Sharereactor Is Closed By Swiss Autorities

[Lord_KiRon]

It's official now :

http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=427

ShareReactor was shut down by Swiss autorities !

Simon Moon (administrator and "owner") of SR was arested , equipment was confiscated !

ShareReactor was one of the corner stones of the eMule/eDonkey community , the act of Swiss police is extreamly controversual , it all comes down to the fact should or not eDonkey hash sums be considered as links .

[DAvenger]

Hehe, nice one ;)

[Lord_KiRon]

Originally posted by DAvenger
Hehe, nice one ;)

I fail to see what you think is so "nice" about it :scared: :angry:

And if you think it's a joke - it's not :eek:

[DAvenger]

I mean ... what took them so long ...

[Lord_KiRon]

"It" took them so long because ShareReactor never published links , so called "eDonkey links" are not links at all , they do not "link" you to anything , they are just MD5 checksums - series of meaningless numbers calculated from some file.

It's going to be a big legal battle I think over this definition soon and I hope Simon will win and put the site back on line :)

Personaly I even ready to donate a small sum to help him in his legal battle , not because I need/use SR of cause :) , but to hold the companies "assalt" that on my opinion mostly ungastified and undermine the freedome of free speach.

[mf]

Originally posted by DAvenger
I mean ... what took them so long ...
They were waiting for this (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/legal/0,39020651,39148199,00.htm) ?

[Lord_KiRon]

Swiss is not part of the EU.

[Stabmaster-Arson]

At least over here, providing something like a checksum is considered contributory infringement, because they have no purpose other than to facilitate the distributon of copyrighted material illegally.

contributory infringement is just as bad as regular infringement.

[Zhnujm]

I want to add thats a real shame they closed Sharereactor :(
Illegal or not.

[ChristianHJW]

I really wonder if this is a legal act, even if i have to admit i have no clue about Swiss jurisdiction in this case.

Jesus, they even arrested him, can anybody recall the founders of napster going to jail for distributing MP3 files from their server illegally, which was infringing a couple of laws directly ?

This all cant be much more than a bad joke, caused by a superactive court with no background about how ed2k is actually working, IMO. If distributing ed2k links is illegal, what about all the spam emails with sexual content sent to millions of email accounts, without any knowledge about the age of the recipient and if the stuff he finds on the link is safe for him or not ?

A link is a link is a link ..... the files are never really touching the HDDs of the shareereactor servers, so what are they trying to sue him for ? If sharereactor goes down, what about suprnova.org and the torrent links offered there ?

[mf]

Originally posted by ChristianHJW
If sharereactor goes down, what about suprnova.org and the torrent links offered there ?
Or torrentreactor for that matter. Hell, even the name is similar.

[Doobie]

That ShareReactor refused to host music links shows that the operators have felt vulnerable for a long time.

[dvd_master]

I don't think Torrents will ever be able to go down, just maybe some of the bigger sites. Since torrents don't require going through a certain webpage, they're safe. I don't know how eMule worked though.

[avih]

ppl, do u really play dumb???? come on, get over it.

seriously, eDonkey/kaza/whatever _should_ be legal, but the issue is that users make ilegal use of it. this kind of software, or these kinds of website (ShareReactor) are _enablers_. they enable ppl to easyly obtain ilegal content. let's face it, 98% of the usage by these apps is ilegal (bitTorrent excluded, as nearly the only tool that's widely used for official releases, that's the good side of p2p). it's true that closing such operations is appearantly against the freedom of speech (probably more than appearant) and i don't agree with such actions, but come on ppl.

as much as i favor freedom of speech, i can not accept the hypocracy from some of you guys here. don't hide behind facts. what's this shit of only trading 'md5'? of course it's only a number, no actual link, etc, but pls tell me, are you lawyers when u say it's ilegal to do that? what are you using these md5 for???? do u make an md5 collection? hang them on the walls?

if you want to discuss freedom of speech as it's reflected from such operations, by all means do it. wanna discuss the DMCA, or it's euro counterpart? do it, but don't come here crying that your favorite movies/mp3 download site just closed in an ilegal manner.

extremely annoyed.
avih

[mf]

avih, closing SR is a useless action for eDonkey and piracy. eDonkey has a 100% perfect way to exist on itself without linksites (contrary to bittorrent, which NEEDS tracker sites to get torrents from), it has millions of users with shared file lists, and with servers that run searchengines for those share lists. ShareReactor was basically only a convenient way to check the quality, availability (SR-hosted ed2k links are undoubtedly more shared than normal ones), and authenticity of a file. "ShareReactor down? Oh what a f*cking tragedy, let's open my emule search engine and look for the file there". It's just to induce FUD to the masses, and to show that the law will always prevail(tm). But in the end it doesn't help shit. It's only something that shuts down a totally legal site. So, the intention is illegal, but the execution isn't. Ed2k links are MD4 hashes (trivia fact: ed2k splits the file in several chunks of equal size, calcs an MD4 checksum for each of them, and then calcs a single MD4 checksum for the checksums of the chunks) of files. That's it. IF you have an ed2k client installed, it will catch the checksum and use it to download the file. So fight the edonkey network, not linksites. But no, they can't fight edonkey because the official client isn't even widely used anymore, and it's a decentralized network. So the law shows its penis size by shutting down a linksite, and speaking of penis size, shouldn't they be fighting spam instead, as it's something EVERYBODY suffers from, and not just record companies and film studios? Stupid actions will generate angry reactions. Don't call it "coming crying".

[assemblage]

I agree with mf.

I never found Sharereactor to be useful.

[avih]

mf, unfortunately, imho u missed my point.

i'm not claiming that SR was ilegal, neither that it was legal. i'm not claiming such an act has any real effect other than some pr. i'm not relating to the technical issue of whether it stops any of the file traders, and i'm not relating to the 'resiliance' of various p2p networks against a single computer shutdown. neither to their methods of distributions.

what i am claiming is that the usage of such tools (websites hubs / p2p apps) is usually imoral, regardless of its legal state. and that most of the time such tools are used to obtain content which u do not have the rights to. and in most places that counts ilegal.

i doubt any of you here see the act of downloading an mp3 'album' or the latest flic as legitimate. if u do think it's legit, that's another issue. and i'm not talking about a specific album that can't be found in the shops anymore. i'm talking about the latest and hottest stuff which is beeing 'traded' on these p2p nets. eventually, that's the main usage for such networks (again, excluding biTorent).

so what i'm talking about is the buttom line. most ppl that use p2p nets to obtain content they don't have the rights to commit an ilegal act, regardless of the legality of each of the 'sub-elements', or the technical tools needed to stop them.

and while SR specifically might be legal, the total act by the users isn't. and more important imho, immoral.

what i'm unhappy about is that everyone here becomes a lawyer and telling how trading md5 md4 or whatever isn't an ilegal act by itself. this is not a law forum. and what i'm looking at here is the total act. i'm not breaking it into small 'legit' sub-actions, and not arguing the legitimacy of each.

i am arguing the legitimacy of the total act. or, more correctly, the non-legitimacy of such.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by avih
ppl, do u really play dumb???? come on, get over it.

seriously, eDonkey/kaza/whatever _should_ be legal, but the issue is that users make ilegal use of it. this kind of software, or these kinds of website (ShareReactor) are _enablers_.

So by that logic the US government are enablers because they are responsible for providing the highway systems that people so frequently speed on. :P I mean after all it's not the speeders fault is it? Damn government enablers. :D

Originally posted by avih
they enable ppl to easyly obtain ilegal content. let's face it, 98% of the usage by these apps is ilegal (bitTorrent excluded, as nearly the only tool that's widely used for official releases, that's the good side of p2p). it's true that closing such operations is appearantly against the freedom of speech (probably more than appearant) and i don't agree with such actions, but come on ppl.

Free speach means that you could speak of commiting a crime. But so long as you don't actually commit the crime you are fine. In the same way you are allowed to speak out against your mentally challenged President without being halled off to jail. Sharereactor and all the torrent sites only speak of the crime etc. They don't commit the crime. They are as responsible for enabling the crime as a public park is for enabling rapist and serial killers. Closing down Sharereactor is hypocritical. Fine..... close down share reactor. But you best make sure you shut down the highways, gun shops, public parks, or about any other public place for that matter. Bye bye internet. Yes that's the key! Sarereactor was in some way an enabler. But ultimatly it's the internet that is the enabler!. Shut down the internet! Then the US can be secure in the ignorance that no one in america is pirating via the internet any more. Funny the country that originated the internet shutting it down. Not that they could. Because it would still exist in the rest of the world and they would still use it as they do now.

Originally posted by avih
as much as i favor freedom of speech, i can not accept the hypocracy from some of you guys here. don't hide behind facts. what's this shit of only trading 'md5'? of course it's only a number, no actual link, etc, but pls tell me, are you lawyers when u say it's ilegal to do that? what are you using these md5 for???? do u make an md5 collection? hang them on the walls?

The hypocracy is not from any of the people here. It is by those shutting down such sites. Even sharereactor provided links to legally traded materials. About the same proportion of materials on sharereactor as are on bittorrent are legal. The difference is that with edonkey/emule that the same network that provided you with the file that matches that legal link it also allows you access to hundreds of illegal unrelated files. Where as with bittorrent there is much more control over the network and the files on it.

Originally posted by avih
if you want to discuss freedom of speech as it's reflected from such operations, by all means do it. wanna discuss the DMCA, or it's euro counterpart? do it, but don't come here crying that your favorite movies/mp3 download site just closed in an ilegal manner.

If it is closed in an illegal manner then they have every right to complain. Remember two wrongs don't make a right. But three lefts do. In fact it would be hypocritical for them not to complain.

I don't condone file trading myself. But I recognise that it is not realistically possible to stop it. What can be done is to remove the incentives that currently exist which cause most people to use such networks. Things like price control and collusion on CDs and albums and even to an extent with DVDs. There will always be people who illegally trade these files even if reasonable prices were charged. But the rest of the world should not be punnished because of them. P2P is going to be "the" distribution system of the future. But by shutting down such sites for vested corporate interest only denies the inevitable and hurts us all. The longer these companies can perpetuate the stigma against P2P the longer they can avoid change. And the longer they avoid change the more they will benefit and the more we will suffer.

[mf]

Originally posted by avih
mf, unfortunately, imho u missed my point.

what i'm unhappy about is that everyone here becomes a lawyer and telling how trading md5 md4 or whatever isn't an ilegal act by itself. this is not a law forum. and what i'm looking at here is the total act. i'm not breaking it into small 'legit' sub-actions, and not arguing the legitimacy of each.
Actually, you missed my point, but I don't feel like arguing about that. This is not a law forum, but this is a forum with a public face. Go re-read the rules, you are telling people not to be hypocritical, but they have no choice. Whether or not someone actually pirates or not, is out of the question. Try it, and be shot down and striked for it. And there is a reason for that. For doom9.org NOT to get shutdown like sharereactor.

[avih]

mf, sorry i missed your point. i'm not into agruging too. i re-read your post as u suggested, but i appearantly don't get it (no cinicism).

do u say that the law should fight the networks instead of linklists, but linklist is the best they can do, so they just do something to show?.

i also don't understand why u say that ppl must act in hypocracy... imho, the only reason for them to act hypocritical is if they download movies they don't own from the net, and then ask some for technical advice. if that's what u ment, then i would have preffered that they wouldn't download movies and won't act hypocritical. but i'm not their dad and won't tell them what to do. i can advise though, and whoever listens might or might not accept this advice.

the hypocracy in my eyes is when someone acts ilegally and immorally IMO (=download movies from the net) but then complains when a tool that helped him with his act (and is used nearly exclusively for that task) is illegaly shut down. that was my only point. as i said, i didn't argue the legality of shutting down SR.

i do agree that the prices might be too high, but if you wanna fight the prices, u don't do that by stealing what u can't/not-willing to buy. this is not some robin-hood style act.

if i still didn't get it, i'll be glad if u could explain your point again.

regards
avih

@Neo Neko:
i agree with most of your points, however, the difference between SR and a highway is that highways have other very legitimate objectives, and they are usefull to the society. SR sole/main objective (correct me if i'm wrong, i've never used SR) is to make it easier to download content ilegally.

continuing with this line of thought, i think that a public park from which the public no longer enjoys, and is almost exclusively a place for ilegal activity, should be turned into something else. i also don't like the fact that you can buy a gun just near the grocery. the line has to be drawned somewhere when balancing the freedom of speech and the public interest.

[Zhnujm]

Closing a site like ShareReactor is just like arresting the man who sells weapons because you cannot find the murderer.
If i download illegal files im the only one who is responsible, not the person who gives me the link, and not the person who gives me a 1MBit internet flat rate.
And my opinion is not limited by any law, so if its illegal or not - the court will tell.

And btw, the political discussion forum was always a great fun to read :D

[Sirber]

Originally posted by dvd_master
I don't think Torrents will ever be able to go down, just maybe some of the bigger sites. Since torrents don't require going through a certain webpage, they're safe. I don't know how eMule worked though. You need to find the webpage in order to get the .torrent. Close the site and you eradicated the problem.

[Neo Neko]

But the key is that with bittorrent you can administrate what gets shared and even who has access.

[dvd_master]

Originally posted by Sirber
You need to find the webpage in order to get the .torrent. Close the site and you eradicated the problem.

But they're so small that anyone can quickly slap together some Geocities sites full of nothing but links, and they could even be shared P2P.


Originally posted by Neo Neko
But the key is that with bittorrent you can administrate what gets shared and even who has access.

But it's open source, so there's tons of clients, aren't there? (like I use ABC) so someone would eventually rewrite the client...

[KpeX]

Originally posted by Zhnujm
Closing a site like ShareReactor is just like arresting the man who sells weapons because you cannot find the murderer. As avih pointed out with the highway example, such links have no legal use, whereas guns and highways have perfectly legal applications.

[gabest]

Originally posted by dvd_master
But they're so small that anyone can quickly slap together some Geocities sites full of nothing but links, and they could even be shared P2P.Yea, but where and how would you advertise it? With only you and your friends knowing about it, there wouldn't be many sources to download from. Sharereactor was useful because of the large number of visitors in its forum. New releases spread quickly because the links were shared quickly too.

[sysKin]

Originally posted by Zhnujm
Closing a site like ShareReactor is just like arresting the man who sells weapons because you cannot find the murderer.Actually, a person who gives you a gun so that you can murder someone *is* guilty.

I am sorry to say that but I have no doubts that sharereactor *did* illegal things. Just claiming that ed2k link is an md5 sum is like claiming that http link is just a string of ascii characters. Or that an AVI is just some stream of bits. Or that a CD is just a piece of plastic with some small rows on it.

A just court has to see things what they really are - and sharereactor was a searchable database of illegal files, designed to help users download these files, a.k.a. commit a crime (not always, but that too).

I just hope everything goes fine for the people concerned, I wish them well.

Radek

[2COOL]

Originally posted by sysKin
Actually, a person who gives you a gun so that you can murder someone *is* guilty.Just to put my 2 cents in, I have to agree. Another good example is a bar/club that served too much alcohol to a person who in turn killed another innocent person in a car accident on the way home. It is the bar's responsiblity to know when to stop serving when the signs of a disaster is imminent. The bar must hold some liability if found responsible leading to the crime scene.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by avih

@Neo Neko:
i agree with most of your points, however, the difference between SR and a highway is that highways have other very legitimate objectives, and they are usefull to the society. SR sole/main objective (correct me if i'm wrong, i've never used SR) is to make it easier to download content ilegally.

So you are saying that since so many people use things like kazaa and emule to pirate that the authors must have written them for that very purpose? That is a real jump in logic for me. The analogy stands. I recognise it is not perfect. But it is quite well suited. I admit that basically every time I get on the highway I speed practically every time. Just like the times I use P2P tend to be for technically pirate reasons. But the key is that with either one I don't do it all the time or alot for that matter. ;)

Originally posted by avih

continuing with this line of thought, i think that a public park from which the public no longer enjoys, and is almost exclusively a place for ilegal activity, should be turned into something else.

Why turn it into something else? Why not take it back. Chances are the public would still like to use it very much. Kinda like P2P. :D

Originally posted by avih

i also don't like the fact that you can buy a gun just near the grocery.

Just near? Where do you live?(Don't answer. I know where you live and I feel for you man. Keep safe.) You can buy them in some grocery stores here. :D


Originally posted by avih

the line has to be drawned somewhere when balancing the freedom of speech and the public interest.

Well this could get quite political.(so lets just keep it at this) And it is a big issue over there. Heck it is over here as well. But I have to say that "If you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns.". If it wasn't guns it would be something else. If someone wants to kill someone else banning weapons will not help. They will just use household items. Like pointed sticks or fertilizer and nitrates etc. The only thing we can do and should do is to teach responsibility, accountability, and tollerance.

[avih]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
... The only thing we can do and should do is to teach responsibility, accountability, and tollerance.

i'll drink to that ;)

(things here are ok for now, thx. although i guess it's the same way a bronx guy will say it's safe while u'll never get there ;) )


[edit]
i'm only saying that it's hypocracy when ppl cry that SR gets closed illegaly when they mostely/solely use it for illegal objectives.
[/edit[

[Belgabor]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
Free speach means that you could speak of commiting a crime. But so long as you don't actually commit the crime you are fine. In the same way you are allowed to speak out against your mentally challenged President without being halled off to jail.

To my knowledge thats not entirely true. Say you want to murder him/he should be murdered/tell other ppl they should murder him --> off to jail you go, don't take 200$ at start. (And thats no Joke, but US law)

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by Belgabor
To my knowledge thats not entirely true. Say you want to murder him/he should be murdered/tell other ppl they should murder him --> off to jail you go, don't take 200$ at start. (And thats no Joke, but US law)

Not so. Granted you could get in alot of trouble if something like that happens. But chances are you would not. What you are thinking of is a police state. Not that we are not rapidly heading that way anyway. I can run around the streets all day telling people they should kill Bush. The next day if he is dead what do you think would happen? Worst case scenario I would be detained and questioned by the secret service or NSA for a few hours. You would not go to jail. They need something more solid than just those words. For instance if I said "You should kill 'soandso' tomorrow at 2Pm in the park with a gun I have stashed here. Upon completion I will stash your payment there.". Even in that there is nothing that someone could be jailed for in and of itself. But if 'soandso' did die in the park at 2Pm from a gunshot wound by a gun. Well that is different. Not only was it sugested and spoken of. There were specific instructions on how, where, and when it should be done that are corroberated with hard evidence.

Sharereactor never went to people and said "you should/must download these files." People do that of their own volition. In fact had sharereactor been left in operation it could have just as easily been used as a tool for anti-P2P forces. Sharereactor provided the infohashes for some of the most popular files on edonkey. Which could be used as bait to catch a great number of people in the act. Leave it to the morons in charge of these actions to overlook that slight bit of strategy and common sense. :p

[Mug Funky]

ah... heated arguments.

i never used sharereactor, but i see arresting the webmasters as incredibly tactless... creating martyrs is never a good way to go (an aside - the last man in my country to be hanged is a bit of a hero figure, which i'm sure is the opposite effect the authorities wanted, but that was way back in the '60s...)

for the record - i believe in gun control, not because i'm paternalistic (well, maybe just a little), but because i know that with enough guns around, some stupid bugger is going to shoot one of them. it's simple.

you don't keep alcohol around an alcoholic. keep dope away from an addict. it's common sense that a big flashing site full of links saying "kickass stuff for free" is going to get a lot of people's attention.

you can't plead ignorance when you advertise a means to obtain illegal content, then get busted for helping people obtain illegal content.

that said, i hate the RIAA, and all similar orginizations. hate them with a passion. but that doesn't mean they're _never_ right about anything. whenever people defend p2p networks, they give the speil about "well, i can't get it at my local record shop", or "if i like a downloaded song, i'll buy the album"... it's nonsense. the majority of users don't live up to these ideals - they're just after free stuff. greed works on both sides of the fence, and we've all got to deal with it.

of course, these "crimes" are not of high enough degree to justify the punishments being dealt. it's the same everywhere - the crimes that are easy to solve will be solved more often. i get done for speeding about twice a year, and i get so many parking fines i'm having difficulty closing my glove-box. but on the other hand, the bugger that keeps burning down the local park has never been found (or indeed investigated), and the guys that stole my parent's car (and my favourite CDs, which i was happy to download replacements for in good conscience) get off with nothing more than a little whiplash.

[Doobie]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
Not so. Granted you could get in alot of trouble if something like that happens. But chances are you would not. What you are thinking of is a police state. Not that we are not rapidly heading that way anyway. I can run around the streets all day telling people they should kill Bush. The next day if he is dead what do you think would happen? Worst case scenario I would be detained and questioned by the secret service or NSA for a few hours. You would not go to jail.

No so. If you were taken seriously in saying someone should kill the president, you would be arrested and jailed. There is also the occasional example of someone being jailed or fined for contributing to an act of violence commited by someone else, even they the person being punished had no relation to the actual criminal and didn't explicitly call for violence.

Free Speech is a dying value in the modern world. In Canada and Europe, it's already common for people to be punished for unapproved speech, even speech that is not a call for anyone to break the law. Witness the recent P2P users busted in Germany for sharing non-copyrighted racial music. America isn't far behind.

In the end, the government doesn't care one wit between whether ShareReactor hosted files or just links. The difference between words that facilitate (the links) and the actual crime (distributing copyrighted materials) is merely one of speech -- thus not a difference at all to the government.

[Mug Funky]

witness the recent P2P users busted in Germany for sharing non-copyrighted racial music.

you got a link? i haven't heard that one. (or would posting a link get you arrested? j/k)

[Doobie]

Originally posted by Mug Funky
you got a link? i haven't heard that one. (or would posting a link get you arrested? j/k)

http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,9069986%255E15318,00.html

My question: Who are the real neonazis? The kids who may have downloaded tasteless music or the German storm troopers raiding people's homes in the early morning hours for the possession of banned words discovered by government eavesdropping on private communication.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by Doobie
No so. If you were taken seriously in saying someone should kill the president, you would be arrested and jailed.

Are you sure? I am quite sure there is no precident of what you claim. There has to be something more than words for you to get arrested. There has to be some clear intent shown. And a motive made clear. You "can not" be jailed for just saying something.

Originally posted by Doobie
There is also the occasional example of someone being jailed or fined for contributing to an act of violence commited by someone else, even they the person being punished had no relation to the actual criminal and didn't explicitly call for violence.

They are not being fined or jailed for what they say. They would be fined or jailed for their actions combined with their words. Even if they did not diretly commit the crime themselves.

Originally posted by Doobie
Free Speech is a dying value in the modern world. In Canada and Europe, it's already common for people to be punished for unapproved speech, even speech that is not a call for anyone to break the law. Witness the recent P2P users busted in Germany for sharing non-copyrighted racial music. America isn't far behind.

I am not going to argue that point as I agree.

Originally posted by Doobie
In the end, the government doesn't care one wit between whether ShareReactor hosted files or just links. The difference between words that facilitate (the links) and the actual crime (distributing copyrighted materials) is merely one of speech -- thus not a difference at all to the government.

That's just it. Share reactor did not host links. They hosted file descriptors which have legal uses. Yes the file descriptor can be used to locate and illegally download a file. But lets say you own DVD "A". You either don't have the know how to make a copy to play on your PC in a transcoded format, don't want to mess getting caught up in the DMCA for doing something that should be legal in the first place, or are simply to lazy to rip on your own. If you own a copy of a DVD it is not illegal for you to download a Divx version off of a P2P network. Infact due to the DMCA it is probably a bit more legal to download them than ripping them yourself. Share reactor itself was not necessarily illegal. It was more the individuals use of sharereactor that was illegal or legal.

What's next? Are we going to outlaw some maps because they could guide terrorists to areas with vulnerable targets?

[ChristianHJW]

Guys,

all your discussion doesnt really take into account that its still the law that has to be followed if somebody is going to be arrested. And i am still not aware of any existing law that would make publishing of ed2k links on a website a crime, allowing you to arrest the owner of the site.

We all agree what the main purpose of SR was. But, as always in the history of mankind, 'criminals' succesfully found a way to cheat and to find holes in the current legislation. In return, the authorities release new laws, fixing the holes. This story is maybe as old as mankind, or at least as old as civilisation. I still wonder on what legal basis this guy was arrested, even in Switzerland .....

[skal]

@Neo Neko


Are you sure? I am quite sure there is no precident of what you claim. There has to be something more than words for you to get arrested. There has to be some clear intent shown. And a motive made clear. You "can not" be jailed for just saying something.

A french guy recently spent ~2 weeks in jail because he
thought being funny saying: "My shit doesn't explode"
getting out of the plane's toilets.
Ok, it was an US plane, the land of no fun, lately.

[unmei]

recently in the police ministry:
officer1: i found this cool torrent site
officer2: oh let's see that is in switzerland
chief: thats not good. our neighbor countries (or the usa) might notice that. better shut it down.
officer3: but it was so useful
chief: don't worry we'll arrest the guy and when noone talks about it anymore let him go silently.
officer2: but there will be complaints about the arresting.
chief: np the time they are actually written and on the judges desk he isn't arrested any longer. It won't cost too much.

mabye..:)