Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

Swedish appeals court rejects claim Pirate Bay judge was biased

25 June 2009 19:23 by Rich "vurbal" Fiscus | 6 comments

The judge who presided over the now infamous Pirate Bay trial was not biased according to a ruling from Sweden's Court of Appeals.

Defense lawyers alleged Judge Tomas Norstrom's membership in multiple organizations which advocate increasing the scope of copyright law should have disqualified him from hearing the Pirate Bay case. Although they were critical of Norstrom for failing to disclose these associations earlier, appellate court judges disagreed that there was any bias.

"We have reached the conclusion that we do not agree with the conflict of interest claim," said appeals court judge Anders Eka.

Christian Engstr�m of the Pirate Party, who was recently elected to represent Sweden in the European Parliament, was critical of the decision. He said "This is part of a pattern. It show that the Swedish legal system is no longer to be trusted when it comes to copyright cases. It's a travesty of justice quite simply."

An appeal of the guilty verdict is still ongoing, but it may be years before a final decision is reached.

Permalink to this article

The Pirate Bay's video sharing site is coming (28 June 2009)

Swedish court says Pirate Bay judge not biased (12 June 2009)

Pirate Bay judge handpicked and biased - appeal sent (29 May 2009)

Pirate Bay judge faces conflict of interest allegation (23 April 2009)

Pirate Bay founders file official appeal (20 April 2009)

Sweden's Pirate Party condemns Pirate Bay verdict as 'gross injustice' (17 April 2009)

« Previous news article
Consumers still not sold on Blu-ray

Next news article »
New Vista PC buyers to get free upgrade to Windows 7

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
beanos66 (Junior Member) 26 June 2009 1:45
a group of judges finds in favour of a judge... ...!big suprise! [ + quote]
jeff_2 (Newbie) 26 June 2009 7:45
this just doesn't make sense anymore, there must be somthing bigger going on here [ + quote]
SgtDavis (Newbie) 26 June 2009 16:06
*Originally posted by jeff_2:* this just doesn't make sense anymore, there must be somthing bigger going on here Being a judge has almost as much to do with politics as being a politician. The more and more these companies get shelled by piracy groups and individuals, the more the judges & other lawmakers are going to find themselves in the cross hairs. Looks to me like they took the safe option, even if their decision was BS. [ + quote]
Josipher (Junior Member) 26 June 2009 23:20
maybe its just me..but the last bit of the article kinda made me smile *Quote:* it may be years before a final decision is reached. good! let it take 5 years for all i care. as long as its still going the servers will continue working and for the meantime we can all be happy [ + quote]
xtago (Newbie) 27 June 2009 22:24
LoL, I find it quite funny. The people behind TPB got hit with a fine for helping people to pirtae files, which is a part of the copyright laws in countries. Now they can't hack having to pay a fine or the jail time now they are trying to sue for any reason, the idot's even showed the judge how to do the stuff as well, because they thought they were getting done for having pirate files on the server. Of caurse the appeal will have been chucked out because they need to prove they aren't helping people to pirate files. Whats happened for those who don't understand is that they have to prove people havn't been getting access to pirate files from the servers they own, which they are. [ + quote]
Jemborg (Member) 28 June 2009 13:48
*Originally posted by jeff_2:* this just doesn't make sense anymore, there must be somthing bigger going on here Ya think??? Its a lot easier being righteous than right. [ + quote] This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28 June 2009 13:48