8 ms·

Dotcom judge quits the case

101 points by te_chris 14y ago

ars 14y ago
What the title does not make clear is the judge did this to himself. You have to be careful when you are a judge, you're human so you probably have a bias, but you need to keep it a secret.
- antidoh 14y ago
  Which must be extraordinarily frustrating when you are knowledgeable and interested in a subject.
- mrich 14y ago
  I would not be totally shocked if there was some pressure involved, which led him to make the original remarks to give him a plausible exit out of the case.
  - RawData 14y ago
    That was my first thought too....you don't just step down without being forced to behind the scenes.
    - rprasad 14y ago
      You do if you do not want to be removed from the bench. Judges who make explicit statements that indicate they cannot be impartial in a case currently before them but who do not remove themselves from such cases usually find themselves disrobed and disbarred for violating their ethical duties of impartiality. (UK standards are different from US standards, but the duty of impartiality is generally the same.) Saying that the US is "the enemy" is pretty much as close as you can get to revealing an inability to be impartial.
- rickmb 14y ago
  So why are pro-copyright judges never expected to keep their bias a secret? Are in fact allowed to not just voice an opinion, but to actually be activists and or paid lobbyist for the copyright industry, and still preside over copyright related cases. This is a one way street, and the judge has accurately formulated why many think this is the case. We have met the enemy of our freedom and our judicial system.
  - rprasad 14y ago
    Bias legally means having sufficient strong views of a legal interpretation or party that these views override the judge's ability to impartially apply the law to the specific facts of a given case. The "pro-copyright" judges are not biased--they are simpy following the law, which currently holds that copyrights are legal and provides (some draconian) mechanisms for enforcing copyrights. If there are problems, it is not the judges--it is the law. In the U.S., at least, judges are not allowed to be publicly politically active (except to the extent of their own campaigns for judicial office), or to lobby for political causes at all, though they are allowed to maintain private political views. No copyright lobbyist is a judge, though a few former judges may be copyright lobbyists. This is not a one way street. The enemy of freedom is not the judicial system; quite often, the judiciary is the primary defender of your freedoms.
mwilcox 14y ago
A recording of his comments can be heard here: http://sciblogs.co.nz/tosp/2012/07/13/podcast-the-fight-for-the-net/ http://sciblogs.co.nz/tosp/2012/07/13/podcast-the-fight-for-...
jeza 14y ago
Seems like the US want to abuse extradition here. If he's guilty of copyright infringement, then they should be able to get him in NZ. Extradition should only be for cases where someone is physically present in a country where they commit a crime then later skip the country to avoid being caught.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- tokenizer 14y ago
  As a Canadian, this really grinded some of our gears. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extradition_proceedings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extr...
  - Joakal 14y ago
    As an Australian, this really grinded some of our gears. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths (This is actually altruistic copyright infringement)
    - cjrp 14y ago
      As a Brit, this really grinded some of our gears. http://goo.gl/6aqeb http://goo.gl/6aqeb (Redirect to Wiki, since apostrophes in URLs don't work).
- 3pt14159 14y ago
  It shouldn't be for moving ones and zeros, but imagine this: I figure out a way to shield a bomb from scanners and then mail a bomb to a hospital in the states. I kill hundreds. Would it not be reasonable for treaties to come in here?
  - 14y ago
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
- sohn9 14y ago
  Most intelligent comment I've ever seen in Hacker News
grandpoobah 14y ago
Call me a kook but I personally cannot rule out the possibility that he was made to stand down.
- adaml_623 14y ago
  I think we can safely assume that unlike the judges in the Pirate Bay case some pressure was applied from above for him to stand aside. Last I heard there was not going to be a need for an extradition hearing as Mr Dotcom was volunteering to go to the US and stand trial as he was certain he would be found not guilty in a courtroom.
  - ramblerman 14y ago
    > Last I heard there was not going to be a need for an extradition hearing as Mr Dotcom was volunteering to go to the US and stand trial as he was certain he would be found not guilty in a courtroom Not quite. Dotcom has offered to voluntarily fly to the US in return for them releasing a portion of his funds so he can mount a defence. The likelyhood that the US will accept his deal is close to 0.
- rprasad 14y ago
  All jurisdictions which follow British law, or which are based on British law to some extent (like the U.S.) have judicial ethical guidelines that generally require a judge to stand down if he makes statements that indicate or suggest he cannot impartially judge the case before him based on the law or merits that specifically apply. This judge said "The US is the enemy" while presiding over a case in which the U.S. was the primary opposing litigant. A statement that strongly worded strongly suggests he would not be able to impartially judge the remaining proceedings. Consequently, the instant he made that statement, he was ethically obligated to stand down. In some jurisdictions, not standing down would result in disrobement and potentially disbarrment. Indeed, in most jurisdictions with these rules, judicial decisions can be struck down for a judge's refusal to stand down after making such statements. The one exception is SCOTUS, because its decisions are not subject to further review except by SCOTUS itself.
Joakal 14y ago
More: Pro-Copyright Judges Never Drop Cases Over Conflicts, So Why Does Megaupload Judge Have To Step Down? http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120718/00503119739/pro-copyright-judges-never-drop-cases-over-conflicts-so-why-does-megaupload-judge-have-to-step-down.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120718/00503119739/pro-co... A better translation of TPB here: Aftermath of The Pirate Bay Trial: Peter Sunde’s Plea – In His Own Words - Falkvinge on Infopolicy. http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/06/aftermath-of-the-pirate-bay-trial-peter-sundes-plea-in-his-own-words/ http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/06/aftermath-of-the-pirate-bay-...
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- rprasad 14y ago
  I imagine it had something to do with the judge saying that the "US is the enemy", thus indicating that he could not impartially judge a case in which the U.S. was the primary opposing litigant.
  - lurkinggrue 14y ago
    He didn't say that. He was quoting a pogo comic: "We have met the enemy and he is us." http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/49/Pogo_-_Earth_Day_1971_poster.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/49/Pogo_-_Earth_D... Not "We have met the enemy and he is U.S."

101 points by te_chris 14y ago

ars 14y ago

What the title does not make clear is the judge did this to himself. You have to be careful when you are a judge, you're human so you probably have a bias, but you need to keep it a secret.

antidoh 14y ago
Which must be extraordinarily frustrating when you are knowledgeable and interested in a subject.
mrich 14y ago
I would not be totally shocked if there was some pressure involved, which led him to make the original remarks to give him a plausible exit out of the case.
- RawData 14y ago
  That was my first thought too....you don't just step down without being forced to behind the scenes.
  - rprasad 14y ago
    You do if you do not want to be removed from the bench. Judges who make explicit statements that indicate they cannot be impartial in a case currently before them but who do not remove themselves from such cases usually find themselves disrobed and disbarred for violating their ethical duties of impartiality. (UK standards are different from US standards, but the duty of impartiality is generally the same.) Saying that the US is "the enemy" is pretty much as close as you can get to revealing an inability to be impartial.
rickmb 14y ago
So why are pro-copyright judges never expected to keep their bias a secret? Are in fact allowed to not just voice an opinion, but to actually be activists and or paid lobbyist for the copyright industry, and still preside over copyright related cases. This is a one way street, and the judge has accurately formulated why many think this is the case. We have met the enemy of our freedom and our judicial system.
- rprasad 14y ago
  Bias legally means having sufficient strong views of a legal interpretation or party that these views override the judge's ability to impartially apply the law to the specific facts of a given case. The "pro-copyright" judges are not biased--they are simpy following the law, which currently holds that copyrights are legal and provides (some draconian) mechanisms for enforcing copyrights. If there are problems, it is not the judges--it is the law. In the U.S., at least, judges are not allowed to be publicly politically active (except to the extent of their own campaigns for judicial office), or to lobby for political causes at all, though they are allowed to maintain private political views. No copyright lobbyist is a judge, though a few former judges may be copyright lobbyists. This is not a one way street. The enemy of freedom is not the judicial system; quite often, the judiciary is the primary defender of your freedoms.

mwilcox 14y ago

A recording of his comments can be heard here: http://sciblogs.co.nz/tosp/2012/07/13/podcast-the-fight-for-the-net/ http://sciblogs.co.nz/tosp/2012/07/13/podcast-the-fight-for-...

jeza 14y ago

Seems like the US want to abuse extradition here. If he's guilty of copyright infringement, then they should be able to get him in NZ. Extradition should only be for cases where someone is physically present in a country where they commit a crime then later skip the country to avoid being caught.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
tokenizer 14y ago
As a Canadian, this really grinded some of our gears. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extradition_proceedings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extr...
- Joakal 14y ago
  As an Australian, this really grinded some of our gears. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths (This is actually altruistic copyright infringement)
  - cjrp 14y ago
    As a Brit, this really grinded some of our gears. http://goo.gl/6aqeb http://goo.gl/6aqeb (Redirect to Wiki, since apostrophes in URLs don't work).
3pt14159 14y ago
It shouldn't be for moving ones and zeros, but imagine this: I figure out a way to shield a bomb from scanners and then mail a bomb to a hospital in the states. I kill hundreds. Would it not be reasonable for treaties to come in here?
- 14y ago

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

sohn9 14y ago
Most intelligent comment I've ever seen in Hacker News

grandpoobah 14y ago

Call me a kook but I personally cannot rule out the possibility that he was made to stand down.

adaml_623 14y ago
I think we can safely assume that unlike the judges in the Pirate Bay case some pressure was applied from above for him to stand aside. Last I heard there was not going to be a need for an extradition hearing as Mr Dotcom was volunteering to go to the US and stand trial as he was certain he would be found not guilty in a courtroom.
- ramblerman 14y ago
  > Last I heard there was not going to be a need for an extradition hearing as Mr Dotcom was volunteering to go to the US and stand trial as he was certain he would be found not guilty in a courtroom Not quite. Dotcom has offered to voluntarily fly to the US in return for them releasing a portion of his funds so he can mount a defence. The likelyhood that the US will accept his deal is close to 0.
rprasad 14y ago
All jurisdictions which follow British law, or which are based on British law to some extent (like the U.S.) have judicial ethical guidelines that generally require a judge to stand down if he makes statements that indicate or suggest he cannot impartially judge the case before him based on the law or merits that specifically apply. This judge said "The US is the enemy" while presiding over a case in which the U.S. was the primary opposing litigant. A statement that strongly worded strongly suggests he would not be able to impartially judge the remaining proceedings. Consequently, the instant he made that statement, he was ethically obligated to stand down. In some jurisdictions, not standing down would result in disrobement and potentially disbarrment. Indeed, in most jurisdictions with these rules, judicial decisions can be struck down for a judge's refusal to stand down after making such statements. The one exception is SCOTUS, because its decisions are not subject to further review except by SCOTUS itself.

Joakal 14y ago

More: Pro-Copyright Judges Never Drop Cases Over Conflicts, So Why Does Megaupload Judge Have To Step Down? http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120718/00503119739/pro-copyright-judges-never-drop-cases-over-conflicts-so-why-does-megaupload-judge-have-to-step-down.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120718/00503119739/pro-co... A better translation of TPB here: Aftermath of The Pirate Bay Trial: Peter Sunde’s Plea – In His Own Words - Falkvinge on Infopolicy. http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/06/aftermath-of-the-pirate-bay-trial-peter-sundes-plea-in-his-own-words/ http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/06/aftermath-of-the-pirate-bay-...

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
rprasad 14y ago
I imagine it had something to do with the judge saying that the "US is the enemy", thus indicating that he could not impartially judge a case in which the U.S. was the primary opposing litigant.
- lurkinggrue 14y ago
  He didn't say that. He was quoting a pogo comic: "We have met the enemy and he is us." http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/49/Pogo_-_Earth_Day_1971_poster.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/49/Pogo_-_Earth_D... Not "We have met the enemy and he is U.S."