back to article Alleged skipper of pirate site KickAss Torrents keel-hauled in Poland

The world's favourite torrent website, KickAss Torrents, is down and out with Polish cops arresting its alleged operator Artem Vaulin. Kickass rose to prominence after the scuppering of The Pirate Bay and attracted more than 50 million unique visitors a month. That level of traffic made it the 69th most frequently-visited …

  1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

    $1B?

    Let's take Assistant Attorney General Caldwell at his word, and assume Vaulin is "responsible for unlawfully distributing well over US$1 billion of copyrighted materials". Wouldn't that mean more than 50 million unique visitors a month were not responsible for distributing that billion?

    1. WalterAlter
      Pirate

      Lots of other Torrent sites out there

      Just don't download any .exe stuff. Pirate Bay was good because of the comments section that was active and which was an impediment to uploading sabotageware. Type this into your browser search text entry box: filetype:torrent name of movie or artist.

    2. WalterAlter
      Pirate

      Philosophy

      There are zero movies made for pure entertainment. They ALL have a message of some sort, even if it's merely to "be nice" or "don't take any wooden nickels". Message = propaganda and I'm of a mind that if someone wants to stuff ideas in my head like corn into a Strassbourg goose, then they can damned well pay ME for the privilege. It's not theft, it's my fee.

      1. Charles 9

        Re: Philosophy

        ALL of them? Without exception? Then perhaps you can list the message of many of the classics and son on...

    3. TheVogon

      Re: $1B?

      Lol @ back up again already on http://kickass.mx

      Whack-a-mole fail.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Big content: 3

    Pirates: 218,745,104,521,243

    1. Charles 9

      Re: Big content: 3

      Problem is Big Content has the stupid on their side. As long as the stupid continue to buy movie tickets and so on, they'll have a guaranteed revenue stream, meaning infinite money to attack squeaky nails.

      1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: Big content: 3

        Just bought another four DVDs. Happy to contribute towards a little nail pounding.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Big content: 3

          "Just bought another four DVDs. Happy to contribute towards a little nail pounding."

          -RW? I usually buy them in packs of 100...

          By next week there will probably be half a dozen websites running a similar interface to KAT and fighting to take it's place.

          1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

            Re: Big content: 3

            A 500GB spinning disk is about the same cost as 100x 4.7GB DVDRW, and I do not have to waste time loading and unloading 100 disks.

            I am sure there will be a successor or several for KAT. The Motion Picture Ass of America has used particularly poor methods for discouraging copyright infringement, but they do learn from their mistakes (at a glacial pace). I am sure Artem Vaulin is going to have several really bad days, and if found guilty, several bad years. Even so, new copyKATs will appear because every single one of them knows he is too smart to get caught.

      2. Dan 55 Silver badge
        WTF?

        Re: Big content: 3

        Yeah. So if stupid stop buying movie tickets and so on, where's the content to pirate?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Big content: 3

          The OLD stuff that already exists; the GOOD stuff no one really pays attention to anymore.

          1. P. Lee

            Re: Big content: 3

            Our video shop rents the old (six months or more?) content out for AU$1/week.

            Even the latest releases are three for $8.

            Streaming services are grossly expensive in comparison, the quality is awful, the selection tiny.

            Or you can visit the second hand shops, buy for less than a stream and donate it back afterwards if you want.

            The real cause of the industry decline is people spending all their time on facebook.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Big content: 3

              "Streaming services are grossly expensive in comparison"

              My KODI box begs to differ. See for instance https://www.tvaddons.ag/freetelly-contest/

              1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

                Re: Big content: 3

                correct me if im wrong , and i may well be , but isnt KODI just a flashy front end for pirated content?

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Big content: 3

                  "KODI just a flashy front end for pirated content?"

                  Yes.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: Big content: 3

                    It's what my father-in-law seems to use it for.

                  2. Trigonoceps occipitalis

                    Re: Big content: 3

                    KODI can be used to stream suspect content. I use it to stream catchup services that are free, both video and audio (BBC, ITV etc.). The answer is some what more complex than "Yes".

                    (Just about sums up much of the information on the Internet.)

                2. FIA Silver badge

                  Re: Big content: 3

                  correct me if im wrong , and i may well be , but isnt KODI just a flashy front end for pirated content?

                  Kodi is a very capable open source HTPC media player with a fairly good 'ten foot' interface, originally designed as a media player for the original XBox it's since been ported to most major platforms. It's actively developed and has a rich and vibrant community; if you want a general purpose media player that isn't Plex it's a good piece of software. (I use it on my Mac as it's a much better front end to mythTV than the OSX builds of the myth front end).

                  Kodi also supports plugins, for example for iPlayer, making it even more useful.

                  Unfortunately this means there's a plethora of plugins that act as aggregators for dodgy web based streaming sites, also there's a lot of unscrupulous people selling Kodi preloaded with a good selection of such plugins, often illegally trading on the Kodi name to do so.

                  It does sound like it's a problem that will be sorted out in the medium term though as piracy and it's associations are slowly killing the project.

                  It's a shame, as it's a quality piece of open source software that a lot of people have worked very hard on.

            2. Dr Stephen Jones

              Re: Big content: 3

              "The real cause of the industry decline is people spending all their time on facebook."

              Rrrrright.

              Nothing to do with not paying for content. That disposable income still gets spent though. It gets spent on other leisure goods and services. If you were right the economics would be reflected in higher savings. The evidence for that isn't there.

              1. Kumar2012

                Re: Big content: 3

                "Nothing to do with not paying for content" -- the fallacy being that all pirated content would have otherwise been bought.

                1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

                  fallacy being that all pirated content ....

                  I agree that is a fallacy, but its also not true that people only pirate stuff they "wouldnt otherwise have watched / paid for"

                  ..and thats hardly an excuse is it?

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: fallacy being that all pirated content ....

                    "..and thats hardly an excuse is it?"

                    In most jurisdictions, simply streaming and not re-distributing or storing content is not illegal, so no "excuse" is needed...

      3. John Sanders
        Childcatcher

        Re: Big content: 3

        >> Problem is Big Content has the stupid on their side.

        I do agree with you, but the stupid watch less and less new content because they have realised it is all garbage lately.

        1. Charles 9

          Re: Big content: 3

          "I do agree with you, but the stupid watch less and less new content because they have realised it is all garbage lately."

          I don't think so. Garbage is what they WANT to watch, given all the sequels and me-toos you see on the big and small screens all the time. Given the ratings gravitate towards them, this points to a hopeless fight to get truly satisfying content.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    For the record, it appears the authorities took the servers as well as the domains, as NOTHING KAT related works anymore: not their status page, not any mirrors, not any realtime proxies, not even the onion site. Not even IP addresses work.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The end of piracy again!

    ...I'm sorry did you say TPB was down?

    1. Charles 9

      Re: The end of piracy again!

      Most people avoid TPB these days because it's ad-ridden (meaning potentially malware-ridden.).

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The end of piracy again!

        "Most people avoid TPB these days because it's ad-ridden"

        Adblocking works just fine with TPB.

        Many people are not using TPB directly since many ISPs are blocking it but the people are just using the TPB proxies instead.

        1. Charles 9

          Re: The end of piracy again!

          Half the proxies are poisoned, though. This was true of the KA proxies, too, which was why you always wanted the clear quill which kept the ads to a minimum.

          And I'm talking the click-anywhere types of ads that open up full screen and try their damndest to get past the ad blockers by matching domains and so on. Or the clickbait ads. Or the ad walls. Not to mention the fake ones that try to foist "Click to Install" trojans on you (and you can't really block those because most of them run on fast-flux).

  5. fuzzie

    "...today’s most visited illegal file-sharing website..."

    Of course, just like TPB, I don't believe they ever hosted any files, but that's not stopped the MPAA et al before. It's definitely popcorn time again.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      You'd be right, as most of the actual torrent files were hosted through torcache, but for the plods, coordinating stuff is enough. Posting just a URL counts if it's blatant enough.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        does this mean we can take down google, its obviously one of the main reasons while piracy still exists...since TPB and now KAT are taken offline!

        1. Spacedinvader

          Easiest way around ISP blocks is to use google cache...wonder if it works for KAT now it's offline...

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            "Easiest way around ISP blocks is to use google cache"

            Using Google DNS and HTTPS site addresses works for Virgin Media.

        2. TheVogon

          "since TPB and now KAT are taken offline!"

          TPB is still up.

          1. Shane8
            Facepalm

            Shhhhhh....don't tell the MPIAA!

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm in two minds about this

    I can see the issue with content value (although I would always dispute the "calculations" such claims rely on as they have been proven to be more unrealistic and less trustworthy that the EU MEPs expenses), but I know of enough people that would download something they would otherwise never pay for in DVD of film ticket form (not to mention older titles that have simply vanished by now).

    1. fuzzie

      Re: I'm in two minds about this

      Now that we've had streaming services around for a few years, people noticing content disappearing, i.e. stuff that Netflix/Spotify/Hulu/etc had licensed when they started are being removed the the licence expires. The bun fights for exclusivity means punters typically have to sign up to several services to get what they want.

      I'd argue for most people, streaming services are viewed as "whatever you want to watch, when you want to watch". Those who follow these things have noted an uptick in downloads as people become fed up with being told what they can watch, when and where.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    google ;-

    filetype:torrent moviename

    filetype:magnet moviename

    Remind me why kickass is being attacked again and google continues?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      No one can take down the almighty Google. They took down more than half a billion pirate links this year, and they turn over user data to governments when asked.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Thus driving even more traffic to Google's own video pirating site.

  8. scrubber

    What first amendment?

    Why is hosting a link to illegal material illegal? NB. Not only should the links not be illegal, the stuff they link to is at best copyrighted which should be a civil offence and is not actually illegal or copyrightable in every country.

    If I have a directory of local fences* is that illegal even if I never buy or sell stolen goods? Are Yell (is that still a thing) breaking the law by listing gun stores?

    When does knowledge, and the dissemination of it, become so dangerous that our betters have to make it illegal? When is it better for us to not know facts 'for our own good'? This is not about piracy, this is about the state's (and the State's) ability to stop their citizens from accessing knowledge. Government of the people, by the people, for the people.

    * The people who buy and sell stolen goods, not the 'keep out my yard' type.

    1. fuzzie

      Re: What first amendment?

      There are some corners of the world (those Roman-Dutch holdouts?) where copyright violations are still considered violations of terms/conditions/contract and hence are civil matters. Big Media doesn't like this since, at best, they can sue for lost income, no punitive statutory damages. They also then have to do their own legwork, no relying on the criminal justice system to hunt down the evil transgressors.

      That said, the WTO (aka US/MPAA/RIAA) is trying really hard to force holdout countries to "modernise"/"harmonise" their "intellectual property" legislation, sometimes by hitching it onto computer fraud/hacking/etc masks. That leads to odd discontinuities like: if I make a copy of a physical DVD, it's a civil matter and they have to track me down and sue me for lost income. On the other hand, if I download a copy of the same, the police gets to track me down, and it becomes a criminal matter leading to a possible fine and/or jail time.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What first amendment?

        "There are some corners of the world (those Roman-Dutch holdouts?) where copyright violations are still considered violations of terms/conditions/contract and hence are civil matters."

        Without Berne you need to use tort law, as you describe. Very few countries are not signatories to Berne now.

        1. fuzzie

          Re: What first amendment?

          From what I can gather, Berne, WCT and TRIPS are about harmonising what should be protected and for how long. It doesn't specify the details of how signatories should deal, in local law, with transgressions. IANAL, but it appears signatories get to decide civil vs criminal liability and appropriate punishment/remedies. At least in theory. Trade, or other forms of external pressure is often applied to help "steer" local legislation in the "right" direction.

    2. Charles 9

      Re: What first amendment?

      "If I have a directory of local fences* is that illegal even if I never buy or sell stolen goods? Are Yell (is that still a thing) breaking the law by listing gun stores?"

      Does the term "aiding and abetting" ring a bell? Or perhaps "enabling"? If you do something to enable or encourage an illegal act, that's illegal in itself. That's why crime-for-hire is ITSELF a crime. They consider it closing loopholes.

      Unless Yell lists black market gun sites, they're covered under the First AND Second Amendment.

      "When does knowledge, and the dissemination of it, become so dangerous that our betters have to make it illegal?"

      What about the knowledge to make an atomic bomb or perhaps the secrets to a plague? What was that saying? "A little knowledge can be dangerous." Or was it, "There are some things man is not meant to know."?

      "Government of the people, by the people, for the people."

      But then you end up with what we have now: "government of the charismatic, by the stupid, for the affluent". It's the natural human condition to find a way to get a leg up over the neighbors. PLUS stupid people are statistically certain. Put them together, and no government that you describe is destined to survive for very long. Even Greece fell to the Romans eventually.

      1. heyrick Silver badge

        Re: What first amendment?

        bq. they're covered under the First AND Second Amendment.

        ...which is of no consequence to 95% of the world.

        bq. What about the knowledge to make an atomic bomb

        I'm sure I read a pretty detailed description (engineering diagrams and all) when I was at school in the '80s. Thing is, there's more to making a nuclear bomb than just knowing how it works. You'll need the right sort of radioactive material, in the right places, with the right type of detonation - the idea is to kick off a chain reaction and it would appear to be kind of precise.

        That's why people worry about the bad guys making dirty bombs - that is less impressive than a mushroom cloud, but getting a load of radioactive material and contaminating the hell out of a public place is bound to make a statement. Yet...all that's going on in the world and this hasn't happened. Are we just lucky so far or is it actually difficult to obtain radioactive materials and harder yet to get them to where they need to be without being noticed?

        Knowing and doing - very different things.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: What first amendment?

          "Yet...all that's going on in the world and this hasn't happened. Are we just lucky so far or is it actually difficult to obtain radioactive materials and harder yet to get them to where they need to be without being noticed?"

          We're just lucky. I still imagine some will either nuke the Temple Mount or a New Year's Eve party somewhere soon and declare the days of anarchy. Maybe the Rio Opening Ceremonies...

        2. John Sanders
          Holmes

          Re: What first amendment?

          >> That's why people worry about the bad guys making dirty bombs

          They worry because they do not understand how it works or how pointless the endeavour is.

          Say make a dirty bomb out of cyanide, lead, mercury, botulinum, I would be more scared about that than some low grade radioactive actinides.

          At most a "radioactive" dirty bomb would cause about the same body-count as a regular bomb because of the conventional explosive, it will contaminate a reduced area, and will be easy to clean (I say easy, not cheap) because the radioactive particles are... well... easy to detect. Some people may die months or years later due to the exposure, but it will not be for example 9/11 levels of damage by a long long shot.

          Too much effort for the same reward as a conventional bomb.

          1. Vic

            Re: What first amendment?

            Too much effort for the same reward as a conventional bomb.

            But it's not the same reward as a conventional bomb...

            You're thinking like an engineer. You're looking at the actual killing capability of the weapon.

            Terrorists don't care about that; they're looking at the amount of fear they can spread among the populace, driven by the number of column inches they get in the press. And a nuclear bomb - however craply implemented - is always going to be the more effective weapon in those terms because the vast bulk of the population has no idea what nuclear weapons really are, and just considers them to be super-scary end-of-the-universe stuff.

            Vic.

            1. Charles 9

              Re: What first amendment?

              "And a nuclear bomb - however craply implemented - is always going to be the more effective weapon in those terms because the vast bulk of the population has no idea what nuclear weapons really are, and just considers them to be super-scary end-of-the-universe stuff."

              But they have to actually SEE the effects to be terrorized. That's why 9/11 was so effective; an airlines crashes into a skyscraper and actually brings it down. In order for atomic terror to work, it has to be a REAL atomic explosion like that seen in the Trinity test (which people have seen on film). Just imagine the kind of terror you could inflict if you could, without warning, nuke the Rio Opening Ceremonies...

              1. Vic

                Re: What first amendment?

                But they have to actually SEE the effects to be terrorized

                No they don't.

                They just have to see the headline in the Daily Fail.

                Vic.

                1. Charles 9

                  Re: What first amendment?

                  Ever heard the phrase "A picture is worth a thousand words"? When 9/11 happened, it wasn't the headlines that made the greatest impact but the photos. And believe me, no front page would elicit more shock than that of a new atomic mushroom cloud. Especially if the spot it happened was someplace like Rio.

                  1. Vic

                    Re: What first amendment?

                    When 9/11 happened, it wasn't the headlines that made the greatest impact but the photos.

                    Says you. Whereas the very fact that the phrase "9/11" came into existence gives succour to the idea that it is the discussion of that event, rather than the pictures, which has the greater impact.

                    Vic.

        3. Vic

          Re: What first amendment?

          What about the knowledge to make an atomic bomb

          I'm sure I read a pretty detailed description (engineering diagrams and all) when I was at school in the '80s

          All the theory was a required part of my A-level physics course...

          Vic.

      2. Disk0
        Facepalm

        What about the knowledge ... or perhaps the secrets

        Blimey, are we going to have to go back to reading scientific journals or asking our friendly local students - or maybe just watch the TV to know how stuff works?

  9. John Sanders
    Windows

    Hail torrents

    Cut one head and two will take its place...

    Hail hidr... torrents!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Hail torrents

      "Cut one head and two will take its place..."

      As I recall, killing the heads with FIRE kept them from growing back, and it seems the plods are packing napalm this time around since no replacement has immediately popped up (archives, yes, but not true replacements that are taking new content).

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Here's a thought...

    If you like a film that cost $100m to make, consider buying it.

    If you don't like the current price, wait until the price drops, or it appears on Netflix / TV.

    But don't lie to yourself about being on some noble crusade for justice when you just decide to steal the thing.

    /Let's not get into the stealing/copying semantics; if you torrent instead of paying, then you are avoiding payment. If 'you weren't going to buy it anyway' then don't watch it because clearly you are lying to yourself and just couldn't wait for the price to drop to a level you were prepared to pay.

    //Don't particularly care about the fortunes of big media, just can't stand the self righteousness of thieves.

    ///Dons asbestos coat

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Here's a thought...

      About 4 years ago, I stopped pirating films. Previously I would only download movies which I had decided that I was never going to pay for anyways.

      Now I continue to not pay for them and simply don't watch them.

      So movie industry saved I guess?

    2. Gene Cash Silver badge

      Re: Here's a thought...

      I love the smug self-righteousness when they've obviously never run up against "this movie/game/sport/tv show is not available in your country because fuck you"

      A couple of those, and they'll be on TPB/KAT like the rest of us.

      It doesn't matter how much money you have, and how much you want to buy it legally when they WON'T SELL IT TO YOU

      1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: Here's a thought...

        Thanks for the love, but I do have a wish list of content not available for purchase either at all, or at a sane price. The newest items on the list are exclusively on Amazon Prime. Exclusives are exclusive for a limited time. I can wait. While I am waiting, older items from the wish list become available like my recent purchases. I keep to a strict ≤£5 per film and ≤£1 per episode. I can sit back, feel smug and self righteous with >370 films >3400 episodes until Amazon Prime's temporary monopoly gets broken just like all their predecessors.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Here's a thought...

      What about TV shows? I'd never buy them but I'm happy to watch. The shows are foreign cooking shows which will never see the light of day in your country. What profits are being impacted there?

      People pirate because it is more convenient than waiting years to see a show. Even on official streaming sites programs are geo-locked or no longer on their books. The only place is pirate sites where the back catalogue is always there. If somebody chose to wait, the program would be spoiled by social media or the internet. That is the world we live in.

      Sorry about your incorrect definition of theft but copying in not stealing. Look it up in a dictionary.

    4. This post has been deleted by its author

    5. Disk0
      Holmes

      Re: Here's a thought...

      We can't all go around buying 100.000.000 dollar movies, there are barely enough for the people of Iceland. Or is there some unknown Hollywood crypt full of megaproductions that we don't know about? SOMEBODY LEAK SOMETHING

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Here's a thought...

      Or you have no income, no money, no hope of getting a job that would not put you in an financially worse situation than you are in now (being underemployed can be worse than being outright unemployed,) and you're desperate for sommat new and entertaining to take the miserable, bleak edge off of the appalling, mind-numbing ennui that is your day-to-day existence.

    7. heyrick Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: Here's a thought...

      "if you torrent instead of paying, then you are avoiding payment."

      It's a very simplistic argument that stands up when we're talking about people ripping off the latest Star Trek film.

      However, your argument falls flat on its face when confronted with "screw you, you live in the wrong country" or "screw you, we're just not going to bother exporting this". There is a world of content, some of it is actually quite interesting and worth taking the time to enjoy. Geographic boundaries are a political and social thing, but the internet transcends all of that bullshit.

      Or, to put it another way, where's the so-called self righteousness of something that you are quite able to watch by piracy, but completely unable to watch by actual payment. Because it isn't for sale. Not to you. Because...who cares, piss off, and other excuses.

  11. This post has been deleted by its author

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Media companies : Start offering high quality content, at a fair price, that you pay for one time rather than several times. Piracy vanishes."

    Piracy doesn't vanish: see KODI and the recommendations for pirate content readers have made in this thread.

    If KODI is 1) free and 2) as easy to use as legitimate channels, and 3) acquiring content through KODI is risk-free (no punishment), then no price discounting will make piracy disappear.

  13. Disk0
    Coat

    1 billion

    that's like, 1 movie. If someone stole the Dark Knight, use the freakin' batsignal already.

    Mine's the one that says "prerelease for insider review only" on the label...

  14. 9Rune5

    Meanwhile other forms of entertainment are readily available

    On my computer, Steam is a mouse click away: Within five minutes I can locate, purchase and start playing a new game. I have never come across a title that does not work (and apparently there is a refund policy in place in case my luck runs out).

    But I do not buy movies or tv shows online. Last time I tried doing a little research, only one online movie rental vendor had any technical information posted. The problem: My 30 inch Apple Cinema monitor does not support HDCP. I bought it over ten years ago and it has 2560x1600 pixels (plenty good enough for HD content). But the lack of HDCP disqualifies it. Sooner or later I might replace it, but as long as it works... Why bother?

    Next issue: Surround sound. Few movies over at Google Play are marked as having such. I had a strong feeling of buying cats in bags, so I did not pull the trigger.

    Final issue: Ownership... When I buy a license over at Steam, it seems to stick. I've never had any of them pulled. The content is there, waiting for me.

    Oh, and other stores offer similar service as Steam. I also have a gog account as well as an origin account.

    FWIW: I do sometimes buy blu-rays. Thanks to AnyDVDHD, I am able to play these titles without any issues. A bit of a hassle to invest almost a hundred dollar for software to ensure smooth playback, but I was left with little choice. Others may not bother and simply avoid buying altogether.

    How a business model that alienates customers can survive is beyond me. I doubt active law enforcement is going to help. Better start by fixing the root cause of the problem first. No?

    1. Charles 9

      Re: Meanwhile other forms of entertainment are readily available

      "How a business model that alienates customers can survive is beyond me. I doubt active law enforcement is going to help. Better start by fixing the root cause of the problem first. No?"

      The root cause of the problem is that media companies want repeat business (as does anyone, one-and-dones don't cut it long-term), and (at least legally) they have a captive market, so capitalism says they can dictate terms and you're left with a "take it or leave it". Thing is, for every one that leaves, there are ten who will take it, so the money's there.

  15. Brian Allan 1

    An Opportunity for the Next "Pirate Bay"

    "Kickass rose to prominence after the scuppering of The Pirate Bay and attracted more than 50 million unique visitors a month."

    This leaves a nice opening for some other enterprising group. As long as there is a demand, someone will step forward to fill the niche!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: An Opportunity for the Next "Pirate Bay"

      But the risks are rising, and sometimes demand isn't enough to draw a supply because of those risks.

      It's nearly to the point that if someone wants to host a torrent site as big as Pirate Bay or Kickass, they need to live and host in countries hostile to the West (such that they won't honor takedowns or extraditions). Trick is, of those countries, 9 out of 10 have crappy Internet, the remaining (mostly Russia and China) have Big Brother ambitions so will tend to attach strings.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon