The Dutch organization BREIN took action this week, resulting in the dismantling of two BitTorrent sites.

The Dutch anti-piracy organization sent a cease and desist letter to the web host provider of Extremepowertorrents.nl. According to BREIN, there was no action on part of the web host or the torrent site owner on a prior demand for 6 weeks. On Monday, BREIN visited the hosting provider to repeat these demands. As a result, the hosting provider sent a cease and desist letter to the site operator, and the website was shut down.

While the investigation may appear straightforward, BREIN ran into difficulties identifying the site owner as the website's registration details are falsified. On further investigation, they discovered another website, Freakytorrents.org, had the same false registration details. It was alleged that the website hosted 650 torrent 'links' and had 11,000 registered users.

Because of the hosting provider's inaction for six weeks against the "illegal" torrent sites, BREIN is seeking additional damages of upwards of 280,000 Euros against the web host. This is an unusual move in copyright enforcement, considering ISPs are generally granted safe harbor against third party "misuse."

"If a cease and desist [order] to the site operators is impossible or without result, BREIN contacts the hosting provider and demands immediate cessation and the disclosure of identity details of the site operator." BREIN said, "Providers who then knowingly and willingly continue hosting the illegal sites can also be held liable."

The BitTorrent community has made the world a lot smaller. No matter what part of the world a BitTorrent user resides, millions are connected by a virtually identical protocol. This not only applies to the end user, but the tracker administrators that help make the community possible.

The exact number of the BitTorrent population has been difficult to zero in; however it’s generally agreed by examining the DHT (Distributed Hash Table) that at least 5-6 million individuals are regularly swarming files. A file request in North America may gather pieces from just about anywhere in the world; and likewise a file request from Australia may swarm with dozens of global locations.

In order to facilitate this massive transfer of files, a centralized index or tracker must coordinate the transfer of torrent files. These torrent files then tell the client which locations, based on the IP address, the file segments are located. From there, the client begins the swarm and within hours, or days, the requested file will trickle its way home.

There’ve been plenty of efforts designed to disrupt this flow of information. Most notably, indexing and tracking sites such as SuprNova, LokiTorrent, and ThePirateBay were forced offline. All but ThePirateBay were permanently eradicated.

In the United States, the renowned BitTorrent tracker EliteTorrents.com was raided by the FBI and US Customs in May of 2005. It was the last BitTorrent tracker operating in the United States. Although not as widely traveled as ThePirateBay or Suprnova, news surrounding this event was just as impressive.

On October 17, 2006, EliteTorrents administrator Grant Stanley plead guilty to a “two count felony information charging conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal copyright infringement in violation of the Family Entertainment Copyright Act.”

This is the first conviction in the United States directly related to P2P and file-sharing. As part of his punishment, Mr. Stanley is to spend the next 5 months incarcerated, followed by an additional 5 months of home detention. On top of that, he is to spend an additional 3 years of supervised release, and in all likelihood stay far away from anything to do with BitTorrent. Finally, Mr. Stanley is to pay a $3,000.00 fine.

Yesterday, another substantial BitTorrent verdict was rendered. This time, the decision was against 21 operators and administrators of the Finnish BitTorrent tracker, Finreactor.

“21 operators of the Finreactor peer-to-peer-network were convicted yesterday by the district court of Turku in Finland,” an IFPI press release reads. “Fourteen operators were convicted for copyright offences and seven for aiding for copyright offences. The operators were in charge of the technical operation of the system as well as the user control.”

Although technologically very similar, if not identical, in every aspect to EliteTorrents, the punishment rendered is worlds apart. Unlike Mr. Grant who has a very bleak outlook for the next five months, those convicted in Finland have a considerably more optimistic, albeit more expensive, prospect.

The 21 individuals convicted have been ordered to pay a €566,000, or $720,630. (US) fine - divided by 21 individuals, that’s still $34,000 each. Compared to Mr. Stanley, the Finish crew got off light.

The BitTorrent network may bond very different peoples and cultures; however the laws of the outside world hold no such similarities. Mr. Stanley will pay a significantly less fine than his Finish BitTorrent brethren; however at the very least the convicted Finreactor administrators and operators won’t have to spend any time in prison.

There's been a lot of hoopla over the latest court decision involving an alleged P2P pirate in Spain. Many headlines read to the effect, "P2P legal in Spain", or "Downloading is Legal in Spain." The IFPI, or the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, disagrees.

The case centers around an unnamed 48 year old man who downloaded music from various P2P networks, then subsequently burned them onto CD and distributed them online. According to TheRegister, he then made these CDs available via email and chat rooms. The Spanish music industry representative, Pro Musicae, believed he was selling the CDs for profit and sought a 2 year sentence and fines against the man.

However, the court found no evidence that suggests the unnamed man ever made a profit. Therefore, the case was dismissed, with the court stating, "a practiced behavior where the aim is not to gain wealth but to obtain private copies". So does this mean file-sharing is now legal and acceptable in Spain?

It certainly appears so. Since the case focused on private copying without profit, the situation in Spain would suggest that an individual can download and distribute copyrighted work with impunity - providing it was done without profit. But don't expect the entertainment industry to wrap up its enforcement campaign just yet.

The IFPI feels since case was specific against the distribution of pirated CDs for profit and not file-sharing, this ruling does not change the legality of trading copyrighted works. In a statement, the IFPI expressed the status of unauthorized file-sharing has not changed.

“This case is not about p2p file-sharing – the judgment refers to an individual who distributed physical music CD-Rs that he had advertised on the internet. Swapping copyright infringing music through peer-to-peer networks remains illegal in Spain as it is throughout Europe and the virtually everywhere else. The Spanish Justice Minister has confirmed in a statement that file-sharing copyrighted music without permission is illegal. The judgment is being appealed.”

Although the IFPI claims this judgment is not about P2P or file-sharing, its interesting to note the decision is being appealed - not to mention the law allowing private copying is being reconsidered.