Talk:Pirate Bay case: Internet group attacks websites in "Operation Baylout"

OR notes

IRC discussion

[redacted per request of source]

PPI statement

Via IRC:

<K`Tetch> "While we can't condone these acts, it does show there is a wealth of feeling that opposes the decisions and actions of this trade body. Perhaps if this trade group was not so focused on increaasing their members short-term profits, and focused on long term growth and giving customers what they have wanted for the last 10 years, we would not all be in this situation now" <K`Tetch> oh, and if you can add this too "however, if people really want to make a difference, and get a result, then they should be supporting their local pirate parties, which will give a lasting result, by providing a government that is more resistant to the lobbying efforts of the IFPI and their ilk"

Review

Revision 809900 of this article has been reviewed by DragonFire1024 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 809900 of this article has been reviewed by DragonFire1024 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

---

Good work, its evident that a lot of research went into this. Quite often articles we publish about computers have contradictions in relation to the technical content (at least initially) It was a pleasant surprise to see an article about a technical subject that was well written, without any apparent inaccuracies. user:Bawolff

Technical inaccuracies generally arise from following the mainstream media, and not knowing when they really need whacked round the head with a clue-by-four. But also, I can think of lots of Wikinewsies I'd hate to see try and describe something like the Tor network. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

NPOV

It seems that it should be possible to dig up a quote from someone from the prosecution or MPAA or otherwise in favor of copyright protections that is opposed to the so-called "Operation Baylout". Please present both sides of the story fairly. --SVTCobra 02:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

"group"

Since Anonymous is not an activist "group," could you please put in a paragraph explaining that "Anonymous" is merely a nom de guerre that can be adopted by any person online who does anything anonymously and wants to remain anonymous? It's tiresome that people still get the impression that the kids posting pix of dead babies are the same people posting gay porn on MySpace accounts are the same people protesting Scientology are the same people in Operation Baylout. Yes, there is some overlap, but it's unclear and inaccurate to leave the impression that it's all the same "group." Thank you. --71.202.127.216 03:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

To add to the above: the only thing that connects anonymous on the internet is that most of them come from the same cultural background. There are many different internet gatherings that use the term "Anonymous", as they are not a part of any specific organized group, such as the cDc. It has become a way of taking action without doing so under any name or affiliation. It certainly would help to make this article a bit more accurate. Relyt22 (talk) 23:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It would be rather difficult to explain the "Anonymous is a meme" within the article, can you offer any suggestions on how you'd reword? --Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)