|
Investigator paid by Warner not available for Pirate Bay trial
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 24 February, 2009
The trial of four men accused of being accessories to illegal file sharing for their involvement with The Pirate Bay resumed this week in Sweden. There were no dramatic developments like the prosecutor's decision to drop half the charges last week. Instead he concentrated on entertainment industry witnesses.
Perhaps the most notable witness was the one who didn't make it. Police investigator ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
slickwill
Member
|
24. February 2009 @ 14:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
The title of the article is sort of ambiguous because I thought it meant that Warner paid off an investigator to not be available during trial.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
azndrake
Junior Member
|
24. February 2009 @ 14:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
sounds like afterdawn is twisting words around O.o
|
Senior Member
|
24. February 2009 @ 15:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
At first glance it kinda looks that way, but it would have to say:
Investigator paid by Warner to not be available for Pirate Bay trial
|
Newbie
|
24. February 2009 @ 15:27 |
Link to this message
|
A lawyer working for the IFPI testified to downloading copyrighted material where is the FINE that he should HAVE to PAY for COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT????????
|
Senior Member
2 product reviews
|
24. February 2009 @ 17:16 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by powerhack:
A lawyer working for the IFPI testified to downloading copyrighted material where is the FINE that he should HAVE to PAY for COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT????????
If a lawyer, policeman, etc. is gathering evidence they can download a file to verify that its contents are in fact illegal and not mislabeled or something legal.
They have to do this in order to prosecute someone because if they did not the person could say "But, that movie labeled "Dark Knight" you saw on my computer was really a home-made movie about my friend pretending he was a Dark Knight".
If the prosecution didn't download the movie they would lose the case due to lack of evidence.
|
Member
|
25. February 2009 @ 00:44 |
Link to this message
|
He shot himself in the foot when he admitted to not actually using the tracker... There goes that bit of 'evidence'....
|
|
plazma247
Member
|
25. February 2009 @ 05:18 |
Link to this message
|
Maybe its because they know Jim was a bit of a plank (pictured above) and that he would just put his foot in it more and lose yet more ground for the prosecutor
|
|
bassdog69
Newbie
|
27. February 2009 @ 13:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by plazma247:
Maybe its because they know Jim was a bit of a plank (pictured above) and that he would just put his foot in it more and lose yet more ground for the prosecutor
A bit of a Plank??? LOL!!!
Noun
plank (plural planks)
1.A long, broad and thick piece of timber, as opposed to a board which is less thick.
2.A political issue that is of concern to a faction or a party of the people and the political position that is taken on that issue.
3.(UK, slang) A stupid person.
|
|
soluto
Newbie
|
2. March 2009 @ 07:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
plazma247
Member
|
3. March 2009 @ 02:39 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Noun
plank (plural planks)
1.A long, broad and thick piece of timber, as opposed to a board which is less thick.
2.A political issue that is of concern to a faction or a party of the people and the political position that is taken on that issue.
3.(UK, slang) A stupid person.
Which ever way you look at it.... fits to me.
|
