The 99% of the population who has no idea what The Pirate Bay is, let alone that there was a trial. Most of those people couldn't find Sweden on a map.
And there goes any credibility IFPI had... I understand that the IFPI has no obligation to question the judges bias, but seriously, how could they think that this would not come out? Public opinion in this case is just as important for the prosecution as the verdict. And they probably just lost on both grounds.
Seriously? How on earth could this have not been uncovered long ago? I know that the pbay lawyers are really good, I wonder if they knew this all along and held it as a card in case they lost.
I mean, the judge is not just a member of a Swedish org campaigning for more strict copyright, he's on the board! Absolutely amazing, I can imagine him chuckling and rubbing his hands together when he had the opportunity to hear the case.
I don't know how Swedish courts work but in the United States all you can really do is privately ask the judge to recuse himself. If he chooses not to you can request that be noted in the court record as possible grounds for an appeal and from there you go on with your case.
So really all an attorney can do is wait things out and then present it as an appeal after the trial.
It's perfectly valid to question whether or not a conflicted judge pulled any strings to hear the case - that sort of thing goes on, and he has shown lack of judgement at best and outright corruption at worst. Everything about his position in this case needs to be thoroughly investigated, but that's one of the most important things IMHO. If he made any effort to hear this case himself, that makes lack of judgement less likely and planned corruption more likely.
If a conflicted judge pulled strings to hear the case, this proves a conspiracy. This accusation should be thoroughly investigated and, perhaps, the way cases are assigned should be rethought.
It seems reasonable that you first try to win a case and only invest the time required to look for these kinds of connections when it proves necessary? Especially since it should rarely occur, as judges do not usually waste the governments' money in such an obvious way. Everyone and his mother understands that this will lead to a retrial.
@TomofTTB:
IANAL, but as far as I know, these kinds of conflicts of interest will cause retrials in most of western Europe.
"that you first try to win a case and only invest the time required to look for these kinds of connections when it proves necessary?"
No way. You look into these connections as soon as possible - it will help shape your defense - and, if the verdict favors your client, you shut up forever. OTOH, if the verdict doesn't favor your client, you go for a retrial and try to invalidate as much of the prosecution's evidence as possible. It's risky, because now everybody knows everybody's hand, but, in face of an unfavorable ruling, this seems to be the way to go. You should prepare some new evidence to clear your client.
Isn't this a free option? If it's enough to get the judge swapped isn't it enough to overturn a guilty verdict? They get an opportunity to try the case, the possibility of winning. Then they have an easy path to a retrial.
Being the victim of judicial corruption can't be that bad for their cause.
If I was a pbay lawyer and I knew this info, I wouldn't release it right away. This way, if the judgment is for my clients, great! If not, I can then release it, claim bias, and get a new trial.
If I released it right away and replaced the judge, I won't have an ace up my sleeve if the judgement goes against my client.
I think now, if they spin this correctly, PBay will have far more leverage for their main point - that the trial is a set up by the IFPI-industrial complex.
Strong as the language may be, it's from a political party. They're paid to be furious on command. I'd be much more interested in the reactions of moderate Swedish media.
As a Swedish citizen this sends shivers down my spine. Since we have a rather weak constitution with little division of power we've relied on the good faith and judgement of our officials to avoid corruption, which has worked pretty well so far.
But now, to send people to jail, fully aware that he's affiliated with stakeholders in the case, that's just sickening.
Okay, swedish prisons for intellectual property offenders probably have a summer camp atmosphere to it, but that's not really the point. To take someones liberty should not be taken lightly.
well yeah appeals is one thing, but it won't automatically clear them, I'm mainly thinking of how the Ted Stevens case was thrown out after a guilty verdict, due to prosecutor misconduct, surely there is the same thing for judges too.
Except in the case of Ted Stevens, everyone realized that it was corruption, and the people that "let him off the hook" are now under investigation for corruption.
I've taken some introductions to law, but this is not something I'm competent in, but I would assume that the defendants could get the verdict invalidated if they could prove that the judge's affiliation with affiliation with that association was of the nature that he should be unfit for duty.
In all likelyhood, I think the outcome will have a lot to do with how media reacts to this. If they label the judge corrupt and fights for a retrial, the courts of appeal will have a hard time resisting.
I think the idea I was trying to push was that for this trial, the outcome in courts of appeal will have more to to with politics and media leverage than the legal code.
The organization "Svenska föreningen för upphovsrätt" that gets most of the press claims on their home page to be an apolitical organization for people interested in copyright law, with no opinions on its own.
I don't really see that membership as a problem, unless the reality of the organization is something different from what is stated. The other organization is "Svenska Föreningen för Industriellt Rättsskydd" which has as its purpose to strengthen industrial control over copyright, patent and trademarks.
I'd say that membership should have been enough for the judge to declare himself as having conflicts of interest, and ought to result in disciplinary action against the judge.
Where I live (not Sweden), the Judges' Code of Ethics forbids any personal contacts or economic associations that could cast any doubt on judge's impartiality while carrying out their duties. I'd say that membership in a lobbying organisation is uncomfortably close to the above.
In sweden there are usually several "judges".
The one at the chair is the "Judge" (educated at law) and the rest is lay assessor. But they have the same voting power (therefore they are all judges). The lay assessor should,could consult the judge about what the law says about a subject.
39 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 89.6 ms ] threadI mean, the judge is not just a member of a Swedish org campaigning for more strict copyright, he's on the board! Absolutely amazing, I can imagine him chuckling and rubbing his hands together when he had the opportunity to hear the case.
So really all an attorney can do is wait things out and then present it as an appeal after the trial.
Was that opportunity just a coincidence? or it was manipulated so that he would hear the case?
@TomofTTB: IANAL, but as far as I know, these kinds of conflicts of interest will cause retrials in most of western Europe.
No way. You look into these connections as soon as possible - it will help shape your defense - and, if the verdict favors your client, you shut up forever. OTOH, if the verdict doesn't favor your client, you go for a retrial and try to invalidate as much of the prosecution's evidence as possible. It's risky, because now everybody knows everybody's hand, but, in face of an unfavorable ruling, this seems to be the way to go. You should prepare some new evidence to clear your client.
Isn't this a free option? If it's enough to get the judge swapped isn't it enough to overturn a guilty verdict? They get an opportunity to try the case, the possibility of winning. Then they have an easy path to a retrial.
Being the victim of judicial corruption can't be that bad for their cause.
If I released it right away and replaced the judge, I won't have an ace up my sleeve if the judgement goes against my client.
It's pretty smart actually.
I think now, if they spin this correctly, PBay will have far more leverage for their main point - that the trial is a set up by the IFPI-industrial complex.
But now, to send people to jail, fully aware that he's affiliated with stakeholders in the case, that's just sickening.
Okay, swedish prisons for intellectual property offenders probably have a summer camp atmosphere to it, but that's not really the point. To take someones liberty should not be taken lightly.
Perhaps. But the climate won't help much ;-)
In all likelyhood, I think the outcome will have a lot to do with how media reacts to this. If they label the judge corrupt and fights for a retrial, the courts of appeal will have a hard time resisting.
I think the idea I was trying to push was that for this trial, the outcome in courts of appeal will have more to to with politics and media leverage than the legal code.
http://www.upphovsrattsforeningen.com/foreningen.asp
I don't really see that membership as a problem, unless the reality of the organization is something different from what is stated. The other organization is "Svenska Föreningen för Industriellt Rättsskydd" which has as its purpose to strengthen industrial control over copyright, patent and trademarks.
http://www.sfir.se/Verksamheten.html
I'd say that membership should have been enough for the judge to declare himself as having conflicts of interest, and ought to result in disciplinary action against the judge.