Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Australia Crime Piracy Apple

Pirate Apple TV Operation Nabbed In Australia 128

littlekorea writes "New South Wales Police have arrested a man selling USB keys bearing the Apple logo, which offered access to over a thousand Pay TV channels, another thousand movies on demand and several hundred adult films. A forensic analysis of the device revealed the content was hosted in China but streamed via US servers and domains."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pirate Apple TV Operation Nabbed In Australia

Comments Filter:
  • No need for new laws (Score:3, Informative)

    by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Wednesday February 01, 2012 @11:29PM (#38899349)

    It seems like the content industry has solved it... no need for SOPA/PIPA to be passed, just pay lawyers to sue and tell police to find pirates and the problem is solved.

  • by webdog314 ( 960286 ) on Wednesday February 01, 2012 @11:42PM (#38899445)

    Just because the guy choses a USB stick with an Apple logo on it (that's not even made by Apple) doesn't mean it has *anything* to do with Apple or Apple TV. Was he somehow spoofing iTunes accounts?

  • by lazycam ( 1007621 ) on Wednesday February 01, 2012 @11:48PM (#38899467)
    Not sure where you are from, but in the USA our courts treat digital content as property. Also, unauthorized access to password protected content falls under the same umbrella [wikipedia.org]. I am unfamiliar with the laws covering digital content and password protected services in the UK, but I imagine the laws are either (1) more restrictive or (2) the courts have taken it upon themselves to issue warrants regardless of the laws on the books.
  • by psiclops ( 1011105 ) on Thursday February 02, 2012 @12:09AM (#38899599)

    Australia is not in the UK. We have our own laws seperate from the empire.

    Although according to this article [news.com.au] they have identified 100 customers and will be pursuing them for recieving stolen goods. I dont know how that'll go in court though.

  • by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Thursday February 02, 2012 @12:45AM (#38899761)

    FTFA: “Customers of this criminal enterprise are not unintended beneficiaries of the digital revolution, they are receivers of stolen property,” he said.

    Unless the USB keys themselves were stolen, to which there appears to be no mention of (and you can be sure they would mention it), there is no transfer of property.

    We need to (I realize easier said than done) get the media to start correcting ridiculous statements.

    Indeed, the "customers" were victims of fraud. The fraud being committed by the one who was arrested for selling fraudulent goods.

    Also please note, the person who the article quoted was Michael Speck, A copyright "specialist" working for "international entertainment networks" not the NSW police.

    As for receiving stolen goods, legally "The Crown must prove that, at the time of receipt of the goods, the accused knew or believed them to have been stolen." So if the Crown (what the state is called in court in Oz) cannot prove the purchaser knew the goods were stolen at the time of purchase, they cannot be charged with receiving stolen goods. Thus the customers are victims of fraud and this copyright "specialist" is full of shit.

  • by Cimexus ( 1355033 ) on Thursday February 02, 2012 @01:38AM (#38900023)

    Actually, the Queen of Australia is on our money. The fact that the same physical person also happens to be the Queen of England is irrelevant. One person, multiple hats.

    When the Queen is in Australia, she's not there as the Queen of England (or any other Commonwealth realm). All the standards, flags, titles associated with her role as Queen of England are nowhere to be seen - the Australian equivalents are used instead. For instance this flag [wikipedia.org] will be on her vehicle.

    One might argue that it's all a subtle technicality. But we don't put the Queen of England on our money, any more than the UK puts the Queen of Australia on theirs.

  • by Cimexus ( 1355033 ) on Thursday February 02, 2012 @02:50AM (#38900317)

    Who modded this informative? She is most definitely the Queen of Australia (and Head of State): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_Australia [wikipedia.org] (same argument applies to most of the other countries you mention too).

    She's head of the Commonwealth too, as you point out. But that's a separate role to her role as Queen.

  • by shutdown -p now ( 807394 ) on Thursday February 02, 2012 @03:11AM (#38900407) Journal

    Actually, she is. Her Australian royal title is as follows:

    "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth."

    That she also has other royal titles in other realms of which she is a queen bears no relation to her status as a Queen of Australia.

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Working...