|
Swedish court says Pirate Bay judge not biased
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 12 June, 2009
Judge Tomas Norström wasn't biased against the Pirate Bay according to a decision by a Swedish court earlier this week. Although it isn't the final word on the issue, the lower court's decision is expected to factor heavily into the Svea Court of Appeals' final ruling.
Frederik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, Peter Sunde Kolmsioppi and Carl Lundstorm were found guilty of "assisting making ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
12. June 2009 @ 08:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
This is bullshit, there is clearly a conflict of interest with this judge. Even if he was'nt consciously biased, how can he claim he was not unknowingly influenced by his association with these groups.
I expect this matter will reach the EU courts eventually to test the impartiality of the findings in Sweden.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
vyze
Newbie
1 product review
|
12. June 2009 @ 11:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by etkasoe:
I expect this matter will reach the EU courts eventually to test the impartiality of the findings in Sweden.
Hopefully by then the Pirate Political Party will have enough seats on the EU to make a biased opinion so that the case is thrown out :)
|
|
windsong
Member
1 product review
|
12. June 2009 @ 13:07 |
Link to this message
|
Well I suppose the moon really is made out of cheese after all. Next up, pigs flying outside my window.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
12. June 2009 @ 13:19 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by etkasoe:
This is bullshit, there is clearly a conflict of interest with this judge. Even if he was'nt consciously biased, how can he claim he was not unknowingly influenced by his association with these groups.
+ 1.
They are just so bare-faced about it now, it's like they just don't care how brazen they are about it.
.......but you try (as a private individual) claiming a similar lack of conflict if a business or the state ever pulled you into court in a similar circumstance.
Yeah right, as if.
|
Member
|
12. June 2009 @ 13:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
so if a judge is for some reason accused of DLing music, movies, child porn is it also safe to assume he just did it to "find out how easy it was"
or if a judge is found to be a member of a criminal orginazation is it safe to assume he was a member of it "to gain inner knowledge of the orginazations operations"
Judgeing by the courts standards and excuses seem judges can do whatever they please
|
|
beanos66
Member
|
12. June 2009 @ 14:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
swedish judges...
...almost as bad as british mp's.
|
|
jeff_2
Junior Member
|
12. June 2009 @ 16:29 |
Link to this message
|
rage about this how can he not be biased?
|
|
domie
Member
|
13. June 2009 @ 05:10 |
Link to this message
|
I'm suprised so many people are surprised by all this - did anyone really think that in today's society and world that logic , common sense , legal arguments , rights and wrongs etc would be considered once the big authorities got involved ?
Their only concern is to achieve the result that they want - to hell with the right and wrong of it - and that is the big problem for anyone invovled in p2p websites or related material these days : -
you can dedicate hours and hours to analising the legal position in your country , the server's country , international copyright law, pay internet lawyers to advise you , protect yourself as much as possible, put disclaimers on your website along the lines of
"we only index material held elsewhere like google does - we don't host any files "
but at the end of the day - if the government or copyright authorities in your country decide to take you down or make an example of you - then down you will be taken and a judge will be told to set the example.
It's a sobering thought for any p2p site owners who believe they are protected by the written law - they are not > I found that out to my own cost two years ago.
|
|
Serialluv
Junior Member
|
14. June 2009 @ 18:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
IMO this is a judgement that will be turned around otherwise surely they will have to go after the people who paid them for the advertising?? Because they were party to it as well. An indexing service should not be held responsible regardless of the actual intent unless it is clearly harming someone (kiddie porn etc)
|
|
bogwart16
Member
|
18. June 2009 @ 08:12 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by windsong:
Well I suppose the moon really is made out of cheese after all. Next up, pigs flying outside my window.
They're already here. Have you not heard of swine flew?
|
|
Tarsellis
Member
|
18. June 2009 @ 09:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sorry guys, we've lost the west to the progressives and courts. Freedom of expression, of thought, to succeed and fail, of action, have all been pre-empted. We of the west have sold our souls for the illusion of peace and security.
And soon, very soon, we will wake up to find Islam, out of the east, at our throats bent on world domination, and forcing us to fight not for our right to free speech and fair use, but for our right to live and to choose our own god.
|
|
bogwart16
Member
|
18. June 2009 @ 10:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Tarsellis:
And soon, very soon, we will wake up to find Islam, out of the east, at our throats bent on world domination, and forcing us to fight not for our right to free speech and fair use, but for our right to live and to choose our own god.
Oh, don't talk such nonsense. It's not Islam that's the problem here. And quite what the Global War on Terror® and/or religion in general have to do with the decisions of a Swedish court escapes me.
|
|
Tarsellis
Member
|
18. June 2009 @ 10:49 |
Link to this message
|
Symptoms of a dying culture. Do some research into the fall of Rome, and actually try to understand Islam a bit. I'm not slamming the Muslims as a people, but Islam is all about one world system under the rule is the caliphate, and it's very core is war and death.
And if you read earlier, it comes from the progressives, who have infiltrated our courts and our schools to degrade our freedoms. And as a result we are hindered in the coming war.
|
|
zdamian
Newbie
|
18. June 2009 @ 10:53 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by etkasoe:
This is bullshit, there is clearly a conflict of interest with this judge. Even if he was'nt consciously biased, how can he claim he was not unknowingly influenced by his association with these groups.
I expect this matter will reach the EU courts eventually to test the impartiality of the findings in Sweden.
I honestly think that his matter may eventually reach the EU courts for arbitration. The problem with the judge's membership lies not only in the fact of the existence of said membership, but also that he is A BOARD MEMBER OF ONE OF THESE GROUPS!!!
Hello! Is anyone at home!!!!! That alone should have precluded him from the matter, and then bias could never have been an issue!
|
|
bogwart16
Member
|
18. June 2009 @ 11:00 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Tarsellis:
Symptoms of a dying culture. Do some research into the fall of Rome, and actually try to understand Islam a bit. I'm not slamming the Muslims as a people, but Islam is all about one world system under the rule is the caliphate, and it's very core is war and death.
And if you read earlier, it comes from the progressives, who have infiltrated our courts and our schools to degrade our freedoms. And as a result we are hindered in the coming war.
You're obviously American because only Americans talk in such apocalyptic terms of something they know nothing about. Islam has as much chance of establishing a caliphate as the US does of surviving the next two years. And among ordinary Muslims there is no desire at all to do anything like this - and they certainly don't have the means, the will or the ability.
This is not the place for this type of discussion, so I suggest you peddle your nonsense elsewhere. I will not respond to you further.
|
|
zdamian
Newbie
|
18. June 2009 @ 11:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
Please tell me how a simple case of bias in a copyright-based lawsuit has somehow degenerated into a discussion of Islam, the fall of The Roman Empire and the global war on terror? Let's get back to the topic people! IF you have your axe to grind on other matters, find the forum dedicated for that and do it there!!!!!
Scotty Ranking says so!
Rise up fallen fighters! Rise and take your stance again!
He who fights and runs away, will live to fight another day!
With de heathen back dey pon de wall!
De heathen back yeah pon de wall!
Scotty Ranking© says so!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. June 2009 @ 11:41
|
|
MIKYPLUM
Newbie
|
19. June 2009 @ 05:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
YES EVERY ONE IS RIGHT TO SAY.THAT THE JUDGE IS BIAS, IN HIS SUMMING UP, WE ALL KNOW THAT CORRUPTION IS ALWAYS VERY RIFE AT THE TOP OF THE LADDER,MOST OF THEM ARE BENT IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER,
|
|
zdamian
Newbie
|
19. June 2009 @ 14:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's a fairly clear-cut and universal legal principle - natural justice. Simply put - justice must not only be done; it must appear to be done.
I am no lawyer, but even I can say that even if the judge's decisions in this case have full, precedented and justifiable legal grounding, the mere appearance that the deck was stacked to ThePirateBay's disadvantage puts a muddy stain in that pool of water. And that must be addressed.
If you have a a case in court against a Mr. Smith, I'm certain that you wouldn't want a Smith as a judge in the matter, unless he is a proven non-relative to your Smith. Similarly, if I bring up a a matter against Company X, do I really feel justice will be served if a board member of Company X is the judge in my matter?
In my country some years ago a matter came before the court where the judge had to instantly recuse herself, even before the charges could be read out aloud. Why? Not only was she related to the accused, but also the counsel for the accused. The judge had to be transferred from that area until all matters involving the accused and/or his lawyer were determined. And that had nothing to do with the accused guilt, or innocence - the playing field of criminal justice must be level, or else justice ceases to exist.
|
Newbie
|
20. July 2009 @ 04:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sounds sorta like doctors in the US, they join these organizations of other powerful doctors (or in this case, judges), and watch out for each other. They've got each other's back...I wouldn't be surprised if the judges ruling this philosophical malpractice appeal were board members of the exact same committee...and if anyone could answer this question:
If you joined an organization for the soul purpose of becoming more educated on legal issues, why are you a board member--one of the highest rankings and most powerful positions--in this organization?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
zdamian
Newbie
|
20. July 2009 @ 12:21 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by darman92:
Sounds sorta like doctors in the US, they join these organizations of other powerful doctors (or in this case, judges), and watch out for each other. They've got each other's back...I wouldn't be surprised if the judges ruling this philosophical malpractice appeal were board members of the exact same committee...and if anyone could answer this question:
If you joined an organization for the soul purpose of becoming more educated on legal issues, why are you a board member--one of the highest rankings and most powerful positions--in this organization?
Another excellent point! As you rightly said, there is a big difference between just joining a organisation for information's sake, and becoming a board member.
If I want to guarantee I get the annual report from a company's auditors, I need to own just one share in that company. No one could say that I'm a serious investor in said company on this basis. But from the time I want to be on the board of said company, I no longer have observer status - I'm a full-fledged believer. and that's why this is so wrong .....
Rise up fallen fighters! Rise and take your stance again!
He who fights and runs away, will live to fight another day!
With de heathen back dey pon de wall!
De heathen back yeah pon de wall!
Scotty Ranking© says so!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. July 2009 @ 12:30
|
