Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Executive Tampers With Evidence In Piracy Case
An anonymous reader writes "TorrentFreak reports on an internet piracy case from Finland, which saw four men found guilty and fined €45,000. During the trial, the defense attorney took note of inconsistencies in log files used as evidence against the men. An investigator for international recording industry organization IFPI revealed after questioning that the files had been tampered with. He said an MPAA executive was present when the evidence gathering took place, and altered the files to hide the identity of 'one of their spies.' 'No one from the MPAA informed the defense that the edits had been made and the tampering was revealed at the worst possible time – during the trial. This resulted in the prosecutor ordering a police investigation into the changes that had been made. "Police then proceeded by comparing the 'work copy' that the IFPI investigator produced with the material that police and the defending counsels had received. Police found out that the material had differences in over 10 files," Hietanen reveals.'"
Usually I don't support "send a message" type of prosecutions (Aaron Swartz, as just one example) but these guys need to be smacked down, hard. Fines are insufficient; anything short of significant jail time won't do a damn thing to the MAFIAA sociopathic execs who honestly believe they are above the law.
A message needs to be sent, and this looks to be an open and shut case. I sure hope to see handcuffs.
that it hasn't been swept under the rug
There is a very easy solution to this kind of nonsense. I know that European courts operate quite differently from US ones, but in US terms here is what should happen.
Order a mistrial. Declare all tainted evidence inadmissible (even if the "original" is presented). Fine the IFPA a significant sum for deliberately attempting to mislead the court. Investigate if criminal charges against individuals in the IFPA are warranted. Order an arrest/extradition warrant against the MPAA agent responsible so he could explain to the court why he should not be imprisoned for evidence tampering. Begin an investigation on whether or not to permanently disbar the plaintiffs attorney (depending on if he had prior knowledge on the evidence being tainted or not).
I'm not so sure that "The Police copy is still pristine" since the articla stated that "there was also an MPAA executive in the room while the evidence gathering took place".
If this were in the U.S., I'd say dust off the RICO act, because someone's transgressed. Anything similar in Finland? It would be fun to see organized copyright lobbyists put on the same page of the law books as Al Capone.
The test for misconduct causing a mistrial is that due process was harmed. The judge probably corrected this with a jury instruction to ignore some of the evidence which is fine. You're right it is grounds for appeal if the judge is wrong, but most court proceeding result in some grounds for appeal technically. It sounds like they charged with evidence tampering which is probably just as bad a perjury. Contempt is usually inappropriate behavior towards the court during procedure. This is not what happened.
Since when private entities like MPAA have the right to retain spies, especially in foreign countries?
Since, well, forever. Perhaps you don't know what a spy is, but they are quite legal, even for a private citizen to hire. Perhaps the word spy makes you think of undercover secret service agents doing illegal things, and yes, they probably are a spy, a government spy doing illegal things, but they are far from the only ones. You have corporate spies, financial spies, even a "private investigator" is a spy. You have spies in sports, trying to find secret plays, or weaknesses in a team. You have spies all over, you just associate the word incorrectly to the james bond type spies.
For your edification: /sp/
spy
Noun
A person who secretly collects and reports information about an enemy or competitor.
Right, I mean, would you be happy if someone started poaching in your turf?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
That's how I see it, the redaction itself is reasonable, what makes it a crime is that they didn't seek permission from the the court. What makes it worse is that it seems professional investigators(who should know better) went along with it, at a minimum I think a hefty fine would be appropriate for their contempt/incompetence.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.