How "legal" is it to create a tracker?

It basically is a new war on drugs. At one point in time drugs where not illegal either.
All it takes is a couple of good lobbyists and payed off judges and what was legal has become illegal.

Technically, the DMCA (which goes against original copyright law and therefor should not be legal) declares a lot of once was legal illegal. As for hosting a tracker the only real law I can find that is broken is, 'Conspiracy to defraud' Which is what caught affil groups get charged with.

It is a messy subject best avoided imho unless you're a lawyer.
 
How are the laws in Shangra-La?

I gotta give you credit for a very concise and solid point, n00bz0r. (pretty darn funny, too):D

Had you mentioned another state, it would have been far better for your argument. Washington is one of very few states that has passed a very strong initiative in favor of medical marijuana. Details of the law can be found here:ACLU of Washington

ACLU of Washington said:
In 2008, the Washington State Department of Health defined a 60-day supply of medical marijuana as no more than 24 ounces of usable marijuana and no more than 15 plants, at any stage of growth. Patients who possess no more than this amount will be presumed to be in compliance with the law; patients who require more than this amount still maintain the right to present evidence of their personal, actual medical need in court. More information about the Department of Health's rule may be found at the following Web site:
Click to expand...

Enough people got together and fought against laws that were not beneficial. It is probably a stretch to say the same thing could happen regarding "fair use" and copyright laws, but I believe that this kind of initiative can help make things more reasonable. Right now, the copyright laws and private citizens are being abused. This needs to stop.
 
DanielleD87 said:
It is a messy subject best avoided imho unless you're a lawyer.
Click to expand...

Exactly right, DanielleD87! Everyday "normal" people should never have to think about such a complicated legal term. Yet alone, be threatened (and in some cases bullied and robbed) by large corporations.

In most of these "trials" there was never any real damages to the companies. No one ever sold a single copy of the down-loaded media and in a lot of instances (I image because of my own uses) the companies would never have been able to sell the product to the defendant. They were simply listening to, or viewing something because it was free. That's called fair use.
 
I have finally got off my ass and read my own thread (thanks for transforming my thread into a book megabyteme).

As to megabyteme, I feel your ways are rather idealist as has been mentioned before. When you mentioned true blood, it reminded me of Hulu. That is how I believe this problem could be addressed. Yes, these companies are rather aggressive in their ways. But like any other company, they need to make money. Letting everything go free, while sounding great, is a great way to put companies in bankruptcy. However, it is their aggressive policies that end up alienating people like megabyte and turning them to piracy. Yes, in the grand scheme of things everything is being marketed to you. In chuck, everyone fricking used an Iphone. In supernatural, I think I recall and mac and a dell laptop constantly being used. To make it worse, if you aren't there exactly when the show is aired, or you don't have tivo, your stuck having to shell out over 30-40$ for per DVD, which is ridiculous. Why pay 30-40$ for entertainment when you can get it free?

Thats where Hulu comes in. It still has advertisements. It still contains the insidious marketing in every episode. I recall when I went through and watched lost on the ABC player, after 30 seconds it gave you the option to end the commercial, but it would keep on going if you didn't click the button. Often I mostly forgot and end up watching the entire commercial anyway. Since I am not incredibly bored out of my mind with the barrage of commercials, I end up watching the one or two commercials per break more carefully. In addition, on TV if I knew it was a commercial break I might leave for 5-10 minutes and come back, completely destroying the point of the commercial. Add in the fact that if I miss a episode I might completely destroy the storyline, so the only other option is forking over 30-40$ on a DVD to find the episodes. Why wouldn't I just illegally download it? Its so much simpler.

Hulu is convenient and easy to use, and the streaming aspect means rarely, if any wait times for loading. The commercials aren't nearly as obtrusive, and I can find episodes easily. If more industries starting using the model, and maybe movies/music could be implemented with similar models, I believe piracy could be greatly reduced. Instead of using bully tactics and powerful lawyers, just use what the customer wants, after all, the customer is always right.

As to another question, it has been mentioned that trackers hosted in other countries where its legal can't be touched by the law. But what if someone from the US(or maybe sweden or something), decided to start up another TPB by buying a server from Hong Kong? What then? The servers in Hong Kong, but the citizens in an area where establishing trackesr is risky and illegal business. What then?
 
Answering the original question; the tracker you create is only as legal as the content you "link" to or "host".

I've never heard of an open-source software or anything public-domain tracker been taken down. If you have copyrighted content, there are obviously special interest groups who will look for a quick buck at your expense regardless of the laws and circumstances involved.
 
If its legal to create a site where theres a disclaimer saying you must have the rights in order to distribute/dl, whats so illegal about it?

It all depends on the country in which you establish the tracker. Obviously, The Pirate Bay has lost the case in the first court. Now there are two more and this case will probably go all the way to the Swedish Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Sweden)

This question is rather intricate and hard to answer in any detail.

The thing about disclaimers, btw, is that they're much more useful in countries that employ something called "common law" -- which means UK and USA. In countries heavily influenced by German law, disclaimers are not that important. etc.

If I were to start a tracker, I would host it on fiber in Khazakstan. Or something.
 
curtanwoo said:
The thing about disclaimers, btw, is that they're much more useful in countries that employ something called "common law" -- which means UK and USA. In countries heavily influenced by German law, disclaimers are not that important. etc.

If I were to start a tracker, I would host it on fiber in Khazakstan. Or something.
Click to expand...

In terms of civil litigation, including many criminal, a disclaimer, on the main page is not going to protect you...
 
you only need time because the money will come if the quallity is high but today there are to many trackers I wonder how they rezist
 
Back
Top