Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Lawyers Target Swedish Pirate, and His Unicorn

Posted by timothy on from the please-make-this-into-a-movie dept.

Chaonici writes "When a Swedish citizen identified as Ryan heard about US movie studio Liberty Media's plan to get copyright infringers to confess and voluntarily pay up, he couldn't stop himself from sending them a satirical email promising that he will pay 'from the pot of gold I got at the leprechaun at the end of the rainbow', regardless of scathing criticism of the studio from his unicorn. However, despite his location, the jesting nature of the email, and his insistence that he has never downloaded anything for which the studio is suing, Liberty Media's lawyers have taken the 'confession' seriously, and have issued a subpoena to Google for personal information related to Ryan's Gmail account. In a phone call, the legal team affirmed their determination to 'hunt him down, all the way to Sweden if need be.'"

181 comments

  1. Wise-ass by devxo · · Score: 0

    Well, that'll teach him to be a wise-ass. Seriously, it's probably the most stupid way to personally handle legal things, even if the almighty The Pirate Bay is doing it...

    1. Re:Wise-ass by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      They have/had a lawyer as "part of the team".

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    2. Re:Wise-ass by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 2

      Yeah, the guy who wrote these answers. Definitely the right person to take lessons from on how not to be a wise ass.

      --
      My first program:

      Hell Segmentation fault

    3. Re:Wise-ass by mirix · · Score: 1

      Yeah. The email is pretty retarded and childish.

      But, being in Sweden I can't see the company being able to do SFA to the kid.

      --
      Sent from my PDP-11
    4. Re:Wise-ass by Per+Wigren · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, but the lawyer naively thought that the law was going to be interpreted by the letter, the way it had always (officially) been done in modern day Sweden. They just underestimated the power of angry multinational mega-corporations and their lobbying/bribing/truth-twisting skills. The trial was very un-Swedish in many ways. TECHNICALLY they didn't break any Swedish laws and the lawyers approached it in a purely technocratical way. Usually that would had worked. Unfortunately, everything turned into messy discussions of intents, unproven figures of lost sales, attitudes and the like. This while there was MASSIVE pressure from very very strong international interests.

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    5. Re:Wise-ass by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, you could argue that thepiratebay itself and their way of running it is very un-Swedish.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    6. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm a Swede, but I think it's as much un-Swedish as it is un-. Thepirateby enables people to "steal", as much as the most well known forums for stolen things creates an underground market.

    7. Re:Wise-ass by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      Maybe. But I'm talking more about the not-giving-a-shit attitude of lawlessness. The crude blue-eyed naivety, though, that's very Swedish.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    8. Re:Wise-ass by lordholm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No one stole anything through pirate bay, they may have committed copyright infringement, but that is an entirely different thing.

      As a side note, the postal office enables people to send drugs and bombs to each other, they are still not held accountable, despite they knowingly do this. The "enabling" part is a faulty argument. However, they did definitely knowingly host links to the files, and did not act when made aware of such files; that is a proper argument that you can build on and probably argue in a court.

      --
      "Civis Europaeus sum!"
    9. Re:Wise-ass by lordholm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Confessions without proof are not valid in Sweden (you cannot for example do plea-bargains in the Swedish court system). It is well known that people make up confessions; for example the Swedish police has received the confessions of over a 100 people, who all confessed murdering the former prime minister Olof Palme. Confessions are only counted (but only marginally so) if there is also technical evidence and / or witnesses.

      The point is, if they trace the guys IP, it is doubtful that the Swedish court would grant a request to reveal the identity behind the IP address, you need to have at-least some bit of concrete technical evidence (e.g. logs identifying him in a bit-torrent swarm) to do that.

      --
      "Civis Europaeus sum!"
    10. Re:Wise-ass by Per+Wigren · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No one stole anything through pirate bay, they may have committed copyright infringement, but that is an entirely different thing.

      Not even that. The Pirate Bay is charged with "assisting copyright infringement of 24 albums, 9 movies and 4 games", nothing more, nothing less. According to the Swedish constitution that's the only thing that should be taken in consideration by the court. Anything else they may have done except assisting copyright infringement of those specified 24 albums, 9 movies and 4 games is completely off-topic in the trial. Also, all fines and damages compensation are required to be in line with proven losses and it's against the constitution to use general deterrence, to make examples of specific deviants.

      One thing we learned during the TPB trial and the debates of the new surveillance laws (FRA, IPRED, datalagringsdirektivet) is that the Swedish constitution isn't enforced at all. We have a "constitution deputation" but what they say are only to be regarded as "recommendations" and weighted with the opinions of other deputations. Previously this wasn't a problem because courts and law makers have pretty much followed the constitution anyway but the last few years it has become clear that we desperately need a constitutional court with full veto.

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    11. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unless they can rig a condom.

    12. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Though even that is a faulty argument as the prosecution do not actually have anyone who performed the crime which these people have allegedly been assisting to perform.

    13. Re:Wise-ass by jopsen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, that'll teach him...

      Not really... it's unlikely that they can prove anything with his gmail account...
      And the case will never hold in Sweden...

      The news here is that some US judge signed a subpoena based on that email... Some might argue that such as judge is somewhat stupid... To put it mildly... :)

    14. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was the king's role in Sweden to defend the constitution? Does he have any influence or formal role to play when the constitution is violated?

    15. Re:Wise-ass by Securityemo · · Score: 2

      He has no political power whatsoever. Not at all. Not even on paper. He's not even supposed to make political statements, if I remember correctly.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    16. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Was the king's role in Sweden to defend the constitution? Does he have any influence or formal role to play when the constitution is violated?

      No, he is constitutionally required to STFU when it comes to politics. If he as much as hints at a political message in a speech or when talking to a journalist, it raises a media ****storm.

    17. Re:Wise-ass by Per+Wigren · · Score: 2

      Though even that is a faulty argument as the prosecution do not actually have anyone who performed the crime which these people have allegedly been assisting to perform.

      Very true.

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    18. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You want me to believe that a fascist is enabling this widespread lawlessness? Isn't that oxymoronic?

    19. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we reckoned your mother was usable. and she was. very well. thank you.

    20. Re:Wise-ass by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      Not really. It was one of the common tactics of fascists in the last century: promote widespread criminal activity and then ride the public backlash on the law and order bandwagon into power.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    21. Re:Wise-ass by tehcyder · · Score: 0

      the right wing fascist multi-millionaire criminal carl lundstrom

      The thing is, being a right wing fascist multi-millionaire criminal is not seen as necessarily being a bad thing on slashdot, just so long as you are anti-copyright.

      If Adolf Hitler was here today/They'd send a limousine anyway.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    22. Re:Wise-ass by jimicus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The news here is that some US judge signed a subpoena based on that email... Some might argue that such as judge is somewhat stupid... To put it mildly... :)

      Look at it this way:

      • The email confesses to sharing files. It also goes on to talk about leprechauns and unicorns, but that's not relevant to the core of the issue here, which is "did this person share files or didn't they? Well, they say they did".
      • The sender claims to be in Sweden. Well, good for them. But there's no evidence either way, and wouldn't it be interesting if it later transpired they were lying? Particularly as you could then say to the court - assuming it ever gets that far - "Mr. Defendant, you claimed to be in Sweden and beyond US justice. Yet here you are standing in a US courtroom, and the IP address you were using is based in the US. Can you explain that for us, please?"
    23. Re:Wise-ass by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      The news here is that some US judge signed a subpoena based on that email... Some might argue that such as judge is somewhat stupid... To put it mildly... :)

      Look at it this way:

      • The email confesses to sharing files. It also goes on to talk about leprechauns and unicorns, but that's not relevant to the core of the issue here, which is "did this person share files or didn't they? Well, they say they did".
      • The sender claims to be in Sweden. Well, good for them. But there's no evidence either way, and wouldn't it be interesting if it later transpired they were lying? Particularly as you could then say to the court - assuming it ever gets that far - "Mr. Defendant, you claimed to be in Sweden and beyond US justice. Yet here you are standing in a US courtroom, and the IP address you were using is based in the US. Can you explain that for us, please?"

      Such a judge must also be frequently checking to make sure his refrigerator is running.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    24. Re:Wise-ass by GooberToo · · Score: 0

      You're completely right. The guy literally confessed. The whole first paragraph is a confession. In most courts around the world, the moron literally handed them probable cause to be investigated to the full extent the law allows. Not to mention he provided written proof of being non-apologetic which concurrently admitting he committed crime.

      This is really a non-story. Dip ship antagonizes lawyers and provides confession to feed them. Idiot is amazed lawyers pursue. I seriously hope this moron is sterile.

      At this point, it doesn't matter one bit if he did it or not because he more or less legally obligated them to pursue the case. And given that he literally handed them probable cause, its not reasonable for him to be able to demand attorney fees - well, not in most courts.

      Idiots like him are exactly why lawyers always tell everyone, don't say a word and keep your fucking mouth shut.

    25. Re:Wise-ass by Laurence0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      But then, so does people calling copyright infringement theft...

      I bet if people stop referring to copyright infringement as theft then the people who correct them when they do will stop too.

      Next up, Tehcyder criticises the police for investigating a murder as "They only do that every single fucking time there's a murder"

    26. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if he was anti-copyright.

    27. Re:Wise-ass by The+Moof · · Score: 1

      You should read the e-mail before claiming it's obviously satire and the judge is clueless. The parts about the leprechaun and unicorn aren't so much the satire that the summary claims, but more flaming in a (and this is a direct quote) "go fuck yourself" sort of way.

    28. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think then that they could point out that unless they believe the unicorn and leprechaun gold are real, that the letter contains no element of truth outside of the point being debated (the confession to downloading) thus why do they assume that that element has any truth to it?

    29. Re:Wise-ass by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My first question, if I were this guy's lawyer, would be, "Do you believe this man shared files based solely upon his email?"

      If the answer is "Yes", then I would say, "That would indicate that you also believe he owns unicorns, talks to leprechauns with pots of gold at the end of rainbows based upon your same assumptions."

      If the answer was "No", then I would ask, "Then what are we doing here?"

      Make them look as stupid as possible.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    30. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So basically you are saying that the beliveability of the person writing the letter is zero, so we should assume that the confession part is true and spend thousands of dollars trying to figure out what parts of the e-mail is true and which are false (we don't know for sure that any part is true at this stage, but we do know that some parts are lies). Also we don't even know that any files have been pirated.

      S-M-R-T

    31. Re:Wise-ass by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      This is really a non-story. Dip ship antagonizes lawyers and provides confession to feed them. Idiot is amazed lawyers pursue.

      I think the story is that the justice system is sufficiently wrongheaded as to allow them to.

      Well, really the problem is that we have the best justice money can buy. We give the court all these powers to issue subpoenas and force people to defend themselves against unproven allegations and the thing we seem to forget is that forcing the accused to defend himself itself is orders of magnitude greater punishment than that of the alleged harm, so that even if you win, you lose -- and therefore that simply by conducting the proceedings it works an injustice.

      In fact, normally the justice system has a bunch of rules to prevent this sort of thing. You can't get into federal court for most claims unless the amount in controversy is over $75,000. State courts send disputes over small amounts to small claims court which limits litigation costs in many ways. And that's exactly where all of this P2P copyright stuff should be, except that it ends up in federal court because it's a federal law and lawyers are abusing the statutory damage amounts to threaten everybody with bankruptcy if they don't settle for an amount which is still two or three orders of magnitude more than any reasonable estimate of the actual damages.

    32. Re:Wise-ass by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      It's funny because John Stewart and Stephen Colbert are pretty much nothing but professional wise-asses, and yet they seem to be celebrated for such actions. Quite frankly, I consider wise-asses to be some of the foremost defenders of civil liberties. Satire is their sword. Humor is their bow. The First Amendment (or equivalent in whatever country they exist in) is supposed to be their armor.

      --
      Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
    33. Re:Wise-ass by plopez · · Score: 1

      True.I was on a jury once and a guy got pulled over for having a few beers in him. His BAC wasn't high enough to warrant immediate guilt so it went to us, the jury. His friend came in from out of state to help him move and they had had a few beers at the bar. The friend went to the witness stand as a defense witness to give testimony. The exchange between the attorney, witness, and judge went sort of like this:

      Attorney: And why did you travel all this way to see Mr. Smith.

      Witness: He had just graduated and got a job so we decided to help him move by coming down to kidnap him....

      Judge : Mr. Jones, you keep your smart remarks to yourself, you are in a court of law and will answer the question directly!

      The look on the judges face was both annoyed and concerned. The upshot is that in a legal record you can't see the body language or the smirk on the witness' face. So in the legal record it looked like he was admitting to a serious felony under oath. The judge made sure that the legal record showed it was a case of a stupid dude making a lame joke and by doing so may have saved him trouble in the future.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    34. Re:Wise-ass by Machtyn · · Score: 1

      Can you explain that for us, please?

      Certainly, easily done. I claimed that I was in Sweden, yet here I am. The letter's statement is a lie. It also stated I would pay with the pot of gold I procurred from my leprechaun. The letter's statement is a lie. It also stated that my unicorn gave the company scathing criticisms. The letter's statement is a lie. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume the entire letter was a lie, including the bit where it stated that I confessed to sharing files.

    35. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since he is in Sweden the confession means nothing without proof..

    36. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The news here is that some US judge signed a subpoena based on that email... Some might argue that such as judge is somewhat stupid... To put it mildly... :)"

      you are partially correct ... the judge only saw the sentence with the confession, no unicorns, no leprechauns, no satire. etc

      typical hollywood shysterism!

    37. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not relevant. They had a reasonable expectation to the traditional protections of the law of the land.

    38. Re:Wise-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the second portion of his e-mail admits that hes not to be taken seriously. Accepting a "confession" like this is like arresting a random drunk guy on the street because he "confessed" to assassinating JFK just before "confessing" to being brainwashed by aliens.

    39. Re:Wise-ass by scubamage · · Score: 1

      I have to disagree. I recently performed an experiement on TPB wherein I uploaded a zero'd out file, titled the same as a main stream movie. I also uploaded a similar file in a passworded zip file. While seeding, almost immediately after getting to 1 full download I suddenly found the torrent removed from TPB, and my account banned. I repeated this 3 times (at which i ran out of IP's to use). To this day i cannot create an account using my home IP because its static. If they're somehow checking the material to ensure its genuine, it shoots a hole in the defense that they "aren't responsible for what gets put up." They're at least encouraging copyright infringement. I'd encourage you to give it a shot, it was kind of disheartening for me because I always found TPB to be kind of an inspiration. Guess there's really no more heroes.

    40. Re:Wise-ass by lordholm · · Score: 2

      If you read what I said, you actually agree with me... ;)

      --
      "Civis Europaeus sum!"
    41. Re:Wise-ass by scubamage · · Score: 1

      Ack, so I did! I owe you a coke :)

    42. Re:Wise-ass by houghi · · Score: 1

      The defense will put so much lawyer power into action that they could make the judge neglect the word not in "I did not download copyrighted material."

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  2. That is incredibly stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... but I am completely unsurprised.

  3. Sweden is not a state of USA by fredr1k · · Score: 2

    The lawyers forget that Sweden is not a state of USA. The kid is safe while the lawyers make an ass of them selves. Sweden has its own laws :) They might aswell try to sue /dev/null

    --
    "Never EVER mess with a jumper you don't know about, even if it's labeled 'sex and free beer'." - Dave Haynie
    1. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      They might have ulterior motives for making this sort of statement, even if they know it's futile. Leading the client on for more pay, temporary publicity for their company, etc.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    2. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      Note to self: when pulling a similar stunt, claim to be from a fake country, like Lavatruria, Pays-Bonguebongue, or Belgium.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by rvw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The lawyers forget that Sweden is not a state of USA./quote>

      Here in Europe we are not sure about that anymore.

    4. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Neither are we here in Sweden.

      Anyhow. US debt is high, Nato and EU is considering a no-flight zone over Libya. So with our new alliance and leaders I question myself why we don't send any JAS-39 Gryphons there?

      Could be great advertisement of the planes to other nations as well.

    5. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by jimicus · · Score: 1

      The lawyers forget that Sweden is not a state of USA. The kid is safe while the lawyers make an ass of them selves. Sweden has its own laws :) They might aswell try to sue /dev/null

      It isn't. Which means he almost certainly won't defend himself, and will be ordered to pay up.

      I can't see him paying up, and for one person and $1000 it's hardly worth going to the trouble they did with the Pirate Bay people. But - and IANAL - I wonder if this would pose a problem at immigration if he ever chooses to visit the US? Of course, he may take the view "why on Earth would I ever want to visit the US?" but the US lawyers don't know that.

    6. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get out of here with your logic and knowledge!

      Sweden is a part of the USA world state, a nation of our grand planet, owned by Obama.
      And don't you forget it Sweden!

      Resistance is futile. You will convert to our ways, God commands it.

    7. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah just asked the guys at piratebay or julian assange, Sweden is completely not a state of the USA. OF course not. Sweden would never roll on to its back and wag its tail like the little bitch she is... :P

      yeah im norwegian :D

    8. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by miffo.swe · · Score: 2

      Im a Swede and wondering more and more if i should just pack it up and leave for Norway.

      --
      HTTP/1.1 400
    9. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I regard everyone who has visited the US on tourism or business in the past 6 years (I've drawn the line at the day biometric information is collected at immigration points for your particular country) as a traitor to freedom and, poignantly, anti-American.

      I've given up my business interests in the US out of principle, with no compensation. It caused me temporary hardship but I picked myself up and carried on. The only thing which has depressed me is that so few other people are prepared to just say no, even if it also means difficulties for them. People today are mewling robots marching in lockstep, too afraid to step out of line, regroup and stand up for what is right. Come on, men! Be proud of your principles!

    10. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by digitig · · Score: 1

      Gryphons would scare the unicorns.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    11. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by aliquis · · Score: 1

      lol, aren't they on the same side in Narnia? ;D

      http://narnia.wikia.com/wiki/Gryphon
      http://narnia.wikia.com/wiki/Unicorn

      ""not even a king would think of riding a unicorn except in great need." They are almost always loyal to Aslan, and are known to be very wise."

      Almost always? Maybe not then, damn unicorns, can't be trusted! ;D

    12. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think pretty much every intelligent being outside the US would think that way; those inside it are thinking about how to get out.

    13. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      People today are mewling robots...

      Kittens mewl. Robots might squeak, rattle, hum, or whatever but mewling strikes me as distinctly un-robotlike.

      Perhaps a white hat grammar nazi can settle this. :)

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    14. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      Nah, go for Finland instead. Isn't Norway even more USA-friendly?

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    15. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly right. They'll laugh this out of the courts just like they did the unlawful charges against The Pirate B-- Wait, hold on. BRB, my irony detector is going off.

    16. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I regard everyone who has visited the US on tourism or business in the past 6 years (I've drawn the line at the day biometric information is collected at immigration points for your particular country) as a traitor to freedom and, poignantly, anti-American.

      Why not go back to when they introduced passports? I don't see he big difference between having to have an official identity document to visit a country, and their taking your fucking fingerprints.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    17. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Latveria's fun for that. If they somehow find it, they face the wrath of DOOM! CURSE YOU RICHARDS!

    18. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different purposes and applications.

      A passport initially confirmed that you were from a friendly country, possibly with authorisation to benefit from particular services of the country.

      Then, by actually recording information on the (electronic) passport, the passport is used to trace your entry and exit from the country. This is primarily used to enforce previous paragraph, but I quite understand the argument that it's a step too far.

      With fingerprints, they're simply collecting irrelevant information which may be used against you anywhere for anything whatever.

    19. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by TheLink · · Score: 1

      The lawyers forget that Sweden is not a state of USA

      Is that even relevant to them?

      1) They still get paid right?
      2) The US laws apply if the silly swedish guy (and his unicorn) ever ends up in the US territory[1]. So there is still an effect. Go ask Dmitry Sklyarov.

      [1] You don't even have to be "rendered". You could be flying to/from Canada and stuff happens and your plane has to land in USA (this has happened to someone I know - the US immigration bunch even asked him stupid questions like why he didn't have a valid US visa - he wasn't intending to go to the US in the first place).

      --
    20. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      Aaron Barr had an ulterior motive for confronting Anonymous and we all know how that turned out.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    21. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans are roboticised kittens.

    22. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by orient · · Score: 1

      The lawyers forget that Sweden is not a state of USA. The kid is safe while the lawyers make an ass of them selves. Sweden has its own laws :) They might aswell try to sue /dev/null

      You sure? Tell that to Assange.

      --
      Laudele lor desigur m-ar mahni peste masura.
    23. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by kanguro · · Score: 0

      Thor is going to put Mjolnir up those lawyer's as*

    24. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by houghi · · Score: 1

      Belgium? You will be the wrath of our government. Oh wait. Never mind. (Well, and what is one less? We have plenty of them to go around.)

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    25. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by miffo.swe · · Score: 1

      Finland has been in my mind a couple of times actually. I love finland and i would feel pretty at home i think.

      --
      HTTP/1.1 400
    26. Re:Sweden is not a state of USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah just asked the guys at piratebay or julian assange, Sweden is completely not a state of the USA. OF course not. Sweden would never roll on to its back and wag its tail like the little bitch she is... :P

      yeah im norwegian :D

      I think the Julan Assange case is proof that Sweden isn't a state of USA.

      Julian Assange would not have been prosecuted for rape in most (all?) states of USA (he would in some other English speaking countries like UK and New Zealand though). In USA (I believe), there is no possibility to get help from authorities to find someone you suspect could have infected you with a venereal disease and force her/him to test herself/himself, at last not until you yourself test possitive. In Sweden you can get that help if someone previously refused to do a test, or can't be contacted (Assange first refused, then changed his phone card so the girls couldn't reach him). In this case, they also suspected that he had deliberately broken the condoms(*), twice (the same thing happened to both of them), as well as put his unsheated penis in one of the girls while she was sleeping. Who knows who many other he could have had unprotected sex with, voluntarily or not, with that kind of irresponsible behaviour. There have also been three high-profile cases where HIV infected have deliberately tried to spread their disease to as many as possible in Sweden (two of them was, coincidently?, born and raised in USA and they also tried to spread HIV in other countries, including their birth country). No wonder the girls got worried.

      The girls didn't accuse Assange of rape, they just wanted him to be tested for venereal diseases (because it gets harder or impossible to treat some of these diseases when it has gone so far that the recently infected test positive). Authorities in Sweden provide help in such cases. When one of the parties refuse to "do the right thing", you can go to the police and ask for help. Once the police heard what happened, they concluded that it was possible rape (similar laws apply in at least UK, Norway, Finland, Iceland, New Zealand and Germany too, so it is not a "Swedish thing"). That someone voluntarily want to give you fellatio with a condom, don't automatically give you right to have any sex you want with them (the deal was also that Assange would perform cunnilingus with a dam as protection in at least one of the cases, he didn't fulfil that part, he went asleep instead, one of them described it as "the worst sex I have ever had" to a friend the day after).

      (*) Swedish condoms are not not those jokes of condoms that you use in USA (or UK). They are thinner, but much stronger (you cant bite a hole in them without using excessive force), the same type of condoms are used in Japan and Korea (but of different size and shape, of course ;). Condoms is even used by most married people(**) in Sweden (when they don't want children), most women and girls in Sweden don't want to use other contraceptives because of the unpleasant side effects (yes, "the pill" give most women unpleasant side effects, it is just that women in other countries are more subservient and don't even think of refusing to use them) and have negative long term effects on health.

      (**) But then they are not needed for oral sex. I love to point out that Swedes within a pair relationship are by far the most faithful in Europe (yes, there are statistics, in Italy and France almost everybody cheat). Did your German or US made "Swedish" porn claim otherwise, well they are FANTASIES about Swedes, with very little in common with reality (except that we do have a lot more and longer sex then in other countries (yes, there are statistics, I would also guess that our sex is steamier and more satisfying for both involved) and have several sexual partners before we settle down). Most Swedes that form a new relationship also test themselves for venereal disease before they have any unprotected sex, even oral sex.

  4. answer : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    countersue for frivolous lawsuit....

  5. First, kill all the laywers by Compaqt · · Score: 1

    Do lawyers come up with with the stupidest things and portray themselves as educated idiots because of the lack of oxygen caused by too-tight neckties, or is it some other reason?

    --
    I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    1. Re:First, kill all the laywers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Here's their train of thoughts:
      How dare some insignificant worm mock us fancy, bigshot corporate lawyers? That peasant should know his place! Something has to be done to show the cattle who's boss!

    2. Re:First, kill all the laywers by SudoGhost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually this is their train of thought: If someone messes with us or tries to interfere with us, then let's make it as expensive, time consuming, and difficult for them as possible, and make knowledge of our actions public as possible, to set an example.

    3. Re:First, kill all the laywers by MareLooke · · Score: 1

      Guess someone should explain to those lawyers that unlike in the US you can't bankrupt someone just by suing them without anything resembling a case in most of Europe, you actually have to win said case to get anything out of it. In the worst case they waste some of his time, and then he can write a book about the entire thing and get rich off of the idiots ;-)

    4. Re:First, kill all the laywers by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Here's their train of thoughts: How dare some insignificant worm mock us fancy, bigshot corporate lawyers? That peasant should know his place! Something has to be done to show the cattle who's boss!

      Of maybe bigshot lawyers are thinking, "yippee, here's a way to generate 10 billable hours!". The letter is quite obviously satirical. Even if the person were in the jurisdiction required, his "confession" would be laughed out of court.

    5. Re:First, kill all the laywers by uffe_nordholm · · Score: 1

      And in Sweden in particular, you yourself can go bankrupt by suing someone: in a civil case (copyright infringement is a civil matter, as opposed to criminal) the loser pays _all_ attorneys/lawyers involved. On top of that, if you have had to get any expert witnesses the loser will have to pay them as well. Granted, while the case is under progress in court, both parties pay their own costs, but the loser is forced to pay the winner when the matter is settled.

    6. Re:First, kill all the laywers by advocate_one · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Granted, while the case is under progress in court, both parties pay their own costs,/blockquote>

      so basically speaking, you can still be bankrupted by a multi-national corporation as they drag the case out until you run out of money...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    7. Re:First, kill all the laywers by evanism · · Score: 1

      You just outlined the generic American company line of thought.

      --
      Just bought a new quantum computer, but I'm uncertain how it works.
    8. Re:First, kill all the laywers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do lawyers come up with with the stupidest things and portray themselves as educated idiots because of the lack of oxygen caused by too-tight neckties, or is it some other reason?

      These lawyers don't care if they win or loose. When they win they may get a small bonus of a couple hundred bucks per average $5000 settlement, but their main goal here is billable hours to their client.

      Since they have no clear targets or goal other then to hunt down 'pirates' they sue as many people as possible and bill for time. So sue 10,000 John and Jane Doe's and that's billed probably at least an hour per case average, win or loose. Most large law firms in the United States bill between $200 and $1,000 per hour for their lawyers' time.

      So who's the real idiot here?

    9. Re:First, kill all the laywers by Rysc · · Score: 1

      And how is this different from the USA? If you can't afford to pay your lawyer long enough to win the case then you'll still go broke. If you don't have a lawyer chances are you make some legal fumbles that make you lose when you could have won.

      --
      I want my Cowboyneal
    10. Re:First, kill all the laywers by cbope · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Exactly. Here in the EU, they would actually have to have a valid case before anything will happen. You can't go around suing people like in the US without a strong case to take it to trial. This is a major reason why the US courts are jam-full of frivolous and baseless cases today. The problem is, they often go to trial before there is any real evidence of a crime.

      This is exactly why I prefer a letter-of-the-law system like we have in Finland. There is little or no "interpretation". Laws are enforced as written and laws are written so that the average educated adult can understand them without hiring a lawyer to "interpret" them.

    11. Re:First, kill all the laywers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just outlined the generic American company line of thought.

      And drug cartels - don't forget the cartels.

    12. Re:First, kill all the laywers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So who's the real idiot here?

      Those still buying movies and music. They are the ones fueling this insanity.

    13. Re:First, kill all the laywers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was under the impression that the generic American company line of thought is:

      "We are going to do X. X may be anything short of actually going out into the streets and randomly shooting people. We are going to continue to do X until such time as the highest court we're prepared to pay for says we cannot do X.

      We shall seek no advice as to whether or not we can do X - even when we start to receive paperwork summoning us to court - because if that advice said "no you can't", we'd have torn a whacking great hole in any defence we might have.

      We shall pay no heed of lower courts telling us we cannot do X. If they say that, we shall file an appeal immediately and continue to do X."

    14. Re:First, kill all the laywers by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

      This is exactly why I prefer a letter-of-the-law system like we have in Finland. There is little or no "interpretation". Laws are enforced as written and laws are written so that the average educated adult can understand them without hiring a lawyer to "interpret" them.

      Unfortunately, you have to know Finnish.

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    15. Re:First, kill all the laywers by spyfrog · · Score: 1

      Sadly the Pirate Bay case proves that this doesn't hold true in Sweden any more. Apparently you can loose a trial just because important Americans think you should, no matter what the law says.

    16. Re:First, kill all the laywers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Letter-of-the-law system is really emphasized only for criminal cases. Outside the criminal law there are room for interpretation, especially as the EU justice starts to influence increasingly to the national courts and laws around the EU. That said, even for the criminal law the influence of EU level collaboration and distribution of values are influencing national criminal laws on the practical and philosophical levels. This has already lead to "unjust" criminal legislation for example in the anti-terrorism laws witch are based on foreign philosophies of justice and punishment.

      The understandability of law is certainly diminished when references to the EU or other international law is made. In my opinion, any law should be written in the "selkokieli" (Plain English equivalent), although reading of such language might be infuriatingly slow when it comes to understanding a more complex circumstance.

  6. meanwhile in sweden by Torvac · · Score: 1

    in sweden
    the US lawyer problem can only be solved with shotguns. making lawsuits and money out nothing ...

  7. Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by no+known+priors · · Score: 1

    First, I would like to say that this is a clear case of the cloud being the wrong place to store your data. Especially if the cloud-based service is located in the USA. From the (2nd) article:

    “Discovery (evidence gathering) allows for the acquisition of literally anything relevant to the suit as long as it is not protected by some kind of privilege,” we were told. “It is often a wake-up call to people when they learn that they likely do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in e-mails or information stored on a third-party server.”

    Secondly, to the people who think this guy is an idiot for sending such an email, well aren't you just a bundle of fun. At most it's trolling (assuming the article is all true), and you don't expect the lawyers to start asking for personal data because of trolling. (I'm going to shoot that president, and the vice-president of the United States with my ak47.)
    Third, the lawyers are going to get paid regardless. So what do they care if this person is in Sweden or some other place?

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. The maximum is 120 characters.
    1. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, that's the worst trolling I've seen in a long time, proper trolling is subtle, it's not trolling if you walk in to a room with a marching band a neaon sign proclaiming that "THIS IS A TROLL LOL". This is some moron who thinks he's clever and playing with fire, only to get burned as a result.

      Second, "(I'm going to shoot that president, and the vice-president of the United States with my ak47.)" isn't trolling either, it's a death threat, and you can bet your bottom dollar you're going to be savagely beaten with the PWN-stick, just like Ryan S.

    2. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      Fail. You have to lead him on a bit more, perhaps with garish examples of frivolous lawsuits and paranoid police actions before you can make him doubt for a moment that he's not going to gitmo for posing sarcastic death threats.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    3. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by no+known+priors · · Score: 1

      Lol, when the yanks invade the country I'm currently in (again), maybe they'll capture me and harass me over threatening their poor defenseless president on Slashdot. Or, maybe, they've got better things to do with their time. You've just been trolled sucker.

      In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response

      And, if the individual concerned is in Sweden, they hardly got burned did they? Sure they might not be able to visit the States (neither can I, oh noes), but that's hardly a problem for most of the world. Basically, the lawyers win, and the company who has to pay them loses. Everyone else is about the same.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. The maximum is 120 characters.
    4. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by jimicus · · Score: 2

      and you don't expect the lawyers to start asking for personal data because of trolling. (I'm going to shoot that president, and the vice-president of the United States with my ak47.)

      The idea that a single off-the-cuff comment is hardly going to lead to all sorts of trouble coming down on you is an interesting view to take, however ITYF it's not shared by the majority of those in positions of authority.

    5. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fourth, you spelled "moron" wrong - which means most of the /. crowd didn't bother to read the rest of what you wrote.

    6. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      savagely beaten with the PWN-stick

      The correct terminology in this situation is "getting v&"

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    7. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by jittles · · Score: 1

      Saying that you are going to cause physical harm to the POTUS is actually a crime here, whether you intend to do so or not. I don't know whether you are from the US, but that kind of stuff does get investigated on a regular basis.

    8. Re:Moranic. Of the company paying the lawyers. by Vegemeister · · Score: 1

      Proper trolling is successful. Any other properties it may have are entirely incidental.

  8. haaa ha ha by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Insightful

    PWNED. OK, this is so funny :)

    No, really, I can't stop LOLing, it's insane.

    What??? You have never seen a fool teasing a dog or something else he shouldn't have and then being bitten by it?

    Come oooooon, this is exactly like that.

    --
    You can't handle the truth.
    1. Re:haaa ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like your analogy. A rabid dog that bites people is usually put down.

    2. Re:haaa ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Except the dog is in an entirely different country.

    3. Re:haaa ha ha by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      I think it's more like a rabid fool, than a rabid dog. Normally, you tease something to get a rise out of it.

      --
      You can't handle the truth.
    4. Re:haaa ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, too bad we can't have this dog put down like it should have been a LONG time ago.
      Damn immortal devil dog just won't die.

  9. Holy Hooves, Batman! by Grapplebeam · · Score: 5, Funny

    They have UNICORNS in Sweden?!

    --
    There is no -1 Disagree.
    1. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by Securityemo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes. And they're fucking vicious, let me tell you. You think that horn is for decoration? It's a significant contributor to the shortage of wolves in the region. There's been attempts at planting out dire wolves, but the reindeer-holding sámi population started complaining about thinning herds...

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    2. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by aliquis · · Score: 3, Informative

      They have UNICORNS in Sweden?!

      Yeah, and we ride them listening to Erasure.

      http://games.adultswim.com/robot-unicorn-attack-twitchy-online-game.html

    3. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by Kvasio · · Score: 3, Funny

      They have UNICORNS in Sweden?!

      and virgins!

      Oh wait, Julian was there ...

    4. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      Or Snoopy Poopy Poop Dog or the enema man.

    5. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. And they're fucking vicious, let me tell you. You think that horn is for decoration? It's a significant contributor to the shortage of wolves in the region. There's been attempts at planting out dire wolves, but the reindeer-holding sámi population started complaining about thinning herds...

      In the USA our unicorns have TWO horns. And Kevin Costner dances with our wolves.

    6. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sheesh, yes.

    7. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Unicorns? Who cares about the Unicorns? There are vicious little Irish leprechauns hording pots of gold in Sweden and this Ryan fellow knows how to catch one! Christ with the price of Gold I'm planning a we little trip to Sweden to beat this secret out of Ryan.

    8. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For Sweden to have any virgins it would also require it to not have any men. But half of ABBA were men; therefore, Sweden does not have virgins.

    9. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Huh? [/self wakes up a bit]

      So, Michael (?) Ryan, Boss of the much-maligned country-airport-to-rural-airport airline "Ryan Air", has found out how to milk leprechauns for their gold.

      I'm not sure if I should be worried or excited.

      Does unicorn shit work for fuelling airplanes?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    10. Re:Holy Hooves, Batman! by wondafucka · · Score: 1

      You probably just used the wrong form of its/it's or their/they're/there. Please double check, before I have an aneurysm

      Offtopic, but you've probably never heard of Neutral Possessive. "it's", as in "The tidal wave and it's destruction were watched throughout the world". Now I know you're saying that this does not exist in the English language, but language is open source and dynamic. Any opinion against this rule change is bigoted against inanimate objects. Or in the case of the tidal wave, animated objects without cognitive abilities; or taken further, water based disaster events not named by a scientific body such as a hurricane or typhoon.

      --
      postmodernsideshow.com
  10. I bet the lawyers simply figure this will... by Haydn · · Score: 1

    increase their billable hours.

  11. Crap by EdIII · · Score: 4, Funny

    So, BitTorrent users, have you downloaded any Liberty Media movies? If so the company says it is time to hand yourselves in. From 8th February for 14 days, the kind folk at Liberty are offering an amnesty.

    I have downloaded a lot of porn. A lot. I'm fairly certain that I may have represented a few percentage points of the entire bandwidth used by porn in a single day.

    That being said, I have no idea if I downloaded anything from Liberty Media. In the interests of providing amnesty I think it would behoove them to put up a public website with examples of their copyrighted works. Not the whole things of course, but just small groups of shots. Perhaps the ones that made the most money for them, those being the ones most likely to be pirated.

    1. Re:Crap by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I have downloaded a lot of porn. A lot. I'm fairly certain that I may have represented a few percentage points of the entire bandwidth used by porn in a single day.

      Ha, that's nothing. I once downloaded all the porn on the internet in one day. Mind you, this was back in 1970 and it fit on a floppy disc.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:Crap by EdgeCreeper · · Score: 1

      Was it the standard test image used for image processing algorithms?

  12. they really don't have any real gigs.. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    these law guys certainly could use some real gigs. that's one problem, law firms being so bad that they get dependant on one trolling client with POTENTIAL income flow some time later. it worked so well for the other law firms..

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:they really don't have any real gigs.. by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      and it seems to me that liberty media focuses more on relicensing media instead of creating it? so if I rent a movie from somewhere can I start sending subpoenas to people who downloaded that movie?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:they really don't have any real gigs.. by MareLooke · · Score: 1

      Yeah they really need to get laid, or watch some porn...

  13. Not much of a story by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

    Lawyers might just think the kid is from Sweden, hoping he's an American lying about his physical whereabouts to prevent them from even asking questions.

    In any event, if they just throw the first sentence of that confession in front of a judge:

    "I have been sharing a whole load of your files... on every torrent site like Purena, Empornium, Kickasstorrents etc"

    And it'd be at the very least enough to cause an American major headaches.

    Assuming the kid really does live in Sweden though, American courts don't have jurisdiction. He can just kinda've ignore them. Might get in his way of ever coming to the United States for a job or vacation or whatever, but that's about it.

    1. Re:Not much of a story by BarefootClown · · Score: 1

      Assuming the kid really does live in Sweden though, American courts don't have jurisdiction.

      Not necessarily. A court may be able to exercise long-arm jurisdiction under the "minimum contacts" rule--when Ryan went out of his way to make contact with Liberty Media, his actions were clearly directed to the forum state (wherever Liberty Media is based). As such, he may have subjected himself to that state's jurisdiction, at least with regard to this matter (this definitely wouldn't be enough to subject him to general jurisdiction, that is, he couldn't be sued for just anything in that state).'

      Jurisdiction can be complicated and ugly; we spent a full semester on just that in Civ Pro I (Civ Pro II covers venue, the Erie doctrine, pleadings, and more) because there's just that much to cover.

      --

      "Make it ten--I am only a poor corrupt official."
      --Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains), Casablanca

    2. Re:Not much of a story by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      He may well be sued in a US court, and they may even win; but what does it matter, so long as he's in Sweden? Any verdict would be unenforceable.

  14. The Streisand effect, but different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These lawyers appear not to be familiar with the Net - I suspect their email servers are already groaning under a gazillion more "confessions", with the next step some site or organisation offering a reward for the funniest one. Whoever is in charge of PR is probably hiding in a closet with a bottle of booze already..

  15. New gmail account + Tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Don't be stupid folks. If you're gonna do stuff like this,
    a) have a common version of a Linux Live-CD running
    b) use Tor for all access.
    c) setup a new gmail account.
    d) Let the unicorn speak to anyone you like using that gmail account over Tor **always**

    If you slip even once and forget Tor or use your normal OS - even under Tor - you may be discovered.

    1. Re:New gmail account + Tor by Securityemo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also, tor transparent proxy support FTW. Add:

      AutomapHostsOnResolve 1
      TransPort 9040
      DNSPort 5300

      to torrc, and then:

      sudo iptables -A OUTPUT -t nat -p tcp ! -d 127.0.0.1 -m owner ! --uid-owner tor -j REDIRECT --to-ports 9040
      sudo iptables -A OUTPUT -t nat -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -m owner ! --uid-owner tor -j REDIRECT --to-ports 5300
      sudo iptables -A OUTPUT -t filter ! -d 127.0.0.1 -m owner ! --uid-owner tor -j DROP

      and then just add 127.0.0.1 as nameserver in /etc/resolv.conf. There where instructions for this on the tor wiki, but it didn't work right. Doing it this way also filters all traffic for all users except tor, and allows you to use tor without sudo. These rules also assume that you don't have a lan, otherwise just add exceptions for 192.168.0.0/32, etc.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    2. Re:New gmail account + Tor by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Don't be stupid folks. If you're gonna do stuff like this,
      a) have a common version of a Linux Live-CD running
      b) use Tor for all access.
      c) setup a new gmail account.
      d) Let the unicorn speak to anyone you like using that gmail account over Tor **always**

      If you slip even once and forget Tor or use your normal OS - even under Tor - you may be discovered.

      Actually, when you put it like that I'm surprised nobody's developed a version of Bittorrent with Tor-like functionality already built in.

    3. Re:New gmail account + Tor by Securityemo · · Score: 3, Informative

      To clarify, the above redirects all outgoing TCP connections and DNS resolves through Tor without needing anything else, and should block all other leaking outgoing traffic.It doesn't block identifying information being sent through Tor though, but that's a given. Bloody awesome feature, if a bit obscure.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    4. Re:New gmail account + Tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe not that surprising when considering the amount of traffic that would go through the nodes. I for one would not want to run a node having massive amounts of torrent traffic running through it.

  16. Confess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Confess to witch..., wrong sharing and save your soul.

  17. About to be sacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, a unicorn once bit my sister.

    1. Re:About to be sacked by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      That was a moose.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    2. Re:About to be sacked by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't be silly, have you ever seen a moose wearing a dress?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:About to be sacked by Tigger's+Pet · · Score: 0

      Seen one? I've slept with a moose wearing a dress before now.

    4. Re:About to be sacked by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      Every night in my dreams!

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    5. Re:About to be sacked by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 2

      >> Don't be silly, have you ever seen a moose wearing a dress?

      You've obviously never been to one of Great-Aunt Edna's bridge parties.

    6. Re:About to be sacked by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

      have you ever seen a moose wearing a dress?

      Do you Republicans have to bring up Sarah Palin on every single story?

      --
      That is all.
  18. Corbin Fisher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you RTFA, the COO of Liberty Media who made the declaration was named Corbin Fisher. If you google up the name, the first site is Corbin Fisher's Amateur College Men and Amateur College Sex.

    This has to be a really good troll.

  19. Good luck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's behind seven proxies.

  20. Critical Fumble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their stupidity is a powerful defense against his sarcasm.

  21. I wonder if this should be reported to the bar? by erroneus · · Score: 1

    The bar association in this lawyer's area might be interested to hear a complain about this clear abuse of the legal system. No one could take this as a confession, not even a bad lawyer. It is beyond reasonable and should be punished. I know lawyers rarely punish their own, but perhaps if enough complaints come in?

    1. Re:I wonder if this should be reported to the bar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could be worth a shot, it is about time for the LAWYERS to learn their places!

    2. Re:I wonder if this should be reported to the bar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too many lawyers means having to MAKE UP stuff in order to charge fees. Make Law School REALLY hard to get into, might cut down on the oversupply?

  22. Yes indeed it is, US lawyers thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes indeed it is, US lawyers thinking US laws apply in Sweden.

  23. Just exactly when the meaning of word lawyer by unity100 · · Score: 1

    got enlarged to include 'money whore' ?

    --
    Read radical news here
    1. Re:Just exactly when the meaning of word lawyer by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      I believe the term in US English is "shyster"; the equivalent term in Swedish would be "brännvinsadvokat", lit. "schnapps-lawyer".

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    2. Re:Just exactly when the meaning of word lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It always has. Law = whoever has money, *yer = one who does *.

    3. Re:Just exactly when the meaning of word lawyer by corbettw · · Score: 1

      No, in US English it's just "lawyer".

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
  24. Before now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What have you done after now?

    1. Re:Before now? by Tigger's+Pet · · Score: 0

      Well... As I'm married now, I don't expect to be doing that again - but you never know.

  25. so basically by unity100 · · Score: 1

    swedish justice, has failed.

    --
    Read radical news here
  26. unicorns making a comeback? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just kidding? we're surprised that the penguinistas were not extincted in the softwars of the '80's... many say the bips were on there side, before they went billionerror.

    there does appear to be some unusual things happening in our fellow inhabitants' development. there's fish who can digest plastic, getting the sea stuff off, then pooping it out. our babys can now digest small amounts of crude oil, & a variety of other toxic substances, with less than fatal results, so that's good?

  27. Ooooooooh, big mistake mentioning gold... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To a lawyer.

  28. Wait, Corbin Fisher ? by vegiVamp · · Score: 2

    The same Corbin Fisher as this Corbin Fisher? Really?

    This should prove to be amusing, at the very least. Yes mister judge sir, this here man has illegally copied and jerked off to thousands of dollars' worth of gay porn that we filmed using straight actors.

    Actually, mister judge, sir, you're looking pretty good, yourself. Can I interest you in a financial opportunity ?

    --
    What a depressingly stupid machine.
  29. Typical Sweden by bazmail · · Score: 1

    No better country than Sweden to allow their citizens to be harassed this way.

    What a spineless puppet state.

    1. Re:Typical Sweden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No better country than Sweden to allow their citizens to be harassed this way. What a spineless puppet state.

      Sweden is spineless because they didn't stop a US company from issuing a subpoena to Google, another US company?

      How many functioning brain cells do you have anyway?

  30. Qualifications for a Corporate Lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Enroll for a Law Degree preferably from an Ivy League place using Daddys money.
    2) Bum around all day getting pissed.
    3) Somehow pass exams despite being hung over from a big frat bash the night before.
    4) Join top notch law firm
    5) Have Frontal Lobotomy to remove any common sense left
    6) Profit????

  31. Sweden: loser pays, USA: loser and winner both pay by name_already_taken · · Score: 1

    And how is this different from the USA? If you can't afford to pay your lawyer long enough to win the case then you'll still go broke. If you don't have a lawyer chances are you make some legal fumbles that make you lose when you could have won.

    At the risk of stating the obvious, this is different from the USA, because in the USA if you are sued by a big company and you then hire a lawyer and your lawyer wins the case for you, you still lose because you still have to pay for your lawyer, even though the company's suit had no merit. In the USA, someone with deep pockets can bankrupt you by filing suits against you even if they know they will lose. That's the threat they use to extort settlements from innocent defendents. In Sweden, the company would have to reimburse you for your lawyer.

    --
    Putting moderation advice in your .sig lowers your karma!
  32. unicorn? by corbettw · · Score: 0

    You mean his single-female friend who hangs out with him and his wife?

    --
    God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
  33. The lawyers win by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    They always do. They are now charging Liberty Media $200/hour while chasing a fantasy. They don't care what they do as long as they earn some money -- parasites!

  34. Re:Sweden: loser pays, USA: loser and winner both by Rysc · · Score: 1

    In the USA if you win you can request that the loser pay for your fees. It's not automatic, but it's common.

    --
    I want my Cowboyneal
  35. As a wise principal once said .... by sunking2 · · Score: 1

    Don't mess with the bull, young man. You'll get the horns.

  36. They will find him...his true position by footNipple · · Score: 1

    Once they get to Sweden, the Liberty Media "hunters" will have no problem tracking this poor bastard.

    http://www.libertymedia.com/capital-trueposition.aspx

    1. Re:They will find him...his true position by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong Liberty Media.

  37. Seems awfully petty. by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Not that it is a big surprise coming from a media company.

  38. So who else... by Galestar · · Score: 1

    Is going to be creating some gmail accounts via TOR and sending them some "confessions" this weekend?

    --
    AccountKiller
  39. Re: How to - Wise-ass by Technician · · Score: 1

    The way to torment those guys is to make and use the email account from a couple of public hotspots such as a free hotel lobby, public library, or other dead end location. Then NEVER log into the account again from anywhere. Let them dig, trace, stake out, monitor, and spend their resources. What they spend tilting at windmills is up to them.

    Even better is to get one of the scammers to relay it for you as part of scambaiting. Maybe the studios can get some of the Internet cafe's shut down in Lagos.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  40. Terrorists can't take a joke; hired gunman either by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Terrorists can't take a joke; hired gunman either. Just because their weapon isn't a gun does not mean they are not "hired guns" and just because they don't blow themselves up for a religion doesn't mean they are not terrorists.

    --
    Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
  41. i doubt they took him seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just their way of saying "you aren't funny."

  42. thepiratebay judge was in bed with mafiaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and the judge had ties with the plaintiff.

  43. So? by P.+Legba · · Score: 1

    It's not a crime to be an ass.

  44. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Certainly not. Under common European law, including in Sweden, defendants have the right to a speedy trial and within reasonable time. It's very serious and the courts are very aware of this. This is not the US, our system does not work like yours.

  45. Re:Terrorists can't take a joke; hired gunman eith by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Still, these "terrorists" and "hired guns" are operating "for profit" and are, at the same time "officers of the court" which means they are bound to certain duties and within certain restrictions on behavior. It appears to me that they are exceeding those limits and abusing their role and position for personal gain. It's time to demote them from being officers of the court.