9 ms·

Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Has Conflict of Interest

267 points by Tsiolkovsky 14y ago

maurits 14y ago
Misleading, unproven and sensationalistic.....
- yaix 14y ago
  That sounds much like Richard Nixon when he first read about watergate. Unproven and sensationalist it is, but how is it "misleading"?
  - maurits 14y ago
    "Found To Be Corrupt" suggest an official inquiry of some sorts. Not the opinion of the author.
    - Falkvinge 14y ago
      Not exactly - in this case, a person on Twitter found a two-year-old article showing that this particular judge was corrupt in copyright monopoly cases. There is nothing denoting how "official" the conclusion is, not inherently in the expression.
      - JoachimSchipper 14y ago
        In a juridical context, "found corrupt" means something like "a judge ruled that X is corrupt". It's easy to think that that is what the headline says.
        yaix 14y ago
        And in a technical context, it means that a data file produced a read error. In a blog context, it means neither.
        SideburnsOfDoom 14y ago
        "Found corrupt" in the same sentence as "judge" strongly suggest a judicial context. This is not accurate.
        pgeorgi 14y ago
        Judge_Dredd.avi found corrupt (SCNR, and sadly somewhat relevant, given the filename-in-a-forum issue reported in the article)
        tveita 14y ago
        So what does "found to be corrupt" mean in a blog context? "Please sue me for libel?" (Yes, I see the note. "I don't need journalistic integrity, I'm a registered journalist!") Good job on finding the other common meaning; you'll have noticed that a search on "found to be corrupt" yields two meanings besides this article: corrupted data, and findings of a court or investigation. There are a lot of ways to phrase the headline that wouldn't make a reasonable reader assume that this was an official ruling, e.g. "X is corrupt", "Why X is corrupt", "Evidence that X is corrupt", "X alleged to be corrupt", or really anything but "found to be". The facts by themselves are interesting, but the headline I found misleading.
        Natsu 14y ago
        > So what does "found to be corrupt" mean in a blog context? It means that evidence indicating corruption has been found. Any other reading puts words in their mouth.
- tluyben2 14y ago
  ... and time more people wrote about it, in whatever way they see fit. Your name sounds Dutch; are you? You agree with this '1-2tje' between Kuik & Hensen?
  - maurits 14y ago
    This is hardly the point. In my experience as a person and engineer I find that there are really no easy solutions or answers to anything. Not in life, not in technical stuff, nor in politics. As such I have a healthy disdain for people who knowingly and willingly oversimplify or scream to make their point. This doesn't help anybody accept perhaps attracting a crowed that yells "me to" or "it is an outrage" For this article he could have written or investigated quite a lot of things. For example the process or system that the Netherlands uses to assign a judge to a case. That is kind of vital information if you are going to establish a link between the judge presiding a case, the specific case, the plaintiffs and the outcome. Where is it? Perhaps it would be nice to note for a (foreign) audience what exactly a Dutch judge does in a case. It is a far cry from an American judge, I can tell you that. These court cases with the so called corrupt judge? Were they appealed? And if so successfully and why? An other bit of vital information that is no where to be found. What exactly does the dutch law say about copyright? How actually does one hire or fire a judge in the Netherlands? Surely, if anybody, the lawyer of the accused has reason to pursue action and to open his mouth. Etc etc etc. If you are going to assert in a headline that "someone is proven to be corrupt" or "is proven to have robbed a bank" I expect to read an article that has a bit more to say than a vague accusation mixed in with the fact that you obviously don't agree with the guy. Hence, sensationalistic, unproven and misleading.
    - tluyben2 14y ago
      You make a lot of valid points, but I don't think OP knows the answers to those things either. Maybe he is just opening up discussions and that's were I don't agree with you; as a tool to make people think he shouldn't have not written the article; it worked. People are reading it on HN and thinking about it. I do think it helps. But it's very difficult to see what helped in the end. There were a lot of 'uninformed' articles about SOPA, especially in the big news outlets; I'm willing to bet (but have no proof) that those made the outcry larger than the technically correct and informative ones on HN etc. But it's hard to tell what makes the pendulum swing and better researched at this time is better, but nothing at all is worse.
- jacquesm 14y ago
  I actually thought the proof presented was pretty convincing, if that holds up the lawyers for XS4ALL, ziggo and a bunch of other dutch providers will surely use this in their appeal.
yaix 14y ago
If that is indeed the same judge working together with the plaintif, then it does still not proof corruption. But taking the case would have been highly unethical. I really hope there will be an investigation into this.
- Falkvinge 14y ago
  As I write in the comments - once you've corrupted yourself as an official to the level of the 2010 case, you cannot UN-corrupt yourself in the eyes of the public. It is of paramount importance for the credibility of the judicial impartiality that there's not even a credible BELIEF of a bias, which is clearly present in this case.
- mark_l_watson 14y ago
  A little off topic, but here in the USA Supreme Court judge Antonin Gregory Scalia went on a vacation with Vice President Dick Cheney, shortly before Cheney's case went before the Supreme Court. I may be wrong about this, but when I was younger it seemed like corruption was well hidden from public view, now the elites rub our faces in the fact that they can get away with just about anything.
  - bediger4000 14y ago
    Clarence Thomas has the appearance of a much larger problem: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/us/politics/19thomas.html?_r=2&hp http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/us/politics/19thomas.html?... http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01/027655.php http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/us/politics/15thomas.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/us/politics/15thomas.html http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_02/027850.php http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_02...
    - stfu 14y ago
      If I were the President, I would do exactly the same thing. Fact is, that Supreme Court nominations are highly political motivated. You have in your presidency one or maybe two chances to appoint a new judge. That judge is going to sit there for about 20 years. As you see right now with the upcoming supreme court decision on the healthcare issue, the decision is most likely going to be made along the party lines, with most of the decision power hanging on the mercy of a single judge. If you are the president and have the ability to appoint/suggest a judge, you need to find someone that you can rely on to keep his political leaning intact for the next 20 years. Otherwise you are significantly reducing the chances to see your worldview represented in the rulings for the next 20+ years. Sure, the process is questionable, but I can completely understand that politicians see the appointment of judges as a very strategic element, and therefore making it necessary to keep them close. But apparently too close in some cases...
rkb 14y ago
Nothing on this is currently floating in the Dutch media, so probably not worth the read.
- SideburnsOfDoom 14y ago
  If and when the Dutch media pick up on this, would that suddenly make it worth reading? The internet leads the traditional media nowadays, so we decide if they pick up on it. Sensational headline aside, there are some pertinent facts in it.
  - Falkvinge 14y ago
    Headlines, unfortunately, need to catch people's attention. That's their job.
    - radicalbyte 14y ago
      Thankfully it has hit Geenstijl: http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2012/05/onafhankelijke_rechtspraak_onze_reetd.html http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2012/05/onafhankelijke_...
- yaix 14y ago
  You may want to send the link to the article to some newspapers in NL, maybe a few will pick it up and investigate. If nobody tells the mainstream press, they may just overlook it.
  - bashzor 14y ago
    Tweakers.net: Het artikel of de meukupdate op de link 'http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/12/dutch-judge-who-ordered-pirate-bay-links-censored-found-to-be-corrupt http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/12/dutch-judge-who-ordered-pira... bevindt zich al in de queue. De link kan niet nogmaals ingestuurd worden. Translation: The article with the link [where this HN story leads to] is already in the queue. The link cannot be sent in again.
tluyben2 14y ago
Everyone following the anti-piracy org BREIN and it's lawsuits in NL knows that this judge is corrupt, but it cannot really be proven. BREIN always uses the same judge, they always make it impossible for the defendant to be present at the hearings (as I understand it, but I don't know much about it, they use some loophole to make it impossible for the defendant to defend itself at the moment of the verdict). And he always finds the defendant guilty in these cases, no matter how insane (like the 'links case' Falkvinge discussed, were even showing the name of a movie in the forum was considered 'illegal linking'). This should get more press, but not enough people care in NL I think as this is only dredged up as 'wow how can this be' in tech forums while it's usually only a footnote in other press. And I don't believe that's a conspiracy, but rather that, no-one cares...
- aerique 14y ago
  How can they always use the same judge?
  - tluyben2 14y ago
    I have no clue. Maybe it's only the cases he presides which make the press as BREIN wins there, but I'm fairly positive I read somewhere they always 'use' this judge. Maybe someone else knows more about it here?
    - aerique 14y ago
      Even though I'm dutch and live in NL I have no idea how our judicial system works. However, I was under the impression that a random judge is appointed to a case. If my impression is correct and this judge actually does the majority of Brein's cases wouldn't that alone be worth an investigation?
      - tluyben2 14y ago
        Yes, I do think it definitely warrants investigation as definitely all high profile BREIN cases I heard of (and that's more than these 2) were with this judge. If it would be random then someone has a bad generator :) And i'm sure, somewhere, someone is getting Rolexes and seats in councils for this. Edit: Ah, Hensen already has a seat in the Benelux council for intellectual properties.
sjaakkkkk 14y ago
FWIW, Geenstijl (probably the largest/most known blog in the Netherlands) reported on this matter in 2010 already, here http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2010/06/rechter_in_zaak_ftd_vriendje_v.html http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2010/06/rechter_in_zaak... (in Dutch). There has been some uproar about this on (Dutch) internet sites, however I haven't seen anything about it in mainstream media. On a related note, just today a small ISP that needed to block TPB has refused to do it and they are now sued by BREIN (http://tweakers.net/nieuws/81929/brein-daagt-zeelandnet-om-the-pirate-bay-ook-te-blokkeren.html http://tweakers.net/nieuws/81929/brein-daagt-zeelandnet-om-t...). The trail will start in June and is expected to last several months. I just hope this time maybe more uproar will ensue if the same judge is doing the case again.
- tluyben2 14y ago
  That will be interesting. Shame it takes so long and it will be 'komkommertijd' (summer) so although media will write about it, they already know that not many will read. On the other hand; it's a good time to get ANYTHING in any press starting june, so why not this? Very curious to see if it's Hensen again. I would think it is.
  - radicalbyte 14y ago
    After the summer we'll be having elections: this case is proof that NOW is the time to push the Pirate Partij. We're the Netherlands, it's our job to be forward thinking, an example to our friends a few kilometers to the East (the Germans, for those not well versed in European geography). As it now stands they're past the first corner, but there's still time to catch up and overtake..
gouranga 14y ago
When there is a singular person responsible for a decision, corruption is inevitable. They are an easy target. Judicial decisions should be taken by a council rather than an individual.
powertower 14y ago
There is so much unproven bullshit and downright deception in that article that this is the first thread I've flagged in a year and a half. 1st. No one has been charged, tried, and found corrupt. 2nd. Was this association before, during, or after the court case? There really is a difference between those three. 3rd. What is this "association"? The judge's name is part of the lower category with a dozen other names. Does this mean he's in the same building? 4th. Even this article is starting to claim (in edit/update, forced by a commenter) that this "commercial" course was some type of an official bar course where the two parties were perhaps picked by the bar (as in, they didn't pick each other). 5th. The article keeps on mentioning that this judge ruled "file names" to be illigal. Right, because taking the URL and breaking it appart before posting it on a warez site clearly turns everything around and makes the forum a place for a purfectly legitimate discussion of "file names". The author seems to be outraged by this. And it goes on and on...
- Karunamon 14y ago
  1st, corruption is like "being a dick" in that you don't have to have been found guilty of it in a court of law in order for it to be true. 2nd, corruption is corruption. Does it matter when? Before, during, after, it's still sketchy as heck. Any judge in possession of their mental faculties should think twice before creating the appearance of impropriety. I don't care if it's an official course - find someone else! 3rd, and 4th, granted. 5th, Right, because having a link to a file (and nothing more!) is somehow infringing anything. The affected server had no infringing content on it. I'd be outraged too. The idea that search engines and other sites should have to be censored despite not doing anything wrong is insane - equally insane is the idea that I can construct an anchor tag that will get me in trouble with the law. Equally sketchy is the fact that this particular judge always seems to preside over BREIN's cases. That's two strikes, and he seems reeeeeaaallly eager for a third.
  - Someone 14y ago
    "I don't care if it's an official course - find someone else!" If you read http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/66177/ftd-vonnis-is--schokkend--en--onhoudbaar-.html http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/66177/ftd-vonnis-is--schokkend--e..., you will learn that Arnout Engelfriet (who more or less invented Internet law as a separate subject of study in the Netherlands) states that he, in his role of council for the defense, did not think that the judge needed replacement because the circle of Dutchmen knowledgeable of the matter is so small that it is impossible to find a knowledgeable judge who hasn't had some contact with someone from BREIN. So, if you claim corruption, you should include mr. Engelfriet in it. He disagrees with the rulings, too, but that is a different subject. "equally insane is the idea that I can construct an anchor tag that will get me in trouble with the law." Not all countries follow US law; freedom of speech carries lower weight in some of them. For example, one cannot publish "Mein kampf" in the Netherlands (AFAIK, the current stance is that a scientific edition might be legal)
bediger4000 14y ago
The Swedish Judge who found all the Pirate Bay people guilty was also associated with a pro-copyright or pro-"Intellectual Property" organisation, too: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/pirateconflict/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/pirateconflict/ To my (USA) mind, this seems like Enemy action, or a multi-national conspiracy. In the USA, judges with this kind of appearance of bias would most like recuse themselves, and if they didn't, one side or the other would try to set up the whole case for an appeal later, and then appeal later with flags waving and horns honking. Why does this appearance of judicial bias occur so often in connection with The Pirate Bay?
- benologist 14y ago
  "Why does this appearance of judicial bias occur so often in connection with The Pirate Bay?" Because the internet's repeatedly not getting the answer they expect. Apparently only a fool and a corrupt one at that could possibly consider TPB, a site which everyone even marginally familiar with knows is devoted to piracy and profiting off piracy ever second of every day, to have anything to do with piracy! Also international conspiracy lol.
  - dchest 14y ago
    Your reply doesn't provide an answer to the question you quoted.

267 points by Tsiolkovsky 14y ago

maurits 14y ago

Misleading, unproven and sensationalistic.....

yaix 14y ago
That sounds much like Richard Nixon when he first read about watergate. Unproven and sensationalist it is, but how is it "misleading"?
- maurits 14y ago
  "Found To Be Corrupt" suggest an official inquiry of some sorts. Not the opinion of the author.
  - Falkvinge 14y ago
    Not exactly - in this case, a person on Twitter found a two-year-old article showing that this particular judge was corrupt in copyright monopoly cases. There is nothing denoting how "official" the conclusion is, not inherently in the expression.
    - JoachimSchipper 14y ago
      In a juridical context, "found corrupt" means something like "a judge ruled that X is corrupt". It's easy to think that that is what the headline says.
      - yaix 14y ago
        And in a technical context, it means that a data file produced a read error. In a blog context, it means neither.
        SideburnsOfDoom 14y ago
        "Found corrupt" in the same sentence as "judge" strongly suggest a judicial context. This is not accurate.
        pgeorgi 14y ago
        Judge_Dredd.avi found corrupt (SCNR, and sadly somewhat relevant, given the filename-in-a-forum issue reported in the article)
        tveita 14y ago
        So what does "found to be corrupt" mean in a blog context? "Please sue me for libel?" (Yes, I see the note. "I don't need journalistic integrity, I'm a registered journalist!") Good job on finding the other common meaning; you'll have noticed that a search on "found to be corrupt" yields two meanings besides this article: corrupted data, and findings of a court or investigation. There are a lot of ways to phrase the headline that wouldn't make a reasonable reader assume that this was an official ruling, e.g. "X is corrupt", "Why X is corrupt", "Evidence that X is corrupt", "X alleged to be corrupt", or really anything but "found to be". The facts by themselves are interesting, but the headline I found misleading.
        Natsu 14y ago
        > So what does "found to be corrupt" mean in a blog context? It means that evidence indicating corruption has been found. Any other reading puts words in their mouth.
tluyben2 14y ago
... and time more people wrote about it, in whatever way they see fit. Your name sounds Dutch; are you? You agree with this '1-2tje' between Kuik & Hensen?
- maurits 14y ago
  This is hardly the point. In my experience as a person and engineer I find that there are really no easy solutions or answers to anything. Not in life, not in technical stuff, nor in politics. As such I have a healthy disdain for people who knowingly and willingly oversimplify or scream to make their point. This doesn't help anybody accept perhaps attracting a crowed that yells "me to" or "it is an outrage" For this article he could have written or investigated quite a lot of things. For example the process or system that the Netherlands uses to assign a judge to a case. That is kind of vital information if you are going to establish a link between the judge presiding a case, the specific case, the plaintiffs and the outcome. Where is it? Perhaps it would be nice to note for a (foreign) audience what exactly a Dutch judge does in a case. It is a far cry from an American judge, I can tell you that. These court cases with the so called corrupt judge? Were they appealed? And if so successfully and why? An other bit of vital information that is no where to be found. What exactly does the dutch law say about copyright? How actually does one hire or fire a judge in the Netherlands? Surely, if anybody, the lawyer of the accused has reason to pursue action and to open his mouth. Etc etc etc. If you are going to assert in a headline that "someone is proven to be corrupt" or "is proven to have robbed a bank" I expect to read an article that has a bit more to say than a vague accusation mixed in with the fact that you obviously don't agree with the guy. Hence, sensationalistic, unproven and misleading.
  - tluyben2 14y ago
    You make a lot of valid points, but I don't think OP knows the answers to those things either. Maybe he is just opening up discussions and that's were I don't agree with you; as a tool to make people think he shouldn't have not written the article; it worked. People are reading it on HN and thinking about it. I do think it helps. But it's very difficult to see what helped in the end. There were a lot of 'uninformed' articles about SOPA, especially in the big news outlets; I'm willing to bet (but have no proof) that those made the outcry larger than the technically correct and informative ones on HN etc. But it's hard to tell what makes the pendulum swing and better researched at this time is better, but nothing at all is worse.
jacquesm 14y ago
I actually thought the proof presented was pretty convincing, if that holds up the lawyers for XS4ALL, ziggo and a bunch of other dutch providers will surely use this in their appeal.

yaix 14y ago

If that is indeed the same judge working together with the plaintif, then it does still not proof corruption. But taking the case would have been highly unethical. I really hope there will be an investigation into this.

Falkvinge 14y ago
As I write in the comments - once you've corrupted yourself as an official to the level of the 2010 case, you cannot UN-corrupt yourself in the eyes of the public. It is of paramount importance for the credibility of the judicial impartiality that there's not even a credible BELIEF of a bias, which is clearly present in this case.
mark_l_watson 14y ago
A little off topic, but here in the USA Supreme Court judge Antonin Gregory Scalia went on a vacation with Vice President Dick Cheney, shortly before Cheney's case went before the Supreme Court. I may be wrong about this, but when I was younger it seemed like corruption was well hidden from public view, now the elites rub our faces in the fact that they can get away with just about anything.
- bediger4000 14y ago
  Clarence Thomas has the appearance of a much larger problem: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/us/politics/19thomas.html?_r=2&hp http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/us/politics/19thomas.html?... http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01/027655.php http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/us/politics/15thomas.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/us/politics/15thomas.html http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_02/027850.php http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_02...
  - stfu 14y ago
    If I were the President, I would do exactly the same thing. Fact is, that Supreme Court nominations are highly political motivated. You have in your presidency one or maybe two chances to appoint a new judge. That judge is going to sit there for about 20 years. As you see right now with the upcoming supreme court decision on the healthcare issue, the decision is most likely going to be made along the party lines, with most of the decision power hanging on the mercy of a single judge. If you are the president and have the ability to appoint/suggest a judge, you need to find someone that you can rely on to keep his political leaning intact for the next 20 years. Otherwise you are significantly reducing the chances to see your worldview represented in the rulings for the next 20+ years. Sure, the process is questionable, but I can completely understand that politicians see the appointment of judges as a very strategic element, and therefore making it necessary to keep them close. But apparently too close in some cases...

rkb 14y ago

Nothing on this is currently floating in the Dutch media, so probably not worth the read.

SideburnsOfDoom 14y ago
If and when the Dutch media pick up on this, would that suddenly make it worth reading? The internet leads the traditional media nowadays, so we decide if they pick up on it. Sensational headline aside, there are some pertinent facts in it.
- Falkvinge 14y ago
  Headlines, unfortunately, need to catch people's attention. That's their job.
  - radicalbyte 14y ago
    Thankfully it has hit Geenstijl: http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2012/05/onafhankelijke_rechtspraak_onze_reetd.html http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2012/05/onafhankelijke_...
yaix 14y ago
You may want to send the link to the article to some newspapers in NL, maybe a few will pick it up and investigate. If nobody tells the mainstream press, they may just overlook it.
- bashzor 14y ago
  Tweakers.net: Het artikel of de meukupdate op de link 'http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/12/dutch-judge-who-ordered-pirate-bay-links-censored-found-to-be-corrupt http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/12/dutch-judge-who-ordered-pira... bevindt zich al in de queue. De link kan niet nogmaals ingestuurd worden. Translation: The article with the link [where this HN story leads to] is already in the queue. The link cannot be sent in again.

tluyben2 14y ago

Everyone following the anti-piracy org BREIN and it's lawsuits in NL knows that this judge is corrupt, but it cannot really be proven. BREIN always uses the same judge, they always make it impossible for the defendant to be present at the hearings (as I understand it, but I don't know much about it, they use some loophole to make it impossible for the defendant to defend itself at the moment of the verdict). And he always finds the defendant guilty in these cases, no matter how insane (like the 'links case' Falkvinge discussed, were even showing the name of a movie in the forum was considered 'illegal linking'). This should get more press, but not enough people care in NL I think as this is only dredged up as 'wow how can this be' in tech forums while it's usually only a footnote in other press. And I don't believe that's a conspiracy, but rather that, no-one cares...

aerique 14y ago
How can they always use the same judge?
- tluyben2 14y ago
  I have no clue. Maybe it's only the cases he presides which make the press as BREIN wins there, but I'm fairly positive I read somewhere they always 'use' this judge. Maybe someone else knows more about it here?
  - aerique 14y ago
    Even though I'm dutch and live in NL I have no idea how our judicial system works. However, I was under the impression that a random judge is appointed to a case. If my impression is correct and this judge actually does the majority of Brein's cases wouldn't that alone be worth an investigation?
    - tluyben2 14y ago
      Yes, I do think it definitely warrants investigation as definitely all high profile BREIN cases I heard of (and that's more than these 2) were with this judge. If it would be random then someone has a bad generator :) And i'm sure, somewhere, someone is getting Rolexes and seats in councils for this. Edit: Ah, Hensen already has a seat in the Benelux council for intellectual properties.

sjaakkkkk 14y ago

FWIW, Geenstijl (probably the largest/most known blog in the Netherlands) reported on this matter in 2010 already, here http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2010/06/rechter_in_zaak_ftd_vriendje_v.html http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2010/06/rechter_in_zaak... (in Dutch). There has been some uproar about this on (Dutch) internet sites, however I haven't seen anything about it in mainstream media. On a related note, just today a small ISP that needed to block TPB has refused to do it and they are now sued by BREIN (http://tweakers.net/nieuws/81929/brein-daagt-zeelandnet-om-the-pirate-bay-ook-te-blokkeren.html http://tweakers.net/nieuws/81929/brein-daagt-zeelandnet-om-t...). The trail will start in June and is expected to last several months. I just hope this time maybe more uproar will ensue if the same judge is doing the case again.

tluyben2 14y ago
That will be interesting. Shame it takes so long and it will be 'komkommertijd' (summer) so although media will write about it, they already know that not many will read. On the other hand; it's a good time to get ANYTHING in any press starting june, so why not this? Very curious to see if it's Hensen again. I would think it is.
- radicalbyte 14y ago
  After the summer we'll be having elections: this case is proof that NOW is the time to push the Pirate Partij. We're the Netherlands, it's our job to be forward thinking, an example to our friends a few kilometers to the East (the Germans, for those not well versed in European geography). As it now stands they're past the first corner, but there's still time to catch up and overtake..

gouranga 14y ago

When there is a singular person responsible for a decision, corruption is inevitable. They are an easy target. Judicial decisions should be taken by a council rather than an individual.

powertower 14y ago

There is so much unproven bullshit and downright deception in that article that this is the first thread I've flagged in a year and a half. 1st. No one has been charged, tried, and found corrupt. 2nd. Was this association before, during, or after the court case? There really is a difference between those three. 3rd. What is this "association"? The judge's name is part of the lower category with a dozen other names. Does this mean he's in the same building? 4th. Even this article is starting to claim (in edit/update, forced by a commenter) that this "commercial" course was some type of an official bar course where the two parties were perhaps picked by the bar (as in, they didn't pick each other). 5th. The article keeps on mentioning that this judge ruled "file names" to be illigal. Right, because taking the URL and breaking it appart before posting it on a warez site clearly turns everything around and makes the forum a place for a purfectly legitimate discussion of "file names". The author seems to be outraged by this. And it goes on and on...

Karunamon 14y ago
1st, corruption is like "being a dick" in that you don't have to have been found guilty of it in a court of law in order for it to be true. 2nd, corruption is corruption. Does it matter when? Before, during, after, it's still sketchy as heck. Any judge in possession of their mental faculties should think twice before creating the appearance of impropriety. I don't care if it's an official course - find someone else! 3rd, and 4th, granted. 5th, Right, because having a link to a file (and nothing more!) is somehow infringing anything. The affected server had no infringing content on it. I'd be outraged too. The idea that search engines and other sites should have to be censored despite not doing anything wrong is insane - equally insane is the idea that I can construct an anchor tag that will get me in trouble with the law. Equally sketchy is the fact that this particular judge always seems to preside over BREIN's cases. That's two strikes, and he seems reeeeeaaallly eager for a third.
- Someone 14y ago
  "I don't care if it's an official course - find someone else!" If you read http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/66177/ftd-vonnis-is--schokkend--en--onhoudbaar-.html http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/66177/ftd-vonnis-is--schokkend--e..., you will learn that Arnout Engelfriet (who more or less invented Internet law as a separate subject of study in the Netherlands) states that he, in his role of council for the defense, did not think that the judge needed replacement because the circle of Dutchmen knowledgeable of the matter is so small that it is impossible to find a knowledgeable judge who hasn't had some contact with someone from BREIN. So, if you claim corruption, you should include mr. Engelfriet in it. He disagrees with the rulings, too, but that is a different subject. "equally insane is the idea that I can construct an anchor tag that will get me in trouble with the law." Not all countries follow US law; freedom of speech carries lower weight in some of them. For example, one cannot publish "Mein kampf" in the Netherlands (AFAIK, the current stance is that a scientific edition might be legal)

bediger4000 14y ago

The Swedish Judge who found all the Pirate Bay people guilty was also associated with a pro-copyright or pro-"Intellectual Property" organisation, too: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/pirateconflict/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/pirateconflict/ To my (USA) mind, this seems like Enemy action, or a multi-national conspiracy. In the USA, judges with this kind of appearance of bias would most like recuse themselves, and if they didn't, one side or the other would try to set up the whole case for an appeal later, and then appeal later with flags waving and horns honking. Why does this appearance of judicial bias occur so often in connection with The Pirate Bay?

benologist 14y ago
"Why does this appearance of judicial bias occur so often in connection with The Pirate Bay?" Because the internet's repeatedly not getting the answer they expect. Apparently only a fool and a corrupt one at that could possibly consider TPB, a site which everyone even marginally familiar with knows is devoted to piracy and profiting off piracy ever second of every day, to have anything to do with piracy! Also international conspiracy lol.
- dchest 14y ago
  Your reply doesn't provide an answer to the question you quoted.