MPAA sues website linking to pirated movies

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has sued Pullmylink.com, a website featuring links to free - and allegedly pirated - movies and TV shows, claiming the site promotes and profits from copyright infringement. The lawsuit is the seventh action filed by the MPAA against content aggregators in the US since late last year and is part of a larger anti-piracy campaign that included a criminal raid on the UK headquarters of the website TV Links. The campaign against sites that link to, but do not host, illegal content has raised some eyebrows with critics asking why the association doesn't go after the host sites or search engines such as Google, which owns video sharing site YouTube. "...Is the message that it's less criminal to host illegal content on YouTube than it is to link to it from a site such as TV Links?..." Guardian technology columnist Jack Schofield wrote in the wake of the MPAA-directed raid on TV Links in October.

In future, do I risk being thrown in the slammer for linking directly to a YouTube video?

News Source: Release Log

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft releases first Windows Vista Feature Pack

Next Story

Nvidia to launch new mid-range G92-based GeForce 9 GPU

45 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

This is a good step but the MPAA needs to get to the root of the problem - the people who upload the content in the first place.

It's a moronic step in the totally wrong direction. If the grass-f***ers in Hollywood at the MPAA & RIAA (plus BSA) had any brains, they would embrace new technologies and find a way to profit from them. Besides, what type of idiot sues your own customers? That just proves their ignorance and intolerance.

In previous court cases the RIAA/MPAA has only won against the defendant on the ground that they uploaded the material and by having proved that people have downloaded said material. Considering this, I do not see how the site has broken the law. In a real world case, it's like telling someone that your friend is giving out a load of pirated DVDs, the person telling everyone is not breaking the law. Thus, I fail to see how what the site was doing was illegal.

They wouldn't go after you unless you did something illegal that affect them. Beside, for them to successfully sue you they have to prove that you broke the law. And if you did break the law there is nothing more to say.

I also highly doubt that posting links is illegal. Despite what the RIAA says. They have this stupid idea that they are the law.

The RIAA/MPAA won't go after Google because Google has the money to defend themselves. Instead, like a typical Mafia thug does, the RIAA/MPAA goes after the weak/poor.

I think the RIAA/MPAA is a corrupted mafia organization that act like a legal system to control the music and movie industry.

sounds like alot of these people are still getting allowance from mom and dad and don't understand the business world. ..I bet if their mom or dad invented something..that put food and juniors gameboy on the table...they would sure have different opinion if someone was giving it away free.....change shoes once in a while and smell fresh air.

you probably have a legit point... but look at it this way... those guys from MPAA etc are still rich when is all said and done regardless of how much Piracy happens.

plus like many people said before... physically stealing something vs virtual stealing aint completely the same thing as the RIAA/MPAA would like you to believe... cause there's no measurable loss with downloading something you might not have paid for to begin with where as if you stole a dvd movie from a store that's directly making a person lose money since it's physical theft and it costed money to make that physical dvd copy etc.

and another thing is... when RIAA/MPAA estimates losses (as im sure u already know) they always 'assume' that all those copies of pirated movies would have been bought if the person could not download it which is NOT true... sure some people might but i would be willing to bet that the majority would not have bought it.

here's a example... say a certain movie was pirated 1 million times... the MPAA would claim they lost 1million times the price of the dvd (say it's 15 dollars each) so that would be 15million dollars they 'claimed' they lost... when in reality not everyone who downloaded that movie would have paid for it even if they could not get it for free... sure some would but not all... so i would roughly guess than AT MOST they might have lost HALF of that 15million... although it 'probably' aint even half that... i think you get my point ;)

i aint saying downloading movies/music etc for free is right but i also feel it aint THAT BAD either.... cause if i was in there situation i would not be happy about people downloading movies. but the way i see it is, if i was still living a more than comfortable lifestyle (which im sure most of them are) it would not be worth ruining people's lives over a few extra dollars.

bottom line = MPAA is just greedy as i think they pretty much proved that by some of the stuff they do to people.

Well...there is certainly a line between Google making a big chunk of the Internet searchable, and a site that links to every South Park episode or movies or something.

they wanna destroy everything that represent a threat to them. And no wonder. The US goverment do exactly the same but destroying countries and cultures. No matter at what cost. Their cost.

The RIAA and MPAA have no idea what's in store for them, just search for "Perfect Dark", it's a next generation p2p service which is mainly used in Japan at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised if it emerges as a world wide revolution in file sharing in the next 12-18 months just as bit torrent came out of no where to become the defacto standard just a few years ago.

Isn't perfet dark fairly old as far as Japan goes, and due to the encryption and anonymization, really slow compared to other options

From what I've read it's the newest, the more popular Winny and Share p2p predate this application. Encryption and relay design of Perfect Dark was implemented to fill some of the gaps on those two systems. The transfer is relatively fast, especially on uploading new content. The system is not well publicly documented, but I've noticed that the bandwidth required is roughly about ~30% of the size of the media being seeded, I'm guessing this has to do with the distributed hash table system being used much like a rainbow table and assembling new contents with chunks of other existing bit patterns, thus only requiring uploads of the unique bit patterns... but that's hearsay.

Truth be told unless something is done about it we're looking at the path toward another revolutionary war...

Our government is no longer serving the interests of the people and it is only a matter of time before the people reclaim their power. Hopefully that happens within the context of our current government with the majority of the people petitioning for redress and the elected officials listening before it reaches the point of no return.

And who is representing the people who do the work making those movies and receive no compensation for it from pirates?

Ahhh there ya go.

(C_Guy said @ #7.5)
And who is representing the people who do the work making those movies and receive no compensation for it from pirates?

Ahhh there ya go.


The legal system already represent content owners. That is why we have IP laws. What shouldn't be happening is the content owners using the government and government resources to promote their business plan (protecting copyrights). There is a reason why IP law is treated civilly and not criminally. There is all the difference in the world between intellectual and physical property... but the mind-washing propaganda of the MPAA, RIAA & BSA would have you believe that they are starving because you are stealing from them. They are not starving and it is not technically theft... it may be a violation of copyrighted works (the content owners have not lost the content) at the very worst. And so, they are more than welcome to come after you civilly, but trying to get the gov't involved (aka, doing their work for them) and portraying it as a crime is total bull****.

If the idiots in Hollywood had any brains, they would find a way to make money off of this technology rather than trying to crush it and penalize their customers. Look at the success of the VHS (which they tried to fight against in the Sony Betamax case).

In future, do I risk being thrown in the slammer for linking directly to a YouTube video?

Not the same at all.

Foub, wake up and smell the coffee ...

All laws are "influenced" by Corporate America, under ANY administration.

That's why there are more corporate lobbyists in Washington than there are rats in New York.

And yet, They are acting lawfully as far as the US law cares. That is the real problem here.
The way that the MPAA and RIAA act should be considered unlawful by any sane judiciary system.

(chaosblade said @ #4)
...should be considered unlawful by any sane judiciary system.

Yeah, no chance in that. Money talks with those guys. Overruled.

(Foub said @ #4.1)
You do know that many of the laws written under the Bush administration were "influenced" by Corporate America?

Not that I claim to be an expert... but isn't the legislator branch of government responsible for writing laws, not the executive? I'm sure Bush's administration has an influence....but...still..... as much as i'd like to think that everything wrong with this country is Bush's fault, I have this bad feeling that not much is going to change after he leaves office.

(Shadrack said @ #4.4)

Not that I claim to be an expert... but isn't the legislator branch of government responsible for writing laws, not the executive? I'm sure Bush's administration has an influence....but...still..... as much as i'd like to think that everything wrong with this country is Bush's fault, I have this bad feeling that not much is going to change after he leaves office.


Correct you are. It's lobbyists and lazy politicians in CONGRESS that are screwing this country to hell. Bush is definitely no great President but he didn't do this. The system was screwed up 8 years ago before he was in office. As much of it is their fault for being lazy, it's also somewhat our fault for electing them.

You do know that many of the laws written under the Bush administration were "influenced" by Corporate America?

You do know that the DMCA, which is what these are mostly charged under, was passed in 1998, two years before Bush was elected.

(xinary said @ #3.2)

Much like your sense of humor, *******.

No because the MPAA has all the rights (and laws in this case) to do this.

Although I dont agree because I pirate almost everything, if they come in my house (which is not possible because I live in Europe) and take away my HDDs and arrest me, I have nothing to do but accept the consequences.

and is part of a larger anti-piracy campaign that included a criminal raid on the UK headquarters of the website TV Links.

Can someone clarify this point.

I hope they mean the POLICE raided TV-Links as surly private associations shouldn't be allowed to launch criminal raids, and even so, should the police even being able to as surly it would have to have being proven in a court of law that linking to other sites was actually copyright infringement.

Police and law should not be allowed to become these associations private security guides.

Police will conduct raids on behalf of individuals or companies as long as their is enough solid evidence that the raid will lead to arrests for violation of laws that individual or company claims are being broken. The police usually have to get the authorization of a judge (depending on country) so that ups the bar a bit.

An example would be a private citizen telling the cops the house down the street has a meth lab in the basement and he saw it while over there for dinner one day or such. If the police can get enough corroborating evidence a judge might grant them a search warrant to verify the claim is in fact true and arrest and prosecute the involved individuals.

I don't think that's a wrong thing for the cops to do... If the laws are a problem we have to take our grievances to the legislature or courts.