Find Illegal Torrents Using Google

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]Uncle Meat[/nom]Google just provides an index of where torrent files can be found.Google does not store torrent files on its servers nor does it provide a tracker for torrent files. Pirate Bay does both of these things.Do you really not see the difference?[/citation]
Google stores a copy of the page... It does a lot more to host a torrent then the pirate bay does acutlly.
 
but now yahoo result are better the google ..
it had long time I'm not using yahoo search but when i use it i found Huge different..and better result then google ..
the experience are bets thing to do .
try search in something in google then compare it to yahoo
you will be surprise .
 
Thing is though, Google is named "Google" and used for everything under the sun, with a reputation as such, and a slogan "Don't Be Evil", and a history of trying to comply with regulations and pull content when requested. They play along.

TPB has the word "Pirate" right in their name, have a reputation as the place to get movies and games illegally, does not remove content when requested, and doesn't care whose toes get stepped on.
 
Looks like Google is blocking requests from that site now. Check it out for yourself by searching for something.
 
if i go looking for a "legit" torrent that is how i do it. this way i do not have to go to every single source ie: mininova, piratebay...
 
Just imagine, all "torrent" site are shut down. Now think that using google for a movie download, you WILL get search results from a billion other websites. google does not store anything nor does it monitor what websites it decides to index. google provides THE LINK to these SITES not FILES. So google nor The Pirate Bay can be held responsible for piracy. If not, shutdown the entire internet. In other words, you can't block sections of the worlds oceans becuase of suspected illegal activities, because then there are an infinite possible locations to continue these activities. It is impossible to think of shutting down the oceans but in this case the internet. Like or not piracy will exist whether physical or digital.
 
Google probably has the biggest information farm in this world to run it's searches. There is a "Google bot" that makes a copy of anything it finds in the net, this is the reason why google has such fast searches. The only difference between TPB and google is TPB hosts the torrent file where as google doesn't.
 
[citation][nom]descendency[/nom]There defense was "other people do it too?" Wow. 3rd grade is calling...[/citation]

For F***'s Sake... it's CALLED THE PIRATE BAY!!! They MEANT to provide illegal downloads. Google just searches the internet... ALL OF IT!

It really is as childish as descendency puts it.
 
Hosting a tracker is not illegal: Fact
Hosting torrent files is not illegal: Fact
Having a search engine on your website is not illegal: Fact
Naming your son Adolf Hitler is not illegal, hence naming your website *pirate* is not illegal either: Fact
The Pirate Bay encourages people to share illegal data: Debateable
You can not convict people of a crime you're not 100% sure they've committed: Fact


I don't see how this conviction could ever be justified. There are quite a few good analogies in this thread, it's just a shame the swedish court apparently doesn't have any judges that have any computer knowledge whatsoever.
 
[citation][nom]spazoid[/nom]You can not convict people of a crime you're not 100% sure they've committed: Fact[/citation]
Incorrect. You cannot convict people of a crime if there is "reasonable doubt." There appears to be quite alot of reasonable doubt.
 
This trial was not held in the USA (even if most of the participants on the prosecuter side probably acted like it and whished it was). The 'reasonable doubt' term is, afaik, not used in swedish law.
 
[citation][nom]spazoid[/nom]This trial was not held in the USA (even if most of the participants on the prosecuter side probably acted like it and whished it was). The 'reasonable doubt' term is, afaik, not used in swedish law.[/citation]
Good point, I wonder what exactly Swedish Law requires then. 100% certainty is going to be hard to obtain.
 
Often torrents on Pirate Bay are everywhere else as well. Those sites don't have the word "pirate" in them. If the author doesn't upload their torrent to other sites, someone else does. Usually any torrent you decide to download doesn't just share files from Pirate Bay users, but any user currently online, regardless of where they got the torrent file from.

Saying Pirate Bay is responsible is like saying the whole internet is responsible. There is nothing special Pirate Bay does that everyone else doesn't do. They were just attacked first.

The only thing Google doesn't do is provide the torrent file itself (not the actual file people are trying to download). Since it's a fact hosting torrent files isn't illegal, that does make Google just as responsible as The Pirate Bay. Having said that, I think Google is an excellent resource and would never want their search engine to leave the internet, but Pirate Bay and any other file sharing site is disposable and makes little difference. Google can always find others!

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Because torrents can be completely legal if proper copyright precautions are taken, you can't say Bit Torrent should be illegal. And yes, the economy will suffer because artists do rely on this technology. I personally know an artist who's created many albums, he's now trying to get back into the business. I told him creating his own torrents will make him more fans then any other way. I'd hate to see that disappear just because the main music/video sellers don't want to share profit with smaller organizations. Could be as bad as Time Warner clogging digital online purchases by putting a cap on downloads (which they've removed thankfully).
 
Zero, That is what the idea of Rapidshare is, it doesn't allow people to know what's on their servers unless someone specifically gives you the link to it. That's why rapidshare is still up and running.
 
I think TPB whole thing is a terrorist plot to take over the world by undermining technology with stupid money hungry bureaucrats. Supported by their politicians & judges(Mr Barak Hussian Obama appointed 5 RIAA bloodsuckers to the DOJ btw. I mean I love the guy and all but a little obvious there wasn't it?) they have bought and paid for in legal ways like campaign contributions, seats on board of directors, stock options etc... . funny and to absurd to have any truth to it.

TSM
 
The site is indeed blocked as "forbidden" but then at the bottom it says to continue this search on google click here. After the click it continues without any real difference....
 
I'm surprised Google is acting so petty against the 'mock' site.

Ultimately, google has the right to associate with whoever it wants but I feel that the message of internet neutrality is being missed to the majority of the public when it comes to TPB case.

I haven't read too much of the ruling details but I found it odd how the 4 men were convicted but the site not ordered shut-down? Does that make any sense? That's like saying we're convicting 4 men for drug distribution but not shutting down their grow-op... I'm really curious to see how the appeal process is going to go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom