Slashdot Mirror


Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Censorship Found To Be Corrupt

TheGift73 writes "TorrentFreak reports that 'This week yet another court order was handed down in Europe with the aim of censoring The Pirate Bay. The ruling forbids the Dutch Pirate Party from not only running a direct proxy, but also telling people how to circumvent an earlier court ordered blockade. However, according to Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge, the judge in the case has a history of corruption relating to another file-sharing case he presided over in the Netherlands. The Court of The Hague in the Netherlands has been particularly busy this work with Pirate Bay-related cases.' Falkvinge wrote, '... not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case. Money was involved. Commercial interest was involved. The judge was, as it appears from this brochure for the quite expensive course, getting money. Shortly after the case. In a directly related matter together with the plaintiff. That makes the judge not only corrupt, but textbook corrupt.'"

7 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. Re:You think? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Funny

    I dunno, Arkham Asylum has notoriously horrible security. Pretty much any other such facility would be better.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  2. Re:Why? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Funny

    Because, of course, he hasn't been found corrupt. Even if the summary were taken at face value it still wouldn't be corruption...'having a financial interest in the outcome', although clearly not acceptable for a judge in a case, is not the same as 'accepting an offer of money in exchange for not carrying out your duties properly'.

    Theoretically, the financial interest that the Judge had would be harmed by his decision, since killing the Pirate Bay would reduce the need for whatever he and his (theoretical) partner were (theoretically) selling.

    Which doesn't suggest all that much corruption - "wow, he hurt his own business interest, he must be evil!!".

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  3. Re:To be fair by jhoegl · · Score: 3, Funny

    "now with fragmented sentences!"

  4. hang em all by cheekyboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Really, if every one pirates and downloads and copies and smokes pot at the same time, is it really so bad?

    Lets cut the wages of these old gay fuckers back to $50k, and see how they do then.

    Fight the power, protest, disobey, total chaos, and anarchy, screw ya all.

    We the young people do what we like, STFU old people, it was the old peoples fault that we had WW1 and WW2, so thats proof enough that old people should never rule any countries or systems.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  5. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Or to put it another way, 'textbook BS'.

  6. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    You spelled "instead of castrating" wrong

  7. Re:You fail at logic by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Also by that logic, internet providers who offer "unlimited bandwidth" would best serve their interests by never... actually ... delivering... oh.