New developments inTPB - case - judge biased!

Can't wait for the movie of this case

This is not necessarily a case of bias. Sure TPB's attorneys will demand a retrial and may get one, but even then it is just to avoid any image of impropriety. It's common for judges and lawyers to be members of important professional groups that are related to their area of expertise. It's not like he was out golfing with the antipiracy group leaders the day after the trial. I guess it would only seem fair if this case were heard by a judge who is a member of the Piratbyran, if you can even find a sitting judge who is.

Just because the defense attorneys are making a pretty tenuous conflict of interest claim and asking for a retrial does not mean that the judge has been bought.

Would you guys like it if the judge in a criminal case was a member of an organization that was against prison? Their job is to interpret and apply the law, and the law is clearly in favor of the copyright holders. So the judge did his job properly here. If you don't like the outcome, work to change the laws themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by primevil

Can't wait for the movie of this case

---

Pirated on TPB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeHD

This is not necessarily a case of bias. Sure TPB's attorneys will demand a retrial and may get one, but even then it is just to avoid any image of impropriety. It's common for judges and lawyers to be members of important professional groups that are related to their area of expertise. It's not like he was out golfing with the antipiracy group leaders the day after the trial. I guess it would only seem fair if this case were heard by a judge who is a member of the Piratbyran, if you can even find a sitting judge who is.

Just because the defense attorneys are making a pretty tenuous conflict of interest claim and asking for a retrial does not mean that the judge has been bought.

Would you guys like it if the judge in a criminal case was a member of an organization that was against prison? Their job is to interpret and apply the law, and the law is clearly in favor of the copyright holders. So the judge did his job properly here. If you don't like the outcome, work to change the laws themselves.

---

I guess You're completely wrong. If anything this case is the textbook kind of conflict of interest. Why is it so hard to accept that even those bigheads can be bought like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeHD

Their job is to interpret and apply the law, and the law is clearly in favor of the copyright holders. So the judge did his job properly here. If you don't like the outcome, work to change the laws themselves.

---

well, that's not as simple as that... to summarize, i'd just say there are many ways to - interpret/play with - the laws.

This is really not a textbook case, you don't know what you're talking about. Saying the judge was bought implies bribery or a more covert pay to play situation. Being a part of respectable groups in an area of interest, which I'm sure most of Sweden's big copyright lawyers and others with a professional interest in the area are also a member.

While reasonable minds may differ on points of intrepretation, the entire system is meant to protect copyright holders. Obviously that means it is clearly in their favor. From the Statute of Anne onwards, copyright law has been overwhelmingly in favor of the one holding the copyright. This is precisely why I don't find it surprising that a judge experienced and knowledgeable in the area of law is a member of such groups.

EDIT: I just realized that I'm not going to get through to you folks, not just you two, but the entire crew here. So don't respond if you want me to read it, I'm done with this section because I don't have the desire to fight the ignorance about such matters. Good luck, bittorrent community.

thank fuck hes gone lol ^^

Verdict was sooo stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeHD

This is really not a textbook case, you don't know what you're talking about. Saying the judge was bought implies bribery or a more covert pay to play situation. Being a part of respectable groups in an area of interest, which I'm sure most of Sweden's big copyright lawyers and others with a professional interest in the area are also a member.

While reasonable minds may differ on points of intrepretation, the entire system is meant to protect copyright holders. Obviously that means it is clearly in their favor. From the Statute of Anne onwards, copyright law has been overwhelmingly in favor of the one holding the copyright. This is precisely why I don't find it surprising that a judge experienced and knowledgeable in the area of law is a member of such groups.

EDIT: I just realized that I'm not going to get through to you folks, not just you two, but the entire crew here. So don't respond if you want me to read it, I'm done with this section because I don't have the desire to fight the ignorance about such matters. Good luck, bittorrent community.

---

i don't know if your post was directed to me but i didn't say in any way that the judge got bought, i just said that laws are subject to many interpretations and are more 'flexible' than many people can imagine so i think it's legitimate to think that the verdict may have been driven by his convictions regarding his involvement into pro-copyright groups.

@mikeHD
Neither me, nor anybody claimed the judge has actually been fixed. I was not there, You see. I merely told - and please, forgive my "arrogance" - that the judge might be biased, and that is a clear case of conflict of interest. You act like a child and get offended, because some people might not share Your opinion. Furthermore You allege words told by us, which have never been said or written down. Being Biased is NOT equal with being corrupted or fixing the judge.
If You do not tolerate other opinion but Yours, then fine - nobody will miss You. Then it's a good riddance. If You can argue in a reasonable way, well, You're most welcome I guess.