kim Dotcom
Hey, Kim, read this article it might save you some pain in the arse from those dudes who like to show us how powerful they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 2:31pm

and no one should ever receive a 'sentence' worse than this!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 5:24pm

Oddly unnamed? Oddly? It troubles me greatly that you would find that strange.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- tqk (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 5:57pm
  
  Re:
  Oddly unnamed? Oddly? It troubles me greatly that you would find that strange.
  
  Perhaps read it as suspiciously unnamed? Perhaps he was turned and is selling out those he was supplying, or he was always a plant owned by the rightsholders?
  
  He was sentenced, if only to community service, so this is a bit hard to believe, but stranger things have happened. We don't know what's really going on or what really happened. I find it hard to believe they gave him a pass for not acting the way TPB acted.
  
  Yes, you have an interesting name, and I'm missing your point on purpose just to speculate.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jan T�ngring (profile), 28 Jul 2015 @ 5:33am
    
    Re: Re:
    ”oddly unnamed”.
    
    No, actually naming him would have been odd. Swedish media typically does not name people sentenced. This is a different tradition from US media. I work in Swedish media.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2015 @ 8:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      America is fond of the perp walk. It's almost a tradition.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JMT (profile), 27 Jul 2015 @ 6:11pm
  
  Re:
  "It troubles me greatly that you would find that strange."
  
  I also find it strange that someone convicted for a crime is not being named. Do I trouble you greatly too?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2015 @ 10:09pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Slonecker rarely has much idea of what he's talking about.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2015 @ 3:46am
    
    Re: Re:
    Not naming convicts is standard practice over here. I seem to be taking it for granted and for some reason expected Techdirters to find it obvious why. My mistake, although it saddens me.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2015 @ 3:53am

Political Prisoners
The Pirate Bay case dragged on for quite a long time as well. Yet it still ended with huge fines and jail time. It's hard to look at the results of the two cases as anything other than the tax one pays for actually calling out a ridiculous system for being ridiculous, rather than sucking up to the system whose own credibility is called into question.

Who says Sweden doesn't have political prisoners? Doesn't every country?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Feb 2016 @ 1:51am

Obviously a snitch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]