PDA

View Full Version : LA Man Pleads Guilty; faces Three Years



kimchibanana
09-02-2005, 02:19 AM
LA district attorney gets first conviction for online file-sharing; perp faces up to three years in prison for conspiracy to commit grand theft.

Jed Frederick Kobles was downloading Leisure Suit Larry for the Xbox when Los Angeles cops served a search warrant on his residence in an Internet piracy investigation in late February, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office.

The investigation led to a felony charge of conspiracy to commit grand theft being brought against Kobles earlier this week for his role in operating an Internet site that allegedly facilitated online theft of movies, TV shows, music, and games. Kobles pled guilty the same day the charge was brought against him, and faces anywhere from probation to three years in prison at his sentencing, scheduled for October 20.

Among the allegedly stolen material was Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, National Treasure, A Beautiful Mind, Madonna music videos and an episode of The Simpsons.

According to the DA's office, this is California's first criminal Internet file-sharing case. However, a worldwide crackdown on Internet piracy has been in effect for the last couple months, and is beginning to yield more charges of Internet piracy.

PWNED

tylerkane
09-02-2005, 02:25 AM
Leisure Suit Larry

l
o
l

Isn't that game on the discount rack on the other side of the aisle?
weird

daZenfmeister
09-02-2005, 03:05 AM
Omg thats so bullshit!
I see the simpsons on broadcast (FREE) television, and now downloading it is illegal? So then how come giving someone a set of simpsons DVD's is illegal? Same principle (sorta) I think that all this shit is stupid file-sharing is the best thing ever where would i be without my 230 simpsons episodes, family guy episodes and futurama episodes? BORED! thats where id be damnit!

Cleveland
09-02-2005, 03:18 AM
what kind of strains are these?

kimchibanana
09-02-2005, 04:58 AM
what kind of strains are these?

the burito flavored 1's

FunkyMonkey
09-02-2005, 07:41 AM
Where does the line get drawn?
Here is a not so hypothetical situation to consider:
Say dude has some vhs, or even beta tapes with some old shit that is not even in production anymore. So dude decides he knows some buddies who would like this stuff so he takes the time and expense to copy that stuff onto digital media and share it. This generates some interest as more people see it and say...'hey man I remember that shit Id love a copy!' so more copies get made. So along comes big business with a copywrite and says hey man you cant do that with our property and sue the guy. Then realising the demand for old school heman videos and thundercats cartoons or whatever that this 'pirate' has created and fueled they then start to reproduce it themselves and market it and make some coin.
But, had the first dude not revived it amoungst his friends and had it not been uploaded onto the net and shared ( all without anyone making any profit yet) and therefore reviving the culture to some extent( interest in the shows, toys and various merchandise) these big businesses would not have realised new profits .
In efect the 'pirate' who digs out some old shit and dusts it off for his friends, and the people sharing shit that is not even availlable for purchase anymore, while violating copywrite laws, have recreated the market for them. Yet, they can still be held liable for'lost profit' and theft.
This shit happens. People revive forgotten relics of our entertainment culture and potentially face prosecution.
Just something we started to talk about the other day while I was copying the complete library of old thundercats cartoons for a friend.
Food for thought.