crime

Man arrested over illegal 'One Piece' manga-viewing website

23 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

23 Comments
Login to comment

Wataru Adachi is suspected of uploading unauthorized image files of the megahit comic in May 2017 on Mangamura

2017? Can you be arrested for crimes that predates when the law goes into affect? This is ridiculous.

The association estimates that number of visitors translates into losses of 319.2 billion yen ($3 billion) for the manga industry.

That assuming that all those people would have actually paid for the manga. I’m pretty sure those 620 million people would not have all paid for the manga.

17 ( +18 / -1 )

If something is free to view/download, that doesn't mean all those people would translate into paying customers. Somewhere between 1 and 10% is the normal conversion rate.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Can you be arrested for crimes that predates when the law goes into affect? 

Pre-crime. Welcome to dystopia.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

That is why he turned in. Limited risk.

If you start making illegal actions, don't return to country where you are a legal copyright infringer.

Another will do the job.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Does anyone have more information on this? Was everything only available in Japanese or did they also provide translations that came with the manga?

I'm just wondering who the target audience was. People in Japan who obviously have access to manga? Or were most visitors people from other countries who have little to no other means to read the manga? And if it is the latter, do they even provide some kind of service for people from other countries?

Obviously something has to be done if people visiting that kind of site actually have the option to buy a copy of the manga in print or digital form (do they even sell them digitaly though?). But if visitors are from other countries and can't buy a copy in a store or online in a language they understand, then maybe it is time to sit down and look for options to give those people this option.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

2017? Can you be arrested for crimes that predates when the law goes into affect? This is ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous, it's called a retroactive law and isn't that uncommon.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The association estimates that number of visitors translates into losses of 319.2 billion yen ($3 billion) for the manga industry.

So, about $5 a man or just over 500 yen. Comics are 6-700 yen these days so are they assuming every one of those visitors will have bought 1 comic? That's pretty "optimistic".

Lorem ipsumToday 11:31 am JST

It's not ridiculous, it's called a retroactive law and isn't that uncommon.

It is quite frowned on in legal circles, and it'll have to be explicitly written in the law.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

his biggest mistake was not baseing his server in China or Russia

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I’m confused. Maybe it’s the heat. But what’s this talk about retroactive laws? Didn’t copyright laws exist before 2017?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Lorem Ipsum

Yes. Retroactive laws are common. However, they are usually reserved for serious offenses. Those such as sexual assault, murder, and things that would normally result in harm and huge losses.

What makes this retroactive law so dangerous is that it would also target people who may have mistakenly took a screen shot on their phone years ago or people that posted lyrics or partial lyrics to their favorite song on their social media.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Let people view what they want. This is censorship!

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Let people view what they want. This is censorship!

It's illegal.

It's similar to video and DVD piracy that blighted the industry for so long.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Ever notice that Japan only cracks down on Japanese material? I've never seen news about the Japanese arresting anyone for pirating foreign music, movies or tv shows.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Let people view what they want. This is censorship!

Right. Because the people who created and own these properties don't need to be compensated for their hard work or anything crazy like that. It's not censorship, you can still view whatever you want. You just have to pay the creator for it. Because they own it.

Then when they decide to stop making new material because too many people steal it, then who will you complain to? Why should they bother, when people like you think it is ok to take what they have made without paying for it?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If he was not selling the manga he should not be bothered. Looks like access was free.

The concept of owning ideas, images (besides your own body and face) and words if fundamentally insane anyway...only enforceable through judicial over-reach and destruction of freedom. And the overwhelming most part of the use of such laws is rich people who don't work at all going after little people for some perceived relatively small monetary loss, or rather, a small lack of profit. Most of this is not some small struggling artist having to forego dinner. Its just blatant greed on the part of media owners whose most strenuous work out during the day is lifting the telephone. You really think this hurt anybody making a fortune off One Piece?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

If he was not selling the manga he should not be bothered. Looks like access was free.

free or not, the manga was not his property to distribute.

Tell you what, I’m just gonna borrow your car for a few days and let some random folks drive it around. Don’t worry, I’m not charging them for it so it’s ok

The concept of owning ideas, images (besides your own body and face) and words if fundamentally insane anyway...

The concept that anyone could believe that something born from your own mind could be used or given away by someone else is what is insane.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The concept that anyone could believe that something born from your own mind could be used or given away by someone else is what is insane.

Oh. So you also oppose a person's descendants being able to own the product of some ancestor's brain child? You also oppose the idea that a corporation can own the product of an artists mind because said artist works for them or sold it to them? Or is it only if they choose not to sell it but rather to give it away?

Are you aware of fair use rules where a teacher can give such stuff away? Do you oppose them?

Tell you what, I’m just gonna borrow your car for a few days and let some random folks drive it

Can you sir, not tell the difference between physical items and words, images and ideas such as I specified clearly in my post?

I thought I made it pretty clear I opposed the concept of ownership of ideas, words and images, and that is the basis on which my opposition rests. I don't even want to give the sale being illegal any credence, but its the best compromise I can come up with to move at least half way from insanity and back to sanity.

Its nothing but a great big fat can of stupid and crazy worms, and the minute you need medicine but cannot afford it because some greed bag owns the process, you might start seeing some cracks in your support of the ownership of ideas.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

@extankerToday 11:37 am JST

Tell you what, I’m just gonna borrow your car for a few days and let some random folks drive it around. Don’t worry, I’m not charging them for it so it’s ok

The funny thing is, if you indeed only borrowed my car for a few days, depending on jurisdiction it would likely not rise to the level of a crime, with theft requiring intent of permanent deprivation.

The concept that anyone could believe that something born from your own mind could be used or given away by someone else is what is insane.

But you turned that "something born from your own mind" into a saleable product, and you sold it to someone. Which means the Right of Ownership is transferred and he should get the rights to freely dispose of the item, including making a million duplicates of it.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Theft of someone's creativity is shameful. It's a crime.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@Norman Goodman

Oh. So you also oppose a person's descendants being able to own the product of some ancestor's brain child? You also oppose the idea that a corporation can own the product of an artists mind because said artist works for them or sold it to them? Or is it only if they choose not to sell it but rather to give it away?

What the heck are you talking about?? Dude, you are all over the place.

Yes, I am ok with things being owned that are created. If someone dies, his or her descendants inherit ownership of their intellectual properties. That's how it works.

If an IP is sold to a corporation, of course I don't oppose them owning it, that was my whole point! YOU are the one arguing that these things can't be owned and the guy who (illegaly) distributed the manga for free did nothing wrong, which is just stupid.

The manga creator was paid by the publisher. They own it and have the right to do what they want with it and to be compensated for each and every copy of it that is distributed. If you buy a copy, you are agreeing to the printed disclaimer that states you are not free to distribute it. The guy broke the law. Period.

Its nothing but a great big fat can of stupid and crazy worms, and the minute you need medicine but cannot afford it because some greed bag owns the process, you might start seeing some cracks in your support of the ownership of ideas.

Like I said, you are all over the place here and make no sense. Now we moved from images and ideas into medicine? Try keeping those goal posts in one place.

@Kazuaki Shimazaki

Which means the Right of Ownership is transferred and he should get the rights to freely dispose of the item, including making a million duplicates of it.

Wrong. By buying the item, he agreed to the legal disclaimer that he is not permitted to distribute copies of the manga. You think they just print those in there for fun? 'Making a million duplicates of it' is illegal.

You guys have no concept of intellectual property.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Retroactive? What are you saying?

Are you confused with the topic of blocking in 2018?

Uploading without permission from the copyright holder has been illegal for a long time.

And it's not only in Japan. Why don't you think a little before you speak?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You guys have no concept of intellectual property.

Actually, my opposition is born of a heightened understanding of intellectual property and what a mess it is and how it creates unnecessary practical difficulties and frustrations for ordinary people and unnecessary advantage for people who are already rich. I think its you having difficulties seeing the inconsistencies, problems, unfairness, over-reach and in this case, injustice, and being nice, I am going to assume your failure to understand or even truly think on it is the result of simply not wanting to.

A man is going to go to jail over sharing images. Yeah, he broke the law, but period? Gays, miscegenists, helio-centrists, medical textbook salesmen, adulterers, pot smokers and alcohol drinkers have also been guilty of breaking laws we think are insane today. For anyone to say "broke the law period" is completely a joke to me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are still a few other websites that have the same content. You can't stop the internet from sharing any and everything.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites