• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Pirate Bay's retrial just lost its sails.

Update: As a reader points out, defendant Peter Kolmisoppi Sunde has just tweeted: "The Pirate Bay will now file charges against Sweden for violation for Human Rights. More info later.
Click to expand...

LOL
 
No reason for a retrial, just because the judge belongs to a group that is against the defendants, will in no way impact his judgment about them.
 
Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
Originally posted by: Quiksilver
No retrial.

Now they just got to wait on the appeal.
Click to expand...

If that judge was unbiased then I'm a 18 year old girl with an amazing figure and more money than Bill Gates...
Click to expand...

Hey baby, want to jump in my white van? I got some candy.

Oops, you said 18 years old, damn! 🙁
 
It is pretty astounding.

Listen, I'm about as anti-pirating as you can get, within reason... I think that people that torrent songs, shows and movies *are* stealing, literally, it's theft. But I simply am flabbergasted that the judge was ruled to be un-biased. It's unbelievable. No justice system can be perfect, but that's pretty much an outright conspiracy against the defendants.
 
But Eka and the other judges concluded that simply endorsing the principles of copyright law was no grounds for disqualification in a trial; copyright was written into Swedish law, and judges can't be called "biased" simply because they support existing laws.
Click to expand...

This sounds pretty reasonable to me. Would you call a judge biased if he supported anti-theft laws and proceeded to put thieves behind bars?
 
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
But Eka and the other judges concluded that simply endorsing the principles of copyright law was no grounds for disqualification in a trial; copyright was written into Swedish law, and judges can't be called "biased" simply because they support existing laws.
Click to expand...

This sounds pretty reasonable to me. Would you call a judge biased if he supported anti-theft laws and proceeded to put thieves behind bars?
Click to expand...

If the judge was a member of the "amputate thief's hands club", I would think that they may be a bit impartial.
 
Originally posted by: Colt45
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
But Eka and the other judges concluded that simply endorsing the principles of copyright law was no grounds for disqualification in a trial; copyright was written into Swedish law, and judges can't be called "biased" simply because they support existing laws.
Click to expand...

This sounds pretty reasonable to me. Would you call a judge biased if he supported anti-theft laws and proceeded to put thieves behind bars?
Click to expand...

If the judge was a member of the "amputate thief's hands club", I would think that they may be a bit impartial.
Click to expand...

Actually, they weren't the thieves even by the strictest definition. They facilitated it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top