Slashdot Mirror
First Swede Convicted For File-Sharing Now Cleared
Caine writes, "A 29-year old Swede, who was the first to be convicted under last year's new file-sharing laws, has been cleared on appeal. The court of appeal did not consider the screen dumps provided by the Antipiracy Bureau enough evidence to be able to convict the man. Since the crime does not carry a high enough punishment under Swedish law to allow for a search of the defendant's house, this means it will be virtually impossible to prove file-sharing crimes in the future."
Technicalities like that always amuse me, especially when they work out in favour of "the little guy". We have a few laws like that here in Canada, and I hope they don't change.
I went to Upsalla (sp?) in Sweden on holiday a few years ago. The people were nice, the food was great, everywhere was clean and the women were attractive. Now I can also do all the filesharing I want to? I'm moving.
Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
You mean, despite all that time I spent in MS Paint doctoring screenshots of eMule so the title bar reads "Roy's Internets" and changing the files-in-progress to read "Roy's stealing stoled Metallica musics" and "Star Wars that Roy didn't pay moneys for," my work is now pointless? Damn, I'll never get those three minutes back, and will just have to find some other way to get Roy thrown in jail.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Bring it on....we'll smother the troops in 6 foot tall blondes.
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
You need evidence to convict someone of filesharing? I thought the big companies just pick a name out of the phone book, and then you're guilty even if you are dead, don't own a computer, can't spell "Limewire" and used to live atop Pike's Peak.
There is a common belief, especially in the US, that Sweden has a higher rate of suicide than other countries; this is actually a myth, as Sweden has an average suicide rate. The myth was probably started because the secular government of Sweden started to measure suicide statistics openly before other countries did. President Eisenhower saw this as a chance to promote his political ideology, and maintained that the statistics showed Sweden was the country of "free love, high taxes and suicide" (none of this was particularly true at the time). Also, the dark, relatively cold climate of Sweden in the winter has added fuel to this myth. (see "Suicide and Season" below).
Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_rates
"If it can be thought up, there exists at least one person trying to make it happen for real" - Phil
Learn Swedish for free
the more they over-think the plumbing the easier it is to stop up the pipe
This is a bit like "this only affects criminals/terrorists/paedophiles."
The usual rejoinder for which is, who defines criminality or terrorist behaviour? What stops that from becoming broader?
Considering some of the behaviour currently being flagged as suspicious by over-enthusiastic law-enforcement, not much, apparently.
Ditto copyright. DRM has already given much greater control over "copyrighted" material than copyright ever did, and the lobbying doesn't appear to be slowing down. How long before it becomes illegal to read anything without paying per word? It's nice to know there will be some countries where it won't be illegal to use your computer, or acquire information for yourself.
[ cruise / casual-tempest.net / xenogamous.com / transference.org / quantam sufficit ]
It makes no sense at all to you because you haven't been on the receiving end of an illegal search.
The body of case law that requires the prosecutor's office to ignore evidence that has been illegally obtained is designed to stop illegal police searches, period. If the police constantly get cases tossed out because they are illegally searching people, at some point, police management is going to start training the cop on the beat in how to properly and legally conduct a search, and the illegal searches will at least, get less common.
However, if your idea of being able to use the evidence anyway got a legal foothold, any idea of a search being illegal would quickly go out the door, and the police would be able, in practice, to search anyone, anywhere they wished.
Not the way to protect privacy, in my opinion.
As to your idea of punishing the cop that conducts the illegal search, well, that's another story. Rightly or wrongly, our justice system tends to protect the cop on the beat. Sometimes, I think it goes too far, but on balance, they ARE the ones putting their lives on the line for us, and some leeway should acrue for that sacrifice.
As to the punishment, that DOES happen, internally, and out of public view. Do you think that a cop that constantly wastes police time and resources AND prosecutorial time and resources by constantly conducting illegal searches that get cases tossed out DOESN'T get brought up short by his boss? I'll bet they do. Police agencies all over the world are constantly short of budget, personnel, and other resources. Prosecutors' offices are much the same. They can't just let these things go, because they waste time and money. Cops that search illegally on a regular basis get pulled off the street and get re-educated and retrained. Those that keep it up will eventually get canned.
I can understand your reasons for your rant - we all have gripes with the justice system; it's not even close to perfect. But I'd rather the system encourage the cops to obey the constitutional guarantees of freedom the Bill of Rights gives us than allow them to ignore them. Yes, criminals will get released. But most criminals aren't very smart - if the cops don't get them this time, they will the next.
"Money is truthful. If a man speaks of his honor, make him pay cash." Notebooks of Lazarus Long, Robert A. Heinlein