The last few weeks have been surreal.


Between work and home I haven't had time to take a breath.

I know excuses, excuses.


2008 will forever be remembered as the year of RAPIDSHARE.

Lately, I've found it advantageous to move vast amounts of data online.

Suprisingly my ISP hasn't  hassled me at all. 

It's over now.  I have seen the end of the internet.

Surely I jest, (don't call me Shirley)

Props to Rapidshare.com -

Secure data sharing at a budget price.

Fast transfers and the ability to pause and resume downloads.

Nice and fast (multiple files at 300+ kb/s)

Not a commercial.  Just a review.


It is now time to absorb new information, to seek out new conflicts

and new wrenches, to boldly shine light upon the truth,

just as others attempt to obscure it.


OK, I'll share the wealth.

Truth for all, Justice for those who can afford it.

I picture is truly worth a thousand words.

After two weeks of live broadcasted hearings on the Internet, the ‘Spectrial’ is coming to an end. This week both parties presented their closing statements to the court. Time for us to weigh up developments so far and look forward to the verdict.


Yesterday the prosecutor called for jailtime, while the prosecution presented its closing statements. Today the defense had its say and the trial officially ended.


The Pirate Bay trial started on February 16 with lots of press coverage, protesting pirates and people handing out free candy. As the days went by, plenty of information was presented by both the prosecution and defense.



So which elements are most relevant, and which side is ahead in the polls?
On day two of the trial the prosecutor announced that half of the charges against the four defendants had been dropped. The prosecutor couldn’t prove that the .torrent files that were submitted as evidence actually used The Pirate Bay’s tracker, and he had to let go of all charges that accused the Pirate Bay folks of ‘assisting copyright infringement’.



What remained is the claim that they were ‘assisting in making copyright content available’. Armed with several screenshots of web pages and torrents downloading films and music albums, the prosecution argued that this was indeed the case. The torrent files hosted on The Pirate Bay allow people to download and share copyrighted material - period - they argued.



The crucial part here of course is whether the defendants actually ‘assisted’ in making any files available, this will eventually be up to the judge to decide. The prosecution has shown that there are indeed torrent files hosted on The Pirate Bay, and that some of these indirectly link to copyrighted material. However, whether the defendants are assisting in making copyright content available remains doubtful.


The defense has argued that they are not ‘assisting’, and dragged a giant primate into court to prove it. On the third day of the trial Carl Lundström’s lawyer, Per E Samuelsson pointed out that the prosecution failed to prove that Lundström had been involved in any transfers of any copyrighted material. This became known as the now famous King Kong defense.
“The admins of The Pirate Bay don’t initiate transfers. It’s the users that do and they are physically identifiable people. They call themselves names like King Kong,” Samuelsson told the court.


“According to legal procedure, the accusations must be against an individual and there must be a close tie between the perpetrators of a crime and those who are assisting. This tie has not been shown. The prosecutor must show that Carl Lundström has personally interacted with the user King Kong, who may very well be found in the jungles of Cambodia,” the lawyer added.


During the days that followed both sides tried to strengthen their case, but not much that was actually related to the ‘assisting in making available’ charges that are central to the case. The prosecution brought in more screenshots and some actual torrent files as evidence, and tried to get a better grip on the Pirate Bay’s anarchic ‘management’ structure.


The defense on the other hand, argued that there are many ways to share torrent files online. By playing a video in court they showed that The Pirate Bay is just one of many torrent trackers, and a tiny part of the download chain. One of the witnesses, Kristoffer Schollin from Gothenburg University, told the court that the Pirate Bay is an “open database” of .torrent files which he described as simply an advanced type of hyperlink.


In addition to detailing the charges, there was further debate on the damages claims from last week. While music and movie industry insiders claimed that piracy was responsible for a large part of the decline in sales of their respective industries, media professor Wallis told the court that the file-sharing is actually beneficial to the entertainment industry.


It is now up to the judge to review all the information presented by both parties and decide whether the defendants are guilty of ‘assisting in making copyright content available’.



If the decision was based purely on a big win via the media during the trial, there can be no question that The Pirate Bay won a decisive victory and proved to be even more popular than ever expected. However, as it stands, it’s difficult to find anyone - no matter where their preferences lie - who is willing to step out and say who they believe is going to prevail in the case overall.


What is pretty much certain is that this won’t end with the verdict that is due on April 17. No matter what the outcome it seems unthinkable that either side will accept a defeat. An appeal seems almost inevitable.
Stay tuned.

"King Kong" defense

On day three of the trial, defense attorney Per Samuelson presented an argument later dubbed the "King Kong defense":^[37]

"EU directive 2000/31/EC^[38] says that he who provides an information service is not responsible for the information that is being transferred. In order to be responsible, the service provider must initiate the transfer. But the admins of The Pirate Bay don’t initiate transfers. It’s the users that do and they are physically identifiable people. They call themselves names like King Kong .... According to legal procedure, the accusations must be against an individual and there must be a close tie between the perpetrators of a crime and those who are assisting. This tie has not been shown. The prosecutor must show that Carl Lundström personally has interacted with the user King Kong, who may very well be found in the jungles of Cambodia..."^[39]

Samuelson is referring to a real Pirate Bay user who posts via the username "King Kong", whom Samuelson hypothesizes could be located in Cambodia. He used this scenario to illustrate that Lundström had no control over the actions undertaken by Pirate Bay users. His main objection was that although the prosecutor had said that the accused would be tried individually, he had not once referred to them individually, but always as "them", "they" or "Pirate Bay". Samuelson said the persons behind The Pirate Bay could not be held collectively responsible for a crime committed by other identifiable individuals, such as King Kong.^[40] He spoke the words "King Kong" three times during his argument.

The term "King Kong defense" was quickly popularized by blogs, file sharing news feeds, and media reports on the Pirate Bay trial.^[41] It has been compared to the Chewbacca defense from the TV series South Park, citing a reference to the "jungles of Cambodia" as "the kind of extraneous detail that makes the Chewbacca defense hilarious".^[42]

Courtesy of wiKi / VIPERFILES

What happened?

I thought we were a team. 

Today I was 50% of the team. 

My counterpart . . .  BJ. (FML)

By lunch time (4:00) he once again lived up to his name.

A flat tire is a hurdle unto itself, on bicycle even more-so.


Everyone who was off had their reasons to be.

I begrudge them not, although, I would take any other partner for this dance.


Every facet of my glorified babysitting gig was fulfilled.

Orders, layaways, rentals, quotes, payments, all without a hitch.


Then in walks CVT.  He's an old black guy in the guise of a young white boy.

(like Michael Jackson only straight and poor)


CVT is a sweet dude, and I'll back it up like this:

1. The guy buys sweet gear (and plays it)
2. He knows what he wants and just gets it (except respect).
3. His eyes are open, he knows what should be (and alternately what is)
4. Patience.  (in spite of his youth he reigns in inpulse and instinct)

I'll give him as much dice as any customer.

That's infinitely more that I can say for our nepetismic prince.

I really can't say why BJ would choose today to have a pissing contest
with the only one who feels compelled to watch his back (work ethic)
and soothe the feathers of those he offends.

In short, CVT was killing time. . . .

like everyone else in the store (myself included) 

Was he loitering?  Perhaps.

And the other wrenches in my field of view?  Lets recount . . .

In the drum section, a throng of children banging arhythmically. (no money)

In basses, Juan TuDual is at it again. (Has he ever bought anything?)

In acoustics,  A gathering of 3-4 teens and their ladies treat us
to a swaying sing-song on $3000 acoustics simply unattainable to
anyone but professional session musicians and spoiled rich kids.
(Yeah I'm sure I can sell that as new now)

The PA dept,  a dirty indian man is in again, unable to commit to a $100
interface for the third day in a row & needs a few hours of handholding.
(that's comming back for sure!!)

Rentals, another group of the old CH__CH.  Guess were I am?
Do they need a rental?  Hell no, they need someone to re-write a quote for them.
A quote they were given last week. FMLx2

Shipping . . .  No boxes incoming on the weekend,
Then,  whats all the typing coming from back there?
I don't think it's work related.

So where's CVT when all this is going on?  Waiting patiently.
He was actually asked by a customer for help. (and did!)

Between wrecks, he approaches the counter and comments on the full house.

"Can you step back from the counter, PLEASE!"  BJ asserts his authoritae`.

CVT is taken aback understandably. "pardon?"

"You're blocking actual customers" he quips.

"ah, O-kay" CVT responds rolling his eyes in a way universally dismissive.
He gingerly retreats. to a stool in guitars. (that's called strategic retreat)

What's this? - someone not in awe of the power weilded by the 10th level
Juju-bean of akbar. (Auggie thinks it's real-life)

"Would you like to step outside?"  
(it comes across more menacing on the printed page. 
Imagine a speech bubble above a stick figure)

I was sure he meant "to talk" but sometimes the customer just hears your words.
A more unstable person would have taken him up on it - & beat his ass.

A simple "No thanks" was all he recieved and inside I laughed.

There's only one reason a person takes you away to talk,
they want you out of earshot for anyone else.

Heated words were exchanged about how CVT is a distraction & inpedes my work.
How did I get involved?

Anyway, I have to say something now.

"We do have a bit of a problem, B" I casually remark, "he IS a customer"

"Follow me!" He barks and leads away from the counter.

We're the only 2 staff on the floor.  So what could I say?

"Hey CVT, could you just watch the counter a minute?"

"Done" He responds, already a much more effective team member.


Meanwhile Just off the salesfloor - "We will discuss this later!"
(gee your face is really red)

and then, "This conversation is over!"
(actually, a conversation requires 2 voices)

Fast forward to my lunch break, I'm giving Bryan the play by play recount
when the dorway is darkened by the only "genius" we know who proves it
by working retail with a crew of people who hate him.

I am presented with a piece of paper on which is displayed: (verbatim)

loiter v. to linger or hang around in a public place or business where one has no particular or legal purpose. In many states, cities, and towns there are statutes or ordinances against loitering by which the police can arrest someone who refuses to "move along." There is a question as to whether such laws are constitutional. However, there is often another criminal statute or ordinance which can be applied specifically to control aggressive begging, soliciting prostitution, drug dealing, blocking entries to stores, public drunkenness, or being a public nuisance.

"Very nice, if you think he's loitering you can go ahead and ask him to leave, by the way . . our whole business model is based on loitering"

We don't make someone leave just cause they're hanging around. 

(If I could today wouldn't have been so busy)

 

BJ has another approach, "Just don't deal with him, send him to me"

"Tell him to leave if you want, I'm not getting involved - that's a management thing"

"Just stay away from him then" BJ snaps, and leaves me to my soggy fries

(how lunch came about was hillarious as well)

 

So I finish my "break" and can't help but feel something is missing from my meal.

I return to the floor and after grabbing a loose rental and reassuring the smelly indian

guy that his Karaoke machine would indeed plug into the interface (again),

I catch CVT approaching from the guitar section in my peripheral vison.

 

I make a quick side step and manage to keep myself about 10 feet ahead of him.

I go past the counter and into keyboards before he realizes the elaborate

cat-n-mouse game is for BJ's benefit.

 

"keep your distance man, I got a warning" 

"OK, sorry I don't wanna get you in trouble"

 

"I'll take your payment but let's keep it short"

 

Ching.  Loiter-B-gone.

Finally the clock strikes signalling my parole.

CVT is on his way out lest he outstay his welcome:

"Bye Curt, Bye Bryan, Bye BJ."

"Don't loiter too much" BJ responds wanting to have the last word.

Alas, the last word belongs to CVT,

"EAT A DICK!" he calls and walks out.

 

"I wouldn't have said that", Bryan says playing it safe.

 

Smiling I respond "I am not my brothers keeper,"

I can't control what he says (or writes) any more than I can control BJ.

 

On the Plus side - No man controls me either