Welcome at IH !

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Welcome here buddy .

Following an initial investigation and complaint filed by Rights Alliance in 2012, this week the admin of a Sweden-based torrent site learned of his fate. Dismissing claims that the site had been sold four years earlier, a court sentenced the 40-year-old to a five month jail sentence.

When it comes to file-sharing news arriving from Sweden, these days it’s rarely something positive. Week after week there’s news of a fresh prosecution, or historical cases being brought to a conclusion.

This Thursday a case running since 2012 came to an end, with a particularly miserable outcome for the man involved.

It began two years ago when anti-piracy outfit Rights Alliance filed a complaint against a man they believed to be the owner of torrent site Tankaner. Local police launched an investigation and the man was later arrested.

In April 2014 the man was prosecuted for copyright infringement related to the illegal distribution of 32 movies during 2012 and 2013. At the time prosecutor Fredrik Inglad said that since there were ads on the site he would be pushing for a prison sentence.

In his defense the 40-year-old claimed that he’d disposed of the site four years ago. But according to Rights Alliance lawyer Henrik Pontén, the court didn’t buy that version of events.

“There was extensive evidence against the man in the form of signed contracts for the piracy server, login information, book keeping, e-mails and a photo in which he is posing in a T-shirt with ‘Tankaner’ printed on it,” Pontén told TF.

“The man argued that he was innocent and that he had transferred the operation from him to unknown persons who had made alterations to his encrypted computer while he was asleep. The court did not accept this version of events.”

Pontén says that the Court applied principles from the Svensson case previously referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union by Sweden’s Court of Appeal.

“In the case the suspect argued similar stand points to the ones argued by the suspects in the Pirate Bay case and they were dismissed on the same merits. However a difference from the Pirate Bay case is that the man was convicted as a direct infringer and not for contributory infringement,” Pontén adds.

On Thursday the Uppsala District Court sentenced the man to five months in prison. Rights Alliance are now seeking damages for one of the movies made available to the public.

Proofs Recieved :)

applying for Fano , rep + thanks added

They still trying move to new servers etc

i whould like one invite for DigitalHive

looking for sometime now

Topic closed till sign ups are closed

Title changed :)

@Cklein great giveaway buddy.

I whould love to apply for HDWIng . I am member at CHDBits so i know how things work there and how to pass the tests :)

I use two seedboxes 400Gb x 20Gbit and 3TB x 500mbps .

Feel free to pm me for anything

Copying a song, movie or image without the creator's permission is illegal in many instances, especially so if the infringement is intentional. But what if that piracy is done on a nanoscopic scale, so that infringed works are imperceptible to human senses? How does that affect the artists?

nano-smallIn the modern age almost anything can be copied. Digital technology allows for the reproduction of audio, still and moving images, and even physical items are easily cloned using 3D printing techniques.

This ease of copying has provoked legal aggression and endless debate as to the purpose of copyright law and its role in protecting the interests of artists. In particular, entertainment industry companies often declare that no matter what its nature, infringement negatively affects those creators. But is that always the case?

A new project developed by Dr Robert Hovden at Cornell University aims to provoke discussion on that very topic by pushing replication of content – and indeed the law – to their absolute limits.

A self-confessed gradeschool downloader and former undergraduate at Jet Propulsion Labs, NASA, Hovden went on to study nanoscience at Cornell. His passion for studying the world at the tiniest possible levels has given birth to “When Art Exceeds Perception”.

The project, which will be exhibiting at Cornell University this November and December, explores the implications of copyright infringement, replication and plagiarism when the ‘pirated’ works are so tiny they cannot be perceived by human senses.

To this end, Hovden has ‘pirated’ four famous works of art by scribing them into the surface of a silicon crystal using a focused ion beam. The features in the artwork replicas are five hundred times smaller than the eye can perceive and five times smaller than the wavelength of light.


The Focused Ion Beam device used to ‘pirate’ the artwork

Ion beam

“To take a piece of art, copy it, and share it with the world without the original artists’ permission is traditionally viewed as wrong and, in most cases, violates copyright laws,” Hovden says.

“Such laws are intended to protect an artist’s financial interests and
provide incentive to create. However, in a digital era where information is encrypted and stored in the atomic bits of nanoscale devices, answers to philosophical, moral, and legal questions surrounding copyright become muddled.”

This leads to Hovden’s big question: When a copyright work is copied, framed and presented for public consumption on a nanoscale as it will during November and December at Cornell, has something been taken from the original artist?

“Thus far, people have discussed this project from a science or art perspective, but I believe that the readers of TorrentFreak are best equipped to understand this work. The exhibition is highly conceptual – completely beyond perception – and critical of current views on replication,” Hovden told TF.

Project creative assistant Michael Blaney informs us that the artworks involved are The Treachery of Images by René Magritte, Le Platane by Henri Matisse, M.C. Escher’s Regular Division Of The Plane With Birds and Laylah K. by Joy Garnett.


Laylah K. by Joy Garnett, original and nanoscale

nanoartwork

“The replicated pieces chosen are from recent, famous artists where copyright is relevant to the discussion,” Hovden says.

“Joy Garnett is a fantastic creator and one of a few fine artists who release work under a Creative Commons license. She sometimes paints from the photographs of others to make something uniquely new – a benefit of a free culture society. The nanoscale replica of Garnett’s work is the only one which I retained a low resolution micrograph image of.

“The Escher is a lovely tessellation with symmetries that can be found in the crystalline silicon substrate on which it was etched and Magritte’s ‘The Treachery of Images’ was chosen for a technological modernization and extension of his original concept. The Matisse is a best-selling serigraph at MOMA.”


The works of art, on a nanoscale

nanoartwork

The concept of infringement at an imperceptible level is an intriguing one. Are artists affected by ‘pirate’ music that’s too quiet to be heard or by entire movies played in a fraction of a second, for example?

“I think your idea of an audio performance of ‘pirate’ music is in the same vein as this exhibition, but raises some new concepts,” Hovden told TF.

“The audio is quiet, with a signal to noise ratio that changes with distance. Maybe a microphone could record the sounds we can’t hear at close distances but the sound quality will drop with distance (actually, rapidly with the square of the distance). There will be a point where even a microphone cannot ‘hear’ the sound and the information is lost.

“So, does the extent of a public performance change? If a thousand people are present, but none – or only a couple – can hear it, is it a public performance? Also, you could play with the idea of translating the music to frequencies higher than the human ear can hear. It is loud, but not perceived – maybe by an animal.”

And the complexities and fascination of Hovden’s project only intensifies when one realizes that we’re all engaged in pirating on a nanoscale, quite possibly at this very moment.

“With the modern computer, most of us are continually replicating information – often without permission – in the nanoscale bits of our hard drives and memory. Not only small, the information is encoded in complex arrays.

“Here, I wanted to make something that is a direct representation of the original artwork – just like the low-amplitude ‘pirate’ music performance. The verdict is still out on how this type of work will be received (tolerated),” he concludes.

Those interested in experiencing When Art Exceeds Perception can do so at the Jill Stuart Gallery at Cornell University during November and December.

Welcome

Welcome

Welcome

Welcome