Does the Pirate Bay's Demise Signal the Beginning of the End of Torrent Sharing Sites?

In the latest chapter of the Pirate Bay torrent sharing site saga, Swedish gaming company Global Gaming Factory X (GGF) has acquired the site for $7.8 million.  According to an interview with TorrentFreak, GGF CEO Hans Pandeya plans to implement a system where content creators will be paid for their work, thus honoring copyright laws.  In another TorrentFreak interview, Pirate Bay founder Peter Sunde acknowledged site users' disappointment with moving to this model, but that “I’d rather see The Pirate Bay die in a chance of becoming better, than just dying.”

This acquisition is just the latest in the Pirate Bay's ongoing legal battles.  In April 2009, Pirate Bay founders Lunde, Fredrik Neij, and Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, along with financial backer Carl Lundström were found guilty by the Swedish courts for copyright infringement.  The team was sentenced to a year in prison and $3.8 million in fines, but vowed to appeal.  After an unsuccessful appeal for a new trial, the team as well as GGF announced the deal.  Why would a company want to acquire a troubled site?  The statistics are staggering: over 28 million users trade files at any given point, making it the number one most used torrent site of 2008, according to TorrentFreak.

Now that The Pirate Bay will transform into a legal format, the question remains: will this move affect other torrent sharing sites?  Virtually every popular service, including IsoHunt, Demonoid, BTJunkie, and TorrentSpy, has been temporarily shut down or, at the very least, has been issued cease-and-desist orders.  The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) continues to sue torrent sharing site owners as well as individual users of these services.  Despite these legal threats, torrents continue to survive, even thrive, on the Internet. 

Clearly technology has brought a seemingly new set of problems to the entertainment industry.  Content creators who own the rights to their own work should be paid accordingly.  But what about consumers' rights?  According to TheNextWeb, after having been denied a new trial, Sunde planned to file charges against the Swedish government for violation of human rights.  Denying users access to certain sites, Sunde argued, violates Article 19 of The United Nations' Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” 

Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2Page 3

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Profile image for kit-o-toole

Article Author: Kit O'Toole

Kit O'Toole is a lifelong music enthusiast who maintains a music blog, Listen to the Band. In addition, she is the internet columnist and a contributing editor for Beatlefan magazine. She also holds an Ed.D. in Instructional Technology.

Visit Kit O'Toole's author pageKit O'Toole's Blog

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own

Article comments

  • 1 - Robert M. Barga

    Jul 02, 2009 at 3:36 pm

    The thing is, as the big players disappear, people are going to run out of areas to go

  • 2 - Al Sussman

    Jul 03, 2009 at 8:47 am

    I'm old enough to remember all the examples of old media paranoia. TV was going to kill radio and heavily damage attendance for movies and theatre. Then, VCRs were going to completely kill movie attendance. Cassette dubbing decks were going to kill the record business. Same with CD recorders and, later, computer CD burning software. And remember the Mini-Disc? None of the dire predictions came true so, while I know less about bit torrent sharing than I know about video games (which is next to nothing), I suspect that won't destroy an industry already rotting from within, much like those now-unplayable CD-Rs a lot of us recorded a decade or less ago.

  • 3 - Robert M. Barga

    Jul 03, 2009 at 10:12 am

    50 billion a year indicates real harm

  • 4 - Blackskunk

    Jul 03, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    If music wasn't such a rip-off, then people wouldn't use P2P so much. £2.50 is a reasonable price to pay for a CD... no more. If you rip people off, they will rip you off!
    What goes around , comes around. Fact.
    If CD's are really worth what they sell for initially, up to £15.00. Then how come stores can sell the same CD for £4.00 years later and presumably still make a profit.
    Also, when the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, fact, and music continues to become more popular, people can't afford to pay £15.00 every time they want a new album.
    Music industry, the ball is in your court!
    Stop ripping us off!

  • 5 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus

    Jul 03, 2009 at 2:44 pm

    50 Billion could be lost for a lot of reasons as there is no evidence that "file-sharing" is the only cause.

    The music industry have been hurting themselves financially for a while now by pandering to the popular formula & overcharging the consumer for an inferior product. But, no one gets to sue the music industry for ruining technology,do they? It's a well known fact(and as the article has shown) that artists thrive from concert & merchandise revenue and,even, quite a bit from "word of mouth". The RIAA is only masquerading their frontal assault with the motive of artist concern so they can protect their assets because they are desperate & are having a hard time justifying their existence. I'm not for taking away anybodies' livelihood,BUT,just like newspapers, the music industry didn't invest in their future & are now paying the price. Unfortunately, under this deceit they are destroying the future for this great tool, the internet. If people are always just going to be concerned about monetary gain as opposed to what benefits a culture & progresses technology then we will always be on the losing end.

  • 6 - Kit O'Toole

    Jul 04, 2009 at 11:43 pm

    Thanks for all your comments--this will continue to be a controversial issue, and as some of you have pointed out, the music industry needs to deal with it in a reasonable manner.

  • 7 - Ruvy

    Jul 05, 2009 at 12:40 am

    A cousin of mine owns his own label. He is a musician, a musician's musician even, and is thorougly aware that you can't rip off the public without expecting them to rip you off. What comes around goes around indeed.

    The issues in my mind are fair compensation for the artist, and reasonable prices for the consumer. All the rest can be worked out without burdeneing the consumer too greatly. The key is for the musician and the label owners (preferably indepoendent artists themselves, like my cousin) to be fully aware of technology as it comes down the pike, and before it comes off the exit ramp. The key, as always, is to cut out the middleman as much as possible.

  • 8 - Kit O'Toole

    Jul 07, 2009 at 10:46 pm

    Very true, Ruvy--cutting out the middleman does seem to be the key. Thanks for your comments!

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 07, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs