New developments inTPB - case - judge biased!

Judge biased? Seems very much the case!

"One of the biggest cases in file-sharing history ended last week with The Pirate Bay Four sentenced to huge fines and jail time. Today it is revealed that far from being impartial, the judge in the case is a member of pro-copyright groups - along with Henrik Pontén, Monique Wadsted and Peter Danowsky. There are loud calls for a retrial."


...Swedish Association of Copyright (SFU) - The judge Tomas Norström is a member of this discussion forum that holds seminars, debates and releases the Nordic Intellectual Property Law Review. Other members of this outfit? Henrik Pontén (Swedish Anti-Piracy Bureau), Monique Wadsted (movie industry lawyer) and Peter Danowsky (IFPI) - the latter is also a member of the board of the association.

Swedish Association for the Protection of Industrial Property (SFIR) - The judge Tomas Norström sits on the board of this association that works for stronger copyright laws. Last year they held the Nordic Championships in Intellectual Property Rights Process Strategies.

.SE (The Internet Infrastructure Foundation) - Tomas Norström works for the foundation that oversees the .se name domain and advises on domain name disputes. His colleague at the foundation? Monique Wadsted. Wadsted says she’s never met Norström although they have worked together."

Details: Torrentfreak
http://href.hu/x/8tyg

If this is true, it's probably the best thing that could have happened to the filesharing community, would be a huge blow to the lobby groups. I always thought that the first verdict was absolutely ridiculous to begin with, so it would not surprise me in the slightest if this was true.

The negative publicity will be immense, and in the next instance, the pressure to have impartial and 'clean' judges, a fair trial, even bigger.

Owned :)

This is selfpwned BIGTIME!

It is true it seems, other (non filesharing related) major news portals are reporting it now also. Haha, this is great. The best thing is that the judge won't even deny being member of those pro-copyright groups, but claims that his membership had no influence on the verdict! Seriously, where do you Swedes find these people? :D

What an utter idiot, I seriously hope that there will be a retrial now, it's beyond ridiculous now.

good news :yup:

i hope it will help all BT sites.

Wouldn't get too optimistic. The next judge could easily be bought like the previous one.

Sure it's good news, though it will take ages until another verdict is reached (if of course a retrial is allowed).

Don't think that the next judge can be 'easily bought' again, not after this. It's an issue now, so if there is a retrial, or even in the next instance, it will be in the focus of the public.

Very amateurish by the content lobby mafia to be honest. And the TPB lawyers should have checked this before the trial began, would have made things easier, too.

The verdict was rediculous, especially when considering the consequences (Google illegal? etc.).

But this might actually just make the process slower, as we probably will go to the highest court with this case anyhow, and that verdict is the important one. This might on the other hand buy some time and get the "Antipiratbyrån" of BT communities backs... for the time being.

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.

lets get back ontopic(uhh..kinda :p )
Pwned!

for us this is outrages and inacceptable but it wouldnt be the first time in history that governments ignore facts and just go one with their buisness. i wouldnt get my hopes up because of this....