Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MPAA Executive Tampers With Evidence In Piracy Case

Posted by Soulskill on from the fitting-the-narrative dept.

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.'"

15 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. And... by jamstar7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... this surprises anyone how, exactly?

    --
    Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    1. Re:And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unsurprising things make the news all the time. It doesn't have to "surprise anyone" in order to write an article about it.

    2. Re:And... by digitig · · Score: 5, Informative

      But apparently the judge didn't, otherwise there would have been a mistrial declared and either perjury or contempt of court charges.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    3. Re:And... by BeTeK · · Score: 5, Informative

      In Finland we don't have jury trials. There is judge and 2 or more lay judges who decide the matter in hand.

  2. Handcuffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Handcuffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      Hope all you want. Fuck-all will be done. MAFIAA earned their synonymous name, and are just as powerful.

      Watch and see.

    2. Re:Handcuffs by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Evidence tampering is a serious crime, with penalties up to 20 years the US. Not sure about Finland's laws, but significant jail time would be an appropriate and proportional response for these actions. "Sending a message" is when the response is disproportionate and inappropriate..

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Handcuffs by davydagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I say we treat this RIAA/MPAA goons like all the other criminals in this country.

      pre-dawn raid, shoot their pets, haul everyone found near their compounds out for questioning, trash their house, charge them with RICO.

      and most importantly, freeze their bank accounts so they can't pay for lawyers.

      Lets also call all their freinds, family, and furture employers to let them all know what scumbags they are, and lets run a special on them in gangland.

  3. Some how I doubt it will matter by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I predict that unless it is proven that they fabricated evidence, the person on trial will still get convicted, and the MPAA will get nothing more than a verbal slap on the wrist.

    Deletion of exculpatory evidence is one thing, but deletion to hide a source is simply redaction, which governments do daily. They will laugh it off as a minor oversight.
     

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:Some how I doubt it will matter by Aryden · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is a difference between redaction, which hides material to which you will still know exists but not the actual information and removing information entirely and not notifying the defense and the court.

    2. Re:Some how I doubt it will matter by NFN_NLN · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I predict that unless it is proven that they fabricated evidence, the person on trial will still get convicted, and the MPAA will get nothing more than a verbal slap on the wrist.

      Deletion of exculpatory evidence is one thing, but deletion to hide a source is simply redaction, which governments do daily. They will laugh it off as a minor oversight.

      ... and you're suppose to just take their word that those were the only changes? If they had access to make changes then the chain of evidence is tainted... who knows that happened.

    3. Re:Some how I doubt it will matter by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

      Read the Story. The police had other copies and were able to compare the files verify that the only changes made were to hide the identity of their informant.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    4. Re:Some how I doubt it will matter by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Read the story.

      4 Defendants previously found guilty are still guilty.
      2 Defendants previously acquitted are still acquitted.

      Nothing has changed.

      Police had untouched copies and that is how the differences were found. No evidence was manufactured, only some non-related material was deleted to protect their source. This is a procedural error at worst (failure to notify). Lawyers get a tongue lashing and nothing more.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  4. I'm surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    that it hasn't been swept under the rug

  5. Re:Aaron thought he was above the law, too. by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Informative

    Aaron Swartz thought he was above the law as well.

    There is a large difference between the malum prohibitum of copyright, and the malum in se of evidence tampering.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood