Slashdot Mirror
"DVD-Jon" Demands Compensation
orzetto writes "Jon Lech Johansen, known as DVD-Jon, and aquitted in a trial in Norway, after being accused of infringement for making a GUI for DeCSS, is now demanding that Norwegian Oekokrim pay for all the time and money he has lost to the trial, claiming 150,000 NOK (about 17,500 euros)."
I think it's common sense that if you're a defendant and found not guilty that you shouldn't have to pay. Frankly, I'm surprised something like this doesn't exist already. Perhaps if the plaintiff had to pay ALL court costs if he/she lost there would be fewer nonsensical lawsuits.
IANAL, that's just my two cents.
This is not the sig line you are looking for... -- Old Jedi Sig Line Trick
Is that really all it cost him to defend himself or is that just all he's asking for in return? Did he manage to get some lawyers to take the case pro-bono (or partially pro-bono) to get the publicity or are lawyers just cheaper in Norway?
$22,000 is a nice chunk of change but it's a drop in the bucket compared to what this probably would have cost him in the United States....
Anyone have any more info on this?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I hope he prevails. Perhaps it will give other prosecutors pause, to think out their case. If you have a weak case and know you are going to have to pay all cases, you might decide to forego prosecution and use your resources on cases which aren't weak. This benefits the society as a whole.
If people continue to fight these lawsuits and counter-sue, rather than just settle, then these companies will be discouraged from these rages in the future because it will end up costing them more in dollars & negative PR than it's worth.
He didn't have to pay lawyer's fees, and from the sounds of it outside of having something like this looming over his head for years it's probably been a boon to him overall (he won't have to worry about finding work, for one thing.) It's probably a better time to count blessings than demand renumeration.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
"Are the free lawyers actually any good in Norway?" He got off, didn't he?
Yes, and every so often somebody will win a million bucks playing the lottery. That doesn't mean that the lottery is a good investment.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Right, I'm sure this esteemed organization woke up one day and said "You know what is threatening our great nation? DVD decryption."
Somehow I don't think so. I'm not claiming corruption, but I've a feeling someone gave them the idea that this would be a very good thing to go after.
So really, what you're saying is that "DVD Jon" deserved to be sued for trying to watch a DVD he bought, and deserves to pay for his defense even though a court has sided with him twice?
This case is not about stealing copyrighted works . It's about who owns the things that you buy.
The failed prosecution of DVD Jon demonstrates that Norway, at least, protects the rights of its citizens from corporate/government collusion to persecute. He might be due $20K, a decent return for a Norwegian 20 year old's part-time college job as inexpert witness in his own defense. But Jon's damages from their unmerited actions fall less on his wallet than on his spirit. The real damage was the threats to his liberty, arrest, denigration, disgrace and professional disenfranchisement. These years of undeserved defensive living can not be restored, and have no price.
In the US, there is a distinction between civil and criminal violations of law, and their remedies. While the vagaries of US history, and lawyerly perversions of principles of "justice" often assign "punitive damages" to perpetrators and award them to victims, criminal penalties are assigned to those who damage intangibles: public trust, individual liberty, principles of Justice itself. In DVD Jon's case, there is a great deal of that kind of damage, to Jon, and to his compatriots, and ripples to us, in other countries.
The remedy includes holding those behind these prosecutions liable for their actions in wrongfully prosecuting him. Moreover, if this kind of wrongful prosecution is found to be systemic, the judge ought to assign changes in the system. Otherwise the perpetrators will be free to attack Liberty without repercussions, and the rising tide of corporate attacks on human rights will pervade Norway. Combine corporate financial superiority with their liability immunity advantage, and it looks pretty bad for the humans. Unless Norwegians see themselves in DVD Jon's shoes, and get their country back on track.
--
make install -not war
Her case was based primarily on poor or non-existing evidence and character assasination (among other things, she likened Johansen to gang-bangers). She wasted Johansen's time, the judges' and jury's time, and taxpayer money. So yes, Johansen is in the right to seek compensation from Okokrim.
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
So really, what everyone here is saying, is that it's OK to crack proprietary code ("code must be free"), steal copyrighted works ("music must be free") and get away with it.
No. The Norwegian legal system is saying that that Jon Johansen's actions were legal. If you disagree with their conclusions (and want to do something other than whine about the attitudes of Slashdotters like yourself), you should explain your reasoning to the legislative body of the Norwegian government and the Motion Picture Association of America (which prompted this legal action.)
No, he wasn't. He was charged once, the lower court said he hadn't done any wrong and the Oekokrim (echonomic crime unit) appeled. It may not be the way things work in the US, but it's the way thigns work here - and work pretty damn good I might add. Both the defendant and the plaintiff may appeal if certain conditions are present.
There is a number of important differencies between the norwegian and the US system of justice. One of the most important ones to recall is that they are different; so don't scream up at the instance you hear something that's different from what you're used too - like the fact that lawyers paid by the state are pretty damn good.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
So really, what everyone here is saying, is that it's OK to crack proprietary code ("code must be free"), steal copyrighted works ("music must be free") and get away with it. Aperently most of you still live at home (like DVD Jon) and don't directly have to pay bills, except for maybe your stash and some Dew now and then.
No, what we're saying is that it's legal to reverse-engineer hardware and software for the purposes of interoperability and exercising your fair-use rights. In other words, it's perfectly legal to crack the CSS encryption on DVDs so that you can watch the DVDs that you legally purchased on your Linux computer, which after all these years still has no commercial DVD playing software.
We also recognize that there's a big difference between stealing (depriving someone of a physical product they own) and copyright infringement (making a digital copy of something, which doesn't deprive the owner of their copy nor does it deprive the copyright holder of any revenue if you otherwise wouldn't have purchased it). We also recognize that morally there is a big difference between downloading a few MP3s off the Internet (just for fun, to try out new bands, for albums that are not being produced anymore - which is no more immoral than borrowing a book or a CD from a friend) and wholesale mass-copying (people who burn 'pirated' CDs and sell them in the streets).
He didn't actually say what his reason for exemption was. But it was obviously a reasonable one as he didn't even have to discuss it in court.
If the law says there are exemptions to military service, and you fit the criteria, why is that un-heroic? What if someone has a disability that would make them ineligible but the military service records don't reflect that disability? Going to court would be a fair way to settle the dispute.
Because this is Norway. We generally don't sue for insane amounts - and such demands would be flat out denied by the court.
I'll be quite surprised if he actually gets as much as he has demanded. Especially since this has led to him getting a quite good job.
"Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
I think there should always be different standards for individuals and corporations. For instance, if Bono saw you selling illegally produced copies of "Achtung Baby" and he called you names and took the CDs, and you took him to court for theft, I think a judge would throw the case out. At least, Judge Judy would ;) But if someone took the RIAA to court for the same thing, they (the RIAA) should get penalized to the full extent of the law.
So if it's "Individual vs. Corp," then Ind. pays own fees if he loses, but Corp pays his fees if he wins, and Corp pays their own fees either way.
If it's "Corp vs. Corp" or "Ind vs. Ind," then loser pays the fees.
So things are biased in favor of the individual, but so many other things are biased in favor of the corporation, it works out alright. And that's the way it should be. I mean, I can't find anything wrong with this reasoning, and I've been thinking about this for a full 10 minutes or so.
c-hack.com |
If the purpose of the 9/11 attacks was to overthrow Constitutional government, I'd say that they were pretty damn effective.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
I think you are mistaking this. We aren't overlawyered, but simple over-litigious, necessitating the damn lawyers.
Yes, imagine someone who refuses to donate their person to the state just because the state asks! Why, that person should be made a slave or something! Oh, wait...
steal copyrighted works ("music must be free") and get away with it.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Who said anything about stealing? The purpose of DeCSS was originally, and has always been, to decode encrypted DVDs for the purpose of viewing them on platforms where no decoder exists (ie, Linux).
If you're going to claim that you somehow have the right to take away DeCSS because teenaged kiddies use it to pimp out the latest release of the matrix on kazaa, then its only fair that you also take away guns, cars, airplanes, knives, forks, baseball bats, golf clubs, fireplace pokers, and everything else that could conceivably be used in the comission of a murder.
If you're going to backpedal now and claim that copyright isn't anywhere on the same level as murder, then how about a world without printers, fax machines, scanners, and copiers?
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Now, since the court does not award insanely high awards, we have ambulance chasers and similar parasites at much, much lower level than in USA.
And yes, suing. I believe that the second most common threat an US citizen will give (after "I'll kill you!") is : "I'll sue you!". Beeing sued in USA is tantamount to personal financial ruin, so the mere threat of it might make one cave in. Just witness the US RIAA suing 13 old children, and harassing with impunity.
The US justice system is one very much fucked up system, so much that even lawyers that profit on it is concerned.