back to article Police dismantle global child porn network

Police have dismantled an international child pornography ring that used the internet to produce and distribute tailor-made videos to some 2,500 customers in 19 countries. In all, 92 arrests have been made and 23 victims aged 9 to 16 have been identified. The videos allegedly contained heinous content, including one in which a …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    IT Angle

    So, if the MPAA is to be believed...

    ...then those who may have shared those video files without paying for them have done irreparable damage to the producers of the content, and should thus be hailed as heroes?

  2. This post has been deleted by its author

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Doesn't add up

    >Police from 28 countries worked on the case

    >92 people from 19 countries arrested

    So that makes 9 countries where the police either tipped off the perps before they were arrested or just couldn't be bothered to follow up. Any chance of naming and shaming the guilty forces?

  4. alistair millington
    Thumb Down

    Punishment. Castration for all of 'em. No anaesthetic

    19 countries made arrests.

    18 will lock them up in horrible prisons where they will regret and fear for their lives while making interesting friends who want to do interesting things to them..

    1 country will slap their wrists, let them loose with a "now don't do it again" and put them on a list, only to then have to relocate and hide them at taxpayers cost because people don't want them near them. Or worse, they will be locked up and 3 square meals a day, warmth, Colour tv, satellite, gym membership, free medical care, free dental care, a wage, drugs and women on tap, phone calls when they want it and no mortgage or taxes. And the right to vote.

    I love this country.

  5. Graham Jordan

    And the others?

    2408 others that didnt get arrested?

    don't get me wrong even just one sicko out the loop is good but if they've identified 2500 how comes they're still on the loose?

  6. Bronek Kozicki
    Coat

    @Chris

    The fact that no arrests were made in 9 countries just means this - police might have been involved to assist in investigation ie. providing log files from local ISPs .

    From my side I hope those arrested are severaly punished - on both sides of the "transaction".

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    It's everywhere...

    This is a significant victory.

    However, it is the tip of the iceberg. My partner works on a self harm helpline and every week she hears the after affects of abuse. Grown women are experiencing heartbreaking emotional problems from incidents in their childhood all over the country. Suicide, further abusive relationships, self harm, guilt, inability to form trusting relationships etc etc... This is part of the price the victims pay for the rest of their lives.

    Most is unreported, most is perpetrated by men, all is devastating to innocent lives. Nowhere is immune to this, imagine being a woman/girl, it must be like being under siege all the time...

    Big praise to all involved.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @Bronek

    If that's what you seriously think then either

    1. I want some of what you are taking, or maybe you're not taking what you should be.

    2. You'r entitled to your opinion but you're wrong

    or

    3. I have 50 million dollars in a bank in Nigeria that I need help getting out of the country, please help me.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @David Wiernicki

    Slightly sad that you hijack a story on child abuse to push your anti-copyright agenda, but what the hell...

    >if the MPAA is to be believed... have done irreparable damage

    I think the MPAA generally try to claim "damages" that cover the damage done, so it's quite clearly repairable.

  10. Graham Marsden

    @alistair milligan

    I hope you've remembered to renew your Daily Mail subscription...

  11. Ulm Schulbaum

    Good use of resources

    According to UNICEF:

    "Every year, more than 10 million children under the age of five die totally preventable deaths. Some are directly caused by illness such as pneumonia, diarrhoea and malaria. Others are caused by indirect causes including conflict and HIV/AIDS. Malnutrition, poor hygiene and lack of access to safe water and adequate sanitation contribute to more than half of these deaths."

    But hey, its far more important that our resources are used to tackle this "global child porn network" consisting of allegations against 92 people. Excellent priorities.

  12. Fozzy

    @Ulm Schulbaum

    WTF?

    Are you seriously suggesting that Child Porn rings should be allowed to operate and grow unchecked. Are you suggesting that police forces across the globe should set aside investigations into child porn, murder, extortion and other voilent crime and concentrate their efforts on preventing those needless deaths.Your arguments for this should make for entertaining reading.

    Your either a troll or an idiot. Personally I think your both

  13. Graham Marsden
    Thumb Down

    @Fozzy

    Ulm Schulbaum is neither a troll, nor an idiot. Neither does he make Straw Man arguments like you do.

    If I were to use your tactics I might suggest that you appear to think that it's ok for millions of children to die from lack of basic resources such as food, water and medicine provided a few people who may be innocent (you know "presumed innocent until proven guilty"?) are arrested for alleged child porn offences.

    Your arguments for this should make for entertaining reading...

  14. Ulf Henninger

    @Ulm Schulbaum

    Sorry mate, but I really think you should get your facts - and your thoughts - right before posting.

    Kids dying in the 3rd world are a very serious problem, I agree with you there. But they are a very different problem from the one discussed here - which is child abuse, and which is very serious in its own right. Both Problems are being addressed (more or less effectively - and usually rather more than less, I agree there). But they are necessarily addressed by different means - sorry, but malnutrition, illness and suchlike are not crimes. And as such they are not an issue for police investigation. Child abuse certainly is.

  15. J

    Yeah...

    I'd like to see all the 2500 customers getting more attention too...

    Re: @Fozzy

    Since you (think you) are so smart, Graham Marsden, how exactly do you interpret what Ulm Schulbaum wrote, and why? "Excellent priorities" is supposed to mean what, eh?

  16. Jared
    Paris Hilton

    It's called multitasking...I just invented it

    Can you my CPU just spent trillions of cycles playing the crysis demo while hundreds of children died from preventable causes? It's a traveshamockery!

    Ulm's argument only makes sense if the two priorities compete for the same resources. If these police from 28 countries are typically busy saving starving and sick children when they're not putting their abusers in jail, then he would have a logical argument. But since it's more likely that these policemen are usually busy trying to fine people for going 5 over the speed limit, I think I'm going to applaud this effort as an extremely worthwhile use of our resources.

    I find it hard to accept that anybody educated enough to know what a 'straw man' argument is would accept Ulm's logic as sound...But life's full of surprises.

    Can you imagine a world where everybody waited for the most important problem to be solved before anybody could work on the second most important problem? Hardly a model of efficiency.

    Castrate 'em with a splintery wooden spoon.

  17. Graham Marsden

    @J and Jared

    > Since you (think you) are so smart, Graham Marsden, how exactly do you interpret what Ulm Schulbaum wrote, and why? "Excellent priorities" is supposed to mean what, eh?

    How many politicians do you hear campaigning on a platform of "there are millions of starving children in this world, we should spend more money to help them" and how many go for the much more media-headline and voter friendly "let's put lots of money into chasing and locking up suspected kiddie fiddlers"?

    Is your argument "starving children in other countries aren't our problem"?

    > I find it hard to accept that anybody educated enough to know what a 'straw man' argument is would accept Ulm's logic as sound...But life's full of surprises.

    Yes, like the "surprise" that people on here are willing to skip the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" and jump straight to demanding "castrate them with no anaesthetic" and similar sentiments...

    > Ulm's argument only makes sense if the two priorities compete for the same resources.

    They do. It's called *money*.

    > Can you imagine a world where everybody waited for the most important problem to be solved before anybody could work on the second most important problem? Hardly a model of efficiency.

    Who said anything about "waiting for the most important problem to be solved"? Those are your words, not mine or Ulm's.

    Should we *ignore* the most important problem of millions of children dying because it's happening somewhere else?

  18. Jared

    Still don't buy it

    "They do. It's called *money*."

    That's a little better, but there's still two problems with it. 1) You have to prove that fighting pedophilia and and UNICEF compete for the same funding, and 2) Making that argument is hypocritical unless each penny you spend is spent on something more important than starving/diseased children. How much have you donated to UNICEF this year, and how much has gone into upgrading your computer and eating out?

    "Who said anything about "waiting for the most important problem to be solved"? Those are your words, not mine or Ulm's."

    Ulm argued that we should not spend resources on pedophiles because preventable deaths of children is a more important problem. My version is simply more generalized to demonstrate the implications of his flawed reasoning.

    "Yes, like the "surprise" that people on here are willing to skip the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" and jump straight to demanding "castrate them with no anaesthetic" and similar sentiments..."

    You're correct, my mistake...I should have specified that I desire the castration to happen with a splintery wooden spoon *after* being proven guilty. Not before.

    "Should we *ignore* the most important problem of millions of children dying because it's happening somewhere else?"

    Speaking of straw man arguments...

  19. Graham Marsden

    @Jared

    > You have to prove that fighting pedophilia and and UNICEF compete for the same funding

    UNICEF is financed through donations from Governments which come from money raised by taxation. Police forces are financed from Government, money which comes from taxation. There is only a limited amount of money available from the Government's coffers. To spend more in one area means spending less in another. QED.

    > Making that argument is hypocritical unless each penny you spend is spent on something more important than starving/diseased children. How much have you donated to UNICEF this year, and how much has gone into upgrading your computer and eating out?

    As I've already said, UNICEF is funded by National Governments. I have contributed to them via my taxes just as everyone else who pays taxes has.

    Your subsequent statement is an Appeal to Pity fallacy.

    > Ulm argued that we should not spend resources on pedophiles because preventable deaths of children is a more important problem.

    He did *not* say we "should not spend resources on paedophiles" he simply questioned the priorities under which the amounts of funding are allocated. You are using a Straw Man argument to misrepresent what he said.

    Oh and...

    > Speaking of straw man arguments...

    No, that was *irony*.

  20. Jared

    This is getting dull...

    "To spend more in one area means spending less in another."

    Yes, but *which* other. If we're going to start re-allocating money to help save children around the world, there are an awful lot of necks on the chopping block before we start taking funds out of the 'stop pedophilia' coffer. You've got a long way to go to prove that UNICEF and "police" compete for the *same* government funding (particularly since this article makes no mention of which police organizations were involved). unQED

    "As I've already said, UNICEF is funded by National Governments. I have contributed to them via my taxes just as everyone else who pays taxes has. Your subsequent statement is an Appeal to Pity fallacy."

    You're evading my point. You cannot claim that the governments' priorities are skewed and yours are not when both you and the governments choose to spend money on things less important than starving and diseased children.

    "He did *not* say we "should not spend resources on paedophiles" he simply questioned the priorities under which the amounts of funding are allocated."

    That's quite a stretch, particularly for a response to an article that said nothing about how much this operation cost the taxpayers. How about you and Ulm tell us how much you think the government ought to have spent trying to find a father who rapes his own daughters. Then find out how much this little roundup cost, and maybe we'll have nothing to debate.

  21. Graham Marsden

    Re: This is getting dull

    Jared:

    You asked me to "prove that fighting pedophilia and and UNICEF compete for the same funding". I did.

    Rephrasing your Appeal to Pity fallacy doesn't make it any less a fallacy.

    I demonstrated that your claim about what Ulm said was wrong.

    You now seem to be intent on moving the goalposts because you don't like losing however I do not have inclination to waste any more time on this.

    Please feel free to have the last word.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I no longer am

    utterly believing about these big busts. I don't have any evidence any of this real, yes I know your government would have to really cynical and evil to set people up, or to fake a big child porn ring, and yet I don't trust any more I want to see convictions soon not three years later with only a few of people who haven't killed themselves in the mean time.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021