Jump to content

Talk:The Pirate Bay

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NastalgicCam (talk | contribs) at 12:21, 22 March 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleThe Pirate Bay has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 1, 2008Good article nomineeListed

No mention of...

Recent news:The Pirate bay ordered to close in the netherlands

highlights: The Dutch anti-piracy outfit BREIN has won its court case against The Pirate Bay. The Amsterdam court today ruled that the site must cease all operations in The Netherlands within 10 days, or else pay penalties of 30,000 euros ($42,300) a person, per day. 208.191.39.44 (talk) 21:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pirated Piratebay

There is now a torrent with all the torrents from piratebay. The torrent Thought it might be worth to mention 79.119.14.9 (talk) 10:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't their a WP rule against adding links to illegal sites?Objective3000 (talk) 20:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would dispute labeling TPB as an illegal website. KodakYarr (talk) 14:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Illegal in what country? The country where Wikipedia management is based (USA, I believe)?, Where the Wikipedia servers are (currently Florida, Amsterdam, and Seoul)? The country where The Pirate Bay is based (see my comment below under the heading "CyberBunker" for the difficulty of figuring that one out...)? I would be most interested if anyone could point to the text of an actual law anywhere in the world where it clearly says that hosting a torrent tracker is illegal in that country. 67.150.122.103 (talk) 17:14, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monday 24/08/2009

The Pirate Bay Taken Offline By Swedish Authorities http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-taken-offline-by-swedish-authorities-090824/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.4.35 (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the status in the infobox, a court-ordered cutoff of service is cause enough to change the status to offline. Equazcion (talk) 19:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check the link again - the article was updated recently stating that it is in fact back online, although many people still can't access it as the DNS servers need to update. --User:SinInSpira —Preceding undated comment added 19:48, 24 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]
According to one of the admins, the downtime is temporary. Which is why the past-tensing of this article is immature. Haakon (talk) 19:51, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't looked at the recent edits, but I'd agree, changing the article to refer to TPB in past tense doesn't seem warranted at this point. Equazcion (talk) 20:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why is there such a bloody rush to change the "is" to "was" every time TPB goes off-line for a couple of minutes? Rsduhamel (talk) 22:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because people love to hate what TPB stands for (or, they think they do, at least). Anyway, I just wanted to mention that I edited the section header from "Closure" to "Disconnection" just now. According the the sources provided (and what I can currently see), TPB hasn't closed, they seem intent on reopening the site and appear to have some plan after all. They were however disconnected, obviously.
— V = I * R (talk) 05:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert on this, but if somebody could please advise on two things: (1) if/when Pirate Bay gets bought by this "Global Gaming Factor X" company (that now appears to not have the money to buy it), does anybody know how the new owners plan to handle pre-existing downloads? Let's say that I am in the middle of downloading a file, and then the sale occurs - am I out of luck and have to pay at that point?, or do they intend to "grandfather" existing downloads and let them continue and simply charge for new downloads? (2) If I have a file download that is only 50% complete - can I somehow switch to a bittorrent from, say, Mininova, and get it to recognise the existing partial download??? - I mean, if not, then I am going to be SOL (sh!t-out-of-luck) and had better start making preparations today for when Pirate Bay folds. (the big problem is that I mainly only download old black-and-white TV shows from the 1950's and 60's, and there are not very many seeds (I can't even buy what I want on DVD - I would do that if I could), and so it takes WEEKS for me to complete a download (many of them never complete). Thanks for any advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Betathetapi545 (talk • contribs) 09:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand Bittorrent correctly, as long as a torrent has one free tracker or DHT is working you can download for free. Therefore, if you are downloading files from a torrent that has one TPB tracker and one mininova tracker, and the TPB tracker suddenly requires a password, the files will still download from the mininova tracker. I also believer that if you are downloading files from a torrent with only a TPB tracker, then the tracker suddenly becomes unavailable, and there is another torrent for the exact same files using a mininova tracker, you could switch torrents and resume the download. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Rsduhamel (talk) 06:28, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't note your reverts "vandalism" if they're not!

It is fair to revert IPs & other contributors that go against the consensus here and make the article past tense; but, it would be charitable to not revert them as "vandalism," considering they are pretty obviously (not to mention AGF) not acting with vandalistic intent. I need not quote the Wikipolicies regarding the throwing around of the term "vandalism" in inappropriate situations? Peace and Passion ("I'm listening....") 06:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not all that obvious to me. And I'm not sure vandalistic is a real word. But that's not important right now. Anyway, I'm reverting those as vandalism because, a) I think they are intentional or at least immature, and b) it's tiresome having that same edit repeated over and over, even if it is by different IPs, and I'm seeking to discourage it. I'm not actually warning people about vandalism on their talk pages. Equazcion (talk) 06:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Correction, it seems I did warn someone on their talk page and didn't realize it, which is evidence that I should probably have been in bed a while ago. I still stand by my views on the other stuff I mentioned above though. Equazcion (talk) 06:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
it Is vandalism though.--UltraMagnus (talk) 07:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was not a hoax, as UltraMangus implies; the site was down and newspaper articles all over the net noted it was closed down. We can only AGF that the editors were just attempting to incorporate that into the article.
From Wikipolicy How not to respond to vandalism:
Avoid the word "vandal". In particular, this word should not be used to refer to any contributor in good standing, or to any edits that might have been made in good faith. This is because if the edits were made in good faith, they are not vandalism. Instead of calling the person who made the edits a "vandal", discuss your concerns with them. Comment on the content and substance of the edits, instead of making personal comments.
See also WP:VAND#NOT, especially specific notes such as that → → →"Disruptive editing or stubbornness" are not to be labeled vandalism.← ← ←
Peace and Passion ("I'm listening....") 07:19, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS vandalistic (lol)....

I just happened to do a news search for The Pirate Bay and the top 5 results (which all fit on the screen at once) were articles in English, German, Russian, French, and (?)Swedish. They're all also labeled within a few minutes of each other. I thought this image might do a very good job of illustrating the sudden and widespread "round-the-world" press reaction to the shutdown by authorities; however, I have never worked with images in Wikipedia. I "print-screened" the image and saved it, as it looks quite aesthetically impressive and illustrative of the worldwide significance of this event (it also happens to have the Pirate Bay symbol placed nicely beside one of the results). As I have never worked with images on Wikipedia (though I have seen a few Google screen captures used), I thought I'd ask here first if it would be good to place beside an explanatory section after all these recent events have "worked themselves out." I'd just need help uploading and placing appropriate copyright permissions on the file. Any comments from other editors? Peace and Passion ("I'm listening....") 08:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe permissions / fair use rationale etc. would be very similar (if not identical) to File:Googlebombscientologycult.PNG(don't know how to display it without making it appear other than as an external link). Peace and Passion ("I'm listening....") 08:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of a new 'History' section

Since the Lead section seems to be turning into a history lesson, perhaps it would be wise to move most of this information, along with some other sections of the article, into a new section named 'History'? KodakYarr (talk) 14:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Incidents section is pretty much a history section already, though not in chronological order. The intro could probably be cut down though. Equazcion (talk) 15:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I take it back, reading through the history section again, I think only the major events have been summarized there, and the intro would seem lacking without them, I think. Equazcion (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What I am suggesting is merging these sections into one "big" History section, instead of scattering the information among the Lead section and Incidents section. How this History section should be designed/structured/sectioned exactly however is uncertain and less important, so long as they're merged. I think a new History section will prove even more valuable as time passes, as there is a lot of continuing turbulence surrounding the website. It is possible some other informations can be moved into a History section too. KodakYarr (talk) 16:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Everything in the lead is already in the Incidents section. They're just summarized in short in the lead, which is what the lead is supposed to be for. The only beneficial change I could see is maybe changing the name of the Incidents section to History and putting the events in chronological order. Equazcion (talk) 17:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since that essentially is what I've been talking about, let's do that then. And the Lead section isn't supposed to sumamrize the ongoing history of the subject, but rather to present the subject itself. KodakYarr (talk) 09:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The history of Pirate Bay is its most prominent aspect and takes up most of this article. It seems appropriate to me that the lead section reflects that. Equazcion (talk) 14:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone else have an opinion on the subject? I've added a few cleanup templates to the article to draw attention to the issue. KodakYarr (talk) 16:01, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only the website itself is up

Only the website itself is up. All of its trackers remain down after a week. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True. I don't know if it'll turn out to be a week, but so far they've been down since the ISP disconnection. Equazcion (talk) 18:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The site is up. Things were defeineatly downloadable if someone were to want to do such things MrSAmitt (talk) 18:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Albiet the connection is painfully slow MrSAmitt (talk) 18:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah the site is up. But the trackers are down. You can still download a lot of torrents due to them containing other trackers, and peer exchange, but the Pirate Bay trackers are still down. Equazcion (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

piratebay and openbittorrent trackers and maybe others are all down. I want to mention it on the article because it's inaccurate, but I worry someone will revert it for being unsourced. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 03:04, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not exactly unsourced. See the torrent freak article here. It says the site is back up and "the tracker is expected to follow soon", basically meaning the tracker is down. Equazcion (talk) 03:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Update torrentfreak 2009-11-17 Tracker is and stays down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.239.213.74 (talk) 14:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the tracker not back up???

They got the website back up and running, but does anybody know the reason why they haven't been able to/can't get the tracker back up and running somewhere??? It seems to be permanently down (as of 1 September 2009). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.160.52 (talk) 10:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pirate Bay IP Addresses Assigned to Prosecution Lawyers

from http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-ips-assigned-to-prosecution-lawyers-090426/

Pirate Bay IP Addresses Assigned to Prosecution Lawyers Written by Ernesto on April 26, 2009

"The Pirate Bay recently got a new range of IPs and to everyone’s surprise they are now linked to several movie and music industry lawyers involved in the TPB trial. According to the Pirate Bay’s Wikipedia entry the change was due to a hostile takeover, but most people know better.

"RIPE is the Internet registry that keeps track of all IP-addresses allocated in Europe. When the Pirate Bay got a new range of IP-addresses this week, something odd happened. Aside from the usual TPB ASCII art there was some unusual information added to the RIPE database.

"According to the recently updated RIPE database entry, the Pirate Bay is now listed as a customer of Danowsky & Partner law firm (who represented IFPI), Maqs Law Firm (representing the MPAA) and the Swedish anti-piracy bureau. All three were involved in the recent trial, which led some to believe that they somehow gained control over the site. This is nonsense of course.

"So why is this info in there, some might wonder. One explanation might be that during the Pirate Bay trial the prosecution used (incorrect) data from the RIPE database claiming that this was the absolute truth. The Pirate Bay team probably put the lawyers’ info in there themselves to show that this is not the case. Indeed, there is no doubt that they will have a hard time selling this ‘truth’ to the public now, with their own names being featured in the recent entry.

"One of the other advantages of the new RIPE WHOIS is that the Pirate Bay team doesn’t have to deal with any of the takedown requests anymore, as it states that all abuse email should be directed to the earlier mentioned law firms. Aye, that will teach those landlubbers."

75.84.238.18 (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tracker down/Website up issue

The site isn't exactly useless right now. Pirate Bay started automatically adding the OpenBitTorrent tracker to their torrents, which although affiliated with Pirate Bay's hosting, is currently working. Many of the more prominent torrents also contain other trackers added by their uploaders, and are listed on multiple torrent sites. Most torrent clients also use other methods for finding peers, aside from trackers, like DHT and "Peer Exchange".

The bottom line, as far as the tracker making everything not work on the Pirate Bay site, is that it doesn't. You can still click on nearly any existing torrent there and download it.

A major problem with the Pirate Bay tracker not working, though, is that's the only tracker the Pirate Bay site uses for scraping torrent statistics and listing them. So the "seeds" and "peers" numbers a torrent shows on the site are stuck right now, at the last numbers seen before the site went down. The Top-100 torrents lists, which list the current most-used torrents based on number of peers, are similarly "stuck". Since number of seeds and peers is the standard way that people determine how "healthy" a torrent is, and consequently, which torrents to try downloading, this creates a huge usability problem for the site -- especially with all other Torrent sites giving accurate such numbers.

As far as saying this stuff in the article? Well, I haven't seen anything published yet. If we wanted to cheat slightly we could give the technical aspects -- like the scraping being affected, and how that impacts functions of the site. But the personal opinions should be left out -- such as saying that the site is "still useful" or "now useless". Equazcion (talk) 16:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all I can say, is, TPB may have "started" adding the OpenBitTorrent tracker to its torrents, but they sure didn't get very far. Maybe it's because they only put the alternate trackers in the popular downloads, i.e. recent movies - I don't download those - I download older movies and TV series from the 1960's that I can't get on DVD. I mean, I was downloading National Geographic's "Lockdown: Predators Behind Bars" documentary because I can't get it/buy it over here in Europe (Nat Geo never put it on DVD), and even that torrent no longer works.
You may be able to download the torrent, but that doesn't mean it's got a link to a working tracker in it - the majority of what I try to download using TPB don't work because of "Problem connecting to tracker - ('url error, 'unknown URL type', 'udp', 'udp://tracker.thepiratebay.org:80/announce?info_hash=.............". Maybe TPB put alternate trackers in the top downloads (read, "most popular recent movies"), but I'm not interested in that stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.160.52 (talk • contribs) 06:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OpenBitTorrent tracker is in all of Pirate Bay's torrents, including that National Geographic documentary you mentioned (which I tried and was able to start downloading, though slowly). There probably won't be as many peers available on OpenBitTorrent as there would be on the Pirate Bay tracker, just because OpenBitTorrent was added more recently.
The UDP/'unknown url type' error you're getting in not related to Pirate Bay going down. Rather, many torrent programs don't accept UDP tracker addresses, and will only use HTTP addresses. That includes uTorrent, one of the more popular torrent programs. Luckily, Pirate Bay has both a UDP and an HTTP tracker address, and most torrents contain both of those. But, unluckily, even the HTTP one is currently down. Equazcion (talk) 06:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all that. I think I may have figured out what a large part of my problem has been - my bittorrent client. I was using ABC (Yet Another Bittorrent Client) which hasn't been updated in 3 years (it's basically a dead bittorrent client). It's what somebody gave me - and I'm not one of these people who download loads of recent movies. Anyway, I've switched to utorrent (I was told LimeWire was rubbish) and it seems to be doing the job. Thanks. This can be erased after you read this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.184.128 (talk) 17:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Current Status of Tracker

The wikipedia page on The Pirate Bay currently reads,

"The website was inaccessible, but a few areas reported services restored within 3 hours; it was claimed that the services restored within 24 hours,[13] but the tracker remained offline as of 1 September 2009.[14] However, as of 3 September 2009 it is back up and functioning."

however the claim that the tracker is currently online is not substantiated by any references and therefore should be removed.

Oakdog8 contributed this claim. The details of this contribution can be seen in this comparison

Finally, for what it's worth, downloading from one of pirate bay trackers is working for me right now, with peer exchange turned off. The tracker that is online is OpenBitTorrent, which Equazcion has already mentioned as currently working in the previous section. The tracker that is down is tracker.thepiratebay.org. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weezology (talk • contribs) 20:48, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The Pirate Bay's tracker itself is offline, I would think that would be worth mentioning but I'm not going to add it in without other opinions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by bobrocks95 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking to the people who are reverting the claimed status of the tracker being offline on the grounds that it's unsourced: It seems odd to require a third-party source to tell us whether a tracker is on- or offline. Anyone can try accessing the tracker and see whether or not it's online. I think that counts as a primary source. Additionally, if you want to say that we need a source to say the tracker is offline, shouldn't we also need a source to say it's online? I see no source making that claim either. Equazcion (talk) 04:55, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
that would be wp:original research, verbal's current solution seems the best, as you point out, the is no source either way, and it is not the norm to indicate if a website is on/offline on wikipedia as far as I know.--UltraMagnus (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

05/10/09

Quote "On 5 October 2009, The Pirate Bay's bandwidth suppliers were disabled by the Swedish government." Unquote

Not true, a dutch routing company called Nforce was disabled by the Dutch anti-piracy organisation BREIN. See HERE

The bit about the Swedish government mentioned in the source of above quote is actually about the earlier 3 hour downtime of 24/08/09. 82.169.112.106 (talk) 02:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 October 2009, one of the IP transit providers to The Pirate Bay's blocked all Pirate Bay traffic causing an outage for most users around the world.

Better? JeremyWJ (talk) 02:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a real outage - since the ISP in question is only a transit provider, any number of alternate proxies can still be used to access the site from anywhere. Should that be reflected in the lede? 84.130.234.123 (talk) 15:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's back up for me today. Equazcion (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And since when does that mean you should remove it ?Unless someone has a objection with good arguments (dont think there will be any ,but oh well) i am puting it back up right now. (/huge facepalm)Never mind ,i just saw that now there is a section for "incidents".—Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.59.198.12 (talk) 22:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Offline - October, 2009

I've tried several proxies to reach thepiratebay.org, but it seems to be vanished currently. Shouldn't we update "Current status"? Cheers, theFace 18:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should not. Wikipedia is not a blow-by-blow status reporter of websites. There is a comment in the article saying (excuse my screaming) "DO NOT CHANGE THE CURRENT STATUS UNLESS THE CHANGE IN THE SITE'S STATUS IS INDEFINITE. JUST BECAUSE THE SITE IS OFFLINE DO NOT CHANGE IT!!!" The status "Active", I take it, means that the site has not been shut down officially. Haakon (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to go onto piratebay today from my work, connecting via VNC to my server back home in Sweden (I work in Denmark). I could not open piratebay from Sweden, but when I tested it using my office computer piratebay came up. Telia my ISP has blocked the piratebay IP which can easily be seen by sending a ping to piratebay.org. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cccp200 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it is down again. 67.101.189.93 (talk) 15:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
IT IS NOT A BLOW BY BLOW ACCOUNT, AND SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED UNLESS YOU CAN CITE A WP:RS THAT IT IS DOWN --UltraMagnusspeak 18:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I got that already. Note that I did not change anything in the article. Can anyone access TPB site? 67.101.189.93 (talk) 23:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to still be down, but this is not the place to discuss that. http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ is a good resource if you want to know if a site is down for just you or everyone.JeremyWJ (talk) 23:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's back up and running fine as of 10/22/09. Я£ΙИӺΘЯСΣĐᴙᶕᵻᴎᵮᴓᴚᴐᶒᵯɘᴎᴛᶊ (talk) 19:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:FORUM. I think a forum such as this one is more proper for questions such as this. Haakon (talk) 19:43, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring

The parties have been warned. Further edit-warring will result in blocks. Enigmamsg 07:40, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CyberBunker

It is not clear whether, as this article currently claims, "...on 6 October 2009, the site was back online from CyberBunker located in a NATO territory surrounded by the Netherlands."

According to www.republic-cyberbunker.org, "We can announce your own PI or 'DirectAssigned' IP space on one of our AS'es, or we provide you with a sub allocation out of one of our own IP ranges. This IP space is then routed to any datacenter around the world you desire, or even to your own facilities (office server room, etc). The routes are not visible from the 'outside' world. All that is required is one static internet IP provided by your colocation or access provider, after which you have an untracably routed block of IPs, provinding you with nearly as much privacy as colocating at our facilities, yet maintaining easy physical access if you are overseas."

So maybe The Pirate bay is currently hosted at CyberBunker, or maybe it's somewhere else entirely and simply routes through CyberBunker. 67.150.122.103 (talk) 17:14, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You bring up an interesting point, but we go by what can be referenced as the truth. Therefor despite this possibility, we must go with what we have. However, I would not be in protest of possibly making a small comment in the article that CyberBunker does offer this service. JeremyWJ (talk) 04:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I just clarified the paragraph in "Recent incidents" concerning the move to a CyberBunker IP address. I noticed that the same information is at the end of the "The Netherlands" section. Should these be merged, and if so, where should the merged info go? Also, I cannot find any references to back up the claim that CyberBunker is in NATO territory (some blogs claim that it is under different laws). One would think that when NATO sold the base to a private entity, it became part of the nation surrounding it, but of course we need verified references, not my guesses about what might have happened. 72.251.91.251 (talk) 19:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pirate Bay shuts down it's trackers in favor of DHT + PEX

The following was posted by TPB on Nov 11, 2009:

Now that the decentralized system for finding peers is so well developed, TPB has decided that there is no need to run a tracker anymore, so it will remain down! It's the end of an era, but the era is no longer up2date. We have put a server in a museum already, and now the tracking can be put there as well.

http://thepiratebay.org/blog/175

Does this warrant any mention in the main article? It's a major technical change to how TPB operates and it's exposure to future legal challenges I would think. This would seem to indicate that DHT and Peer Exchange will become more important than trackers for bit-torrent in general, and this observation or fact should also be mentioned in the wiki article for bit torrent. Comments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.125.101 (talk) 15:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Pirate_Bay&oldid=351346634"