Pirate Bay: In search of an unbiased judge

The search for unbiased judges in the high-profile Pirate Bay case in Sweden seems never-ending.

Finding legal authorities who are not connected to the people involved in the case is apparently difficult in a country that counts only 9 million inhabitants.

Shortly after the verdict was delivered in mid-April, sentencing the four defendants to jail for one year for having assisted in making 33 copyright-protected files available for distribution, Judge Tomas Norström was accused of having a conflict of interest.

The accusations were based on his membership in organizations such as the Swedish Copyright Association, which counts among its members: Henrik Pontén, Peter Danowsky and Monique Wadsted. All three are lawyers who represented the plaintiffs during the Pirate Bay trial.

Conflict-of-interest accusations were filed by all the four defendants, together with their appeal of the verdict to the High Court of Justice.

Court President Fredrik Wersäll appointed Judge Ulrika Ihrfeldt to investigate the conflict of interest. But shortly afterward, Ihrfeldt revealed that she also had been a member of the Swedish Copyright Association and was removed from the case.

Wersäll then moved the conflict-of-interest investigation to another part of the court system not involved in the main appeal of the verdict.

Judge Anders Eka was appointed to lead the investigation. But the Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter revealed this week that Eka is connected to the Stockholm Center for Commercial Law, a research center at Stockholm University, where lawyers Monique Wadsted and Peter Danowsky also are involved.

Eka told the Dagens Nyheter that he is not a personal friend of the plaintiffs' lawyers and that he has no background in copyright law. Still, he acknowledges that an investigation of him for potential bias could be possible.

Wersäll told the national news agency TT that the investigation of Norström's potential conflict of interest is a high priority and should be finished within a few weeks.

If Norström is found biased, the case will be sent back to the district court. Otherwise, the High Court of Justice will look at the main appeal of the verdict and possibly decide to hold a new trial.

A few days ago, four record companies involved in the case--Universal Music, EMI Music, Sony BMG and Warner Music--solicited the district court to order the defendants and their Internet provider to stop operating Thepiratebay.org, Swedish media reports.

The Web site has been essentially unaffected by the verdict. The four record companies have verified that the site is still helping distribute copyright-protected files and asks the district court to order its closure and impose a fine if it is not closed.

[wiseleo]

And the beat goes on...

Smooth sailing, Pirate Bay!

[PhaseDMA]

You would think that the plaintiffs would have demanded the pirate bay be shut down when... You know... The defendants were found guilty?

I mean I know I live in the US and this is in Sweden, but is the law really that different?

[unknown unknown]

Apparently copyright cartels weren't on their game, as they're appealing their victory and asking for money and that the Pirate Bay's ISP, "Black Internet", be ordered to cut them off. Though the ISP isn't in Sweden and thus not under the court's jurisdiction. They want the fine imposed before the court actually rules on it and without allowing The Pirate Bay to comment, typical.

[unknown unknown]

"they're appealing their victory and asking for money and that the Pirate Bay's ISP"

Should be "more money"

They believe the amount previously awarded was too low.

[Sausagebiscuit]

The website was not on trial, the people supposedly behind the website were on trial. TPB isn't hosted in Sweden (and has not been for sometime).

[asspen]

In Sweden the decision isn't final until the appeal process is completed, so no money for the record companies and TPB admins don't go to prison for a while. The above is about the record companies asking for more money if the site doesn't stop sharing copyright material or go offline.

[ferricoxide]

You know, *ethical* judges recuse themselves when asked to preside over a case that they have either a vested interest or conflict of interest in.

Then again, how many judges in the *AA's back pockets are going to be ethical?

[unknown unknown]

They know they can't when fairly so they (the copyright cartels) have to cheat. They buy off legislators and anyone else who can give them what they want. They work by corrupting democratic government.

[Philips]

"They buy off legislators and anyone else who can give them what they want."

I do not think they bought anybody in Sweden.

It was more like that. **AA established some institutions with goal to help "explain" the copyright law to judges. For **AA it is chance to bias judges. For judges it is a chance to improve qualification for such cases and consequently be on more cases. Win-win situations, as surely **AA promised to open a floodgate of such cases.

[gertruded]

If we can't get these monopoly (and cartel) corporations under control, then we are all lost. Look at what the monopoly banksters have already done to our economy. They have purchased our governments and are running the world for their benefit at the peoples expense.

As "unknown" says, "They work by corrupting democratic government."

[Philips]

Never investigated that in details, but many say that **AA are pretty much all the time pay some anti-trust money. It is just they always avoid being prosecuted at large (only few of labels go on case) and manage to minimize penalties so it doesn't really hurt them. And since they also control other media, details about such cases are rarely widely known.

[headlessplatter]

"he has no background in copyright law"

This is supposed to be a good thing? So ignorance is their solution for bias? This isn't very confidence-inspiring. How about letting the generation that actually understands technology call this one?

[markhedder]

Who said anything about being ignorant? 'he has no background' means he is not personally involved in any of the profits of the organization/institution and therefore, does not have any incentive to rule in favor of any parties of interest. That in NO way implies lack of knowledge or understanding of technology and the case.

[ClBracken]

So what precisely defines " the generation that actually understands technology "? Young age is no granter of technological wisdom, nor maturity no guarantor of ignorance or bad judgement.

[mskenny]

This sounds familiar..."We apologise again for the fault in the subtitles. Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked, have been sacked."

[Philips]

... and in the end, in last minute they all might be replaced by bunch of llamas.

[rmva]

They need to stop looking for a judge who has standing in the legal community. Instead find one who has served time for petty theft, breaking and entering or mugging. Judges who uphold the law are not going to be "impartial".

[gertruded]

Are we bound to accepting and obeying laws that have been obtained by corrupting governments for personal gain?

[pentest]

A judge who is a thief is going to be impartial to the RIAA and MPAA and their international equivalents, as these are the true thieves in this case.

[YAYitsAndrew]

Could anyone claiming that the RIAA or MPAA are corrupting governments please provide some proof? You know, from an unbiased site since what's fair for one side is fair for another. Or is it just "corruption" because thieves don't like that governments are improving their laws to protect copyrights in a digital age?

[unknown unknown]

opensecrets.org the backers draconian copyright are also recipients of large donations from large content owners.
Pay to play politics is certainly no secret in government.

It certainly explains special 301 reports, in which said content owners pick countries that are suppose to be piracy hot beds. The U.S trade representative then takes their word for it and attempts to pressure the countries into passing stricter copyright. In the case of Canada falsely claiming they haven't met their international obligations, as if the U.S is the sole arbiter of what those obligations are.

"Or is it just "corruption" because thieves don't like that governments are improving their laws to protect copyrights in a digital age?"

These so called improvement have hurt people who do nothing wrong. DMCA has been used to silence critics, parody, and threatened research etc. it's almost impossible to go through your day without infringing copyright at some point.

Even participating in a content company's own promotional activity can get DMCAed of YouTube or anywhere else.
http://newteevee.com/2009/05/05/20th-century-fox-sics-takedown-notices-on-its-own-mashup-promotion/

[pentest]

You mean like the RIAA and MPAA forcing the passage of the DMCA and perverting copyright law so nothing ever goes into the public domain, which is the reason copyright law exists. To encourage progress and build a healthy public domain.

There are two example of these criminal organizations corrupting governments.

[pentest]

Andrew,

Have you ever sung "Happy Birthday" without paying royalties?

If so you are exactly what you accuse other copyright infringer's: a thief.

[Sam Papelbon]

singing 'happy birthday' with a gathering of people is not copyright violation. you can't broadcast it to the public or record it for distribution. a group of people singing a song together is definitely fair use. otherwise you'd have people getting arrested for humming songs while walking down the street.

[pentest]

Actually it is.

Why do you think chain restaurants don't sing it?

[monkeyfun14]

I find it amazing how what they are doing is clearly against the law but people still defend them. Most of which are probably pirates. TPB needs to go down.

[unknown unknown]

A Swedish court probably won't be able to take down the Pirate Bay, simply because a lot of the sites operation does not fall under Swedish jurisdiction. It's unlikely the sites owners are going be cooperative.

I know the U.S, who benefits the most from draconian copyright and tries to spread it, would like it to be illegal, but not all countries have the same copyright law. For example, A Spanish judge has ruled file sharing legal. No doubt the content industry will try to use it's influence and it's flunky the U.S Trade Representative to change that.

[pentest]

It is not against Swedish law despite what this crooked judge claims.

[Sausagebiscuit]

Ah yes, our friend Monkeyfun14 makes his daily troll post to the copyright stories.

Monkeyfun14, do you realize that different countries have different laws? Which law is this against that you are referring to?

[monkeyfun14]

@Sausage

Do you realize that this crime falls in under different categories of crime?

They are not even being charged of copyright infringement but promoting illegal activity.

[compfreeisme]

"I find it amazing how what they are doing is clearly against the law but people still defend them" the Unites States and other governments do so much illegal things, so don't you think all those governments need to go down to? we are at the governments knees because they do what they want and expect to get away with everything. they need to be held liable for everything they do, just like we are held liable. I'am not going to stand behind my government when they tell me not to do something, but they can go ahead and do it. I don't work that way.

[segrov]

The Pirate bay defenders desperately tries to find an incompetent judge, and does so by claiming that all judges with experience in copyright issues are biased.

In this case we end up with an incompetent but unbiased judge. This is interesting, because these judges tend to lean towards more extreme verdicts as "The Pirate Bay are totally legal" or the other extreme as in "Kill all the Pirates, and hang their bodies in a public place".

The first trail seemed very fair indeed, but then again i tend to pay for all the music i listen to.

[pentest]

You might have a point if TPB hosted any infringing data.

Why aren't you advocating shutting down Google?

[unknown unknown]

"The Pirate bay defenders desperately tries to find an incompetent judge, and does so by claiming that all judges with experience in copyright issues are biased."

If you RTFA you'll see it wasn't the judges experience in copyright law that called his decision into question, but his association with pro-copyright groups who's membership includes the prosecutors for TPB case.


"The first trail seemed very fair indeed, but then again i tend to pay for all the music i listen to."

Your payment for the music you listen to has nothing to do with your ability to judge the fairness of a trial.