13 ms·

Pirate Bay Founder Held In Solitary Confinement

161 points by nsns 14y ago

morsch 14y ago
I found this interesting (by user Jenny on the linked page): No, he did NOT ask for protective custody (and I know as I'm in contact with his mother), this is how Sweden treats everyone being held pre-trial. There is a case right now where a guy who has been locked up like this for TWO YEARS is trying to get the supreme court to rule about his treatment. There is no time limit on how long anyone can be held like this, it can (and in many cases it has) go on for years. Amnesty and the European Council have criticized Sweden for this in the past.
- walru 14y ago
  ..and this my friends is why Julian Assange wants nothing to do with being extradited there. Of course, there's also the fact that he'd be shipped to the US once they actually found him again.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    It is no easier to extradite Assange from Sweden than it is from the UK, where he currently resides; both countries are parties to the ECHR. In fact, it's probably harder, as the consent of both the UK and Sweden would probably be required to extradite once he was removed to Sweden.
    - tisme 14y ago
      This is most likely false. You are stating this as a fact but there is some proof to the contrary: Sweden has already extradited people to the US in cases where they really shouldn't have whereas the UK has so far been quite reluctant to do so, see the Gary McKinnon case recently. More info here: http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA
      - tptacek 14y ago
        It looks like maybe you didn't read my whole comment.
        tisme 14y ago
        It looks like maybe you didn't read the linked page.
        vidarh 14y ago
        The "double consent" requirement is irrelevant all the time Sweden has in recent history violated their own laws as well as international treaties to hand political asylum seekers to the CIA for shipment back to the very regime they were fleeing from. Meanwhile, the UK actually relatively regularly refuse extradition requests. If I worried about the US government, I know very well where I'd rather be, and Sweden would be _far_ down that list.
- WhaleCormbit 14y ago
  Wow, this is unbelievable. Can I get a source on the case?
- gcv 14y ago
  No equivalent of the Sixth Amendment in Sweden, then?
  - tptacek 14y ago
    Sure there is. Sweden is a signatory to the ICCPR, like most of the world, and the ICCPR prohibits arbitrary or indefinite detention, requires due process, and forbids torture and cruel punishment. Here's the most recent Periodic Report I could find for Sweden; these reports break down the ICCPR articles, provide some context for how the article is interpreted in the reporting country, and calls to light any issues the country has that complicate the interpretation: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0745675.pdf?OpenElement http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0... To head off a very boring message board argument: having ratified the ICCPR (or, for that matter, having a strong constitution with guaranteed rights for the accused) doesn't automatically mean Sweden invariably respects those rights. But Sweden isn't a police state.
rohern 14y ago
Write him good letters as this situation is terrifying. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_gawande http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_...
- TheAmazingIdiot 14y ago
  So, speaking as a citizen of Indiana, what do we do with these people? What is the ideal prison system?
  - ekianjo 14y ago
    Locking people up should only be reserved for people who are a physical threat to other people around them. Once you apply this kind of rule, you would basically remove a large number of currently jailed people.
    - TheAmazingIdiot 14y ago
      That's not quite where I was going with this discussion. We have a rather disgusting prison system, in which people are in a various forms of lockup for a multitude of crimes. Many of these prisons are for-profit corporations, which seek to lengthen prisoners' stay for added profit. How do we go from what we have now to an ideal prison system? Because of our countries' governance model, even free peoples have problems getting any sort of assistance. Many of these people have been in jail/prison for years and have no clue how to survive. We're not even covering the fact that in this country, a person imprisoned for a drug crime has all state and federal aid taken away from them. Thus ensuring that crime is almost the only route to live.
    - rorrr 14y ago
      And what would you do with thieves, people who destroy property, hunters who kill animals illegally, and a million other non-violent categories that get jailed?
      - vidarh 14y ago
dclowd9901 14y ago
So this person is in jail for facilitating the ability of others to share restricted patterns of 1s and 0s. I hope this is as absurd to everyone as it is to me.
- nestlequ1k 14y ago
  It's sick and it's twisted. The ones who should be in jail are the ones running the labels and movie studios. They're playing with fire with their reaction to the pirate bay. Soon they'll be the ones locked up.
  - finnw 14y ago
    I hope not, since that would require ex-post-facto laws.
- ntumlin 14y ago
  I don't agree that he should be in jail, but the "restricted patterns of 1s and 0s" bit is like saying that murdering someone with a gun is just facilitating the journey of a piece of refined earth that just happens to go through some watery carbon mass.
  - shard972 14y ago
    That analogy is stupid, When you "pirate" something all you are doing is sharing files, nobody looses anything tangible when this happens and nobody is harmed. When you kill someone you take away their life. Can you see the difference?
    - alexqgb 14y ago
      The analogy highlights the rhetorical technique of abstracting something to such a degree that opposition seems unreasonable. It's like saying "I was arrested just for being myself!" when in fact you were arrested for flashing people on the bus. As an approach, this kind of extreme reframing is both abusive and dishonest. When @ntumlin says "it's just a bunch of ones and zeroes" he completely disregards the intangible but very valuable order existing within them. Smash a glass to smithereens, but keep every one, and you still have "a bunch of atoms". Their arrangement, however, is very different - and far less valuable. Focusing only on the atoms to evade responsibility for the value lost in smashing the glass suggests you don't recognize the value of the unbroken glass, which is nonsense. Of course you recognize the value, which is why framing the situation to suggest otherwise is dishonest. And expecting others to go along with an obvious charade is abusive. Beyond your dishonesty, @ntumlin, there's also real harm in your actions (assuming they reflect your thinking). The thing you have failed to acknowledge is that that, when you make a copy, you create an obligation to pay the holder of the copyright a specific amount of money. In other words, when you make a copy a portion of your money stopped being yours and became the author's. He now has a claim (albeit a small one) on your wealth. In the event of a failure to pay, the thing stolen is not the file itself, it's the money. THAT'S what you're stealing. Not the music, the money. "Ok" you say "but I deleted the file". That's irrelevant. You're legal obligation isn't connected to having the file, it's connected to making it. Obviously, there are fair use laws that specify a range of situations in which making a copy doesn't trigger a corresponding obligation to pay. But if you're operating outside those parameters, then you're on the hook. There's no scarcity of files. But there's a real scarcity of people with the time, talent, and resources to make really worthwhile content. And it's the arrangements - not the bits - is what constitutes our culture. At present, there's no reasonable way to enforce people's obligations to share the cost of what they otherwise "share" freely. That's where you find the deprivation - in the money that is no longer changing hands. And, if you think that a person who goes bankrupt because they can no longer charge for their work isn't harmed, you need a new definition of "harm". One more thing: saying - as you do - that "it's just a bunch of ones and zeroes" to a person who may have sweated blood and tears for years to produce the arrangement that actually attracted your attention is just awful. It's an attitude that reflects something deeply rotten about you as a human being. Just understand this: culture thrives in spite of people like you, not because of them. In addition to the money you owe directly to artists, you own a debt of gratitude to those who did get them paid when you refused to do the same.
scelerat 14y ago
He is, what amounts to, a political prisoner.
jpxxx 14y ago
So Sweden tortures. Cute.
scotty79 14y ago
I don't get what's so wrong about solitary confinement. Being left in peace for 23 hours a day sounds perfectly fine to me especially if they give you stuff to read. I'd probably hate 1 hour when I'm not left alone than 23 remaining ones. Is there some part of monkey brain that is supposed to kick in and cause me some distress on some lower level?
- icelancer 14y ago
  All research says people suffer greatly from this. You might be one of the very few sociopathic people who could stand it, I guess.
  - scotty79 14y ago
    Maybe it gets worse after few weeks. The only effect I've noticed after not interacting with people for few weeks is that it's harder to speak for a short while after that.
    - norswap 14y ago
      We're talking about no-one AT ALL. Except maybe three words with the warden. No going online either.
      - scotty79 14y ago
        Yeah. That was before internet. Just me, books and games. Probably TV. I was watching TV before internet. Best holidays ever. :-) Maybe it's not so much because of the "solitary" part but more about being bored out of your mind.
- godDLL 14y ago
  I've done a little solitary in military prison. No more than a week at a time though, on two occasions. It's all about piling on anxiety and taking firm ground from under your feet. See before solitary you'd be in prison, you'd have your cell/tent mates around you; and though you're still being run around campus from 5:30AM to 11:30PM by the tired guards, you're suffering the drab food, the constant boot-camp, the fact you have nothing interesting to do at all or any personal time to do it at; but you're in it with the whole unfortunate/unruly bunch of your peers that you can relate to more or less. Not so in solitary. In solitary you have no natural light, no company; they get to you when they get around to it (food or medical-wise), there's always some sicko screaming at the guards from behind his own cell door, kicking it. They don't turn off the lights ever, if they find you messing with your 'bed' that is not at a designated time, or just out of the blue sometimes – you'll get some personal time (a bootcamp and possibly a beating). It isn't at all like they leave you alone. They do not. The guards don't have any 'personal time' either, you see. They are on the job. And their job is to a) keep you alive and awake, b) make your life miserable, and c) keep you in line; in that order. They do shifts, and their job is to keep your head in prison. You stand no chance. And you know it every minute of being there.
seivan 14y ago
They don't even treat convicted rapists this harsh...
Kiro 14y ago
I have friends who have been in solitary confinement and they say it's nicer than jail (which is very nice in Sweden compared to other countries). It's not what you think it is or like how solitary confinement works in the US.

161 points by nsns 14y ago

I found this interesting (by user Jenny on the linked page): No, he did NOT ask for protective custody (and I know as I'm in contact with his mother), this is how Sweden treats everyone being held pre-trial. There is a case right now where a guy who has been locked up like this for TWO YEARS is trying to get the supreme court to rule about his treatment. There is no time limit on how long anyone can be held like this, it can (and in many cases it has) go on for years. Amnesty and the European Council have criticized Sweden for this in the past.

walru 14y ago
..and this my friends is why Julian Assange wants nothing to do with being extradited there. Of course, there's also the fact that he'd be shipped to the US once they actually found him again.
- tptacek 14y ago
  It is no easier to extradite Assange from Sweden than it is from the UK, where he currently resides; both countries are parties to the ECHR. In fact, it's probably harder, as the consent of both the UK and Sweden would probably be required to extradite once he was removed to Sweden.
  - tisme 14y ago
    This is most likely false. You are stating this as a fact but there is some proof to the contrary: Sweden has already extradited people to the US in cases where they really shouldn't have whereas the UK has so far been quite reluctant to do so, see the Gary McKinnon case recently. More info here: http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA
    - tptacek 14y ago
      It looks like maybe you didn't read my whole comment.
      - tisme 14y ago
        It looks like maybe you didn't read the linked page.
      - vidarh 14y ago
        The "double consent" requirement is irrelevant all the time Sweden has in recent history violated their own laws as well as international treaties to hand political asylum seekers to the CIA for shipment back to the very regime they were fleeing from. Meanwhile, the UK actually relatively regularly refuse extradition requests. If I worried about the US government, I know very well where I'd rather be, and Sweden would be _far_ down that list.
WhaleCormbit 14y ago
Wow, this is unbelievable. Can I get a source on the case?
gcv 14y ago
No equivalent of the Sixth Amendment in Sweden, then?
- tptacek 14y ago
  Sure there is. Sweden is a signatory to the ICCPR, like most of the world, and the ICCPR prohibits arbitrary or indefinite detention, requires due process, and forbids torture and cruel punishment. Here's the most recent Periodic Report I could find for Sweden; these reports break down the ICCPR articles, provide some context for how the article is interpreted in the reporting country, and calls to light any issues the country has that complicate the interpretation: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0745675.pdf?OpenElement http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0... To head off a very boring message board argument: having ratified the ICCPR (or, for that matter, having a strong constitution with guaranteed rights for the accused) doesn't automatically mean Sweden invariably respects those rights. But Sweden isn't a police state.

rohern 14y ago

Write him good letters as this situation is terrifying. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_gawande http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_...

TheAmazingIdiot 14y ago
So, speaking as a citizen of Indiana, what do we do with these people? What is the ideal prison system?
- ekianjo 14y ago
  Locking people up should only be reserved for people who are a physical threat to other people around them. Once you apply this kind of rule, you would basically remove a large number of currently jailed people.
  - TheAmazingIdiot 14y ago
    That's not quite where I was going with this discussion. We have a rather disgusting prison system, in which people are in a various forms of lockup for a multitude of crimes. Many of these prisons are for-profit corporations, which seek to lengthen prisoners' stay for added profit. How do we go from what we have now to an ideal prison system? Because of our countries' governance model, even free peoples have problems getting any sort of assistance. Many of these people have been in jail/prison for years and have no clue how to survive. We're not even covering the fact that in this country, a person imprisoned for a drug crime has all state and federal aid taken away from them. Thus ensuring that crime is almost the only route to live.
  - rorrr 14y ago
    And what would you do with thieves, people who destroy property, hunters who kill animals illegally, and a million other non-violent categories that get jailed?
    - vidarh 14y ago

dclowd9901 14y ago

So this person is in jail for facilitating the ability of others to share restricted patterns of 1s and 0s. I hope this is as absurd to everyone as it is to me.

nestlequ1k 14y ago
It's sick and it's twisted. The ones who should be in jail are the ones running the labels and movie studios. They're playing with fire with their reaction to the pirate bay. Soon they'll be the ones locked up.
- finnw 14y ago
  I hope not, since that would require ex-post-facto laws.
ntumlin 14y ago
I don't agree that he should be in jail, but the "restricted patterns of 1s and 0s" bit is like saying that murdering someone with a gun is just facilitating the journey of a piece of refined earth that just happens to go through some watery carbon mass.
- shard972 14y ago
  That analogy is stupid, When you "pirate" something all you are doing is sharing files, nobody looses anything tangible when this happens and nobody is harmed. When you kill someone you take away their life. Can you see the difference?
  - alexqgb 14y ago
    The analogy highlights the rhetorical technique of abstracting something to such a degree that opposition seems unreasonable. It's like saying "I was arrested just for being myself!" when in fact you were arrested for flashing people on the bus. As an approach, this kind of extreme reframing is both abusive and dishonest. When @ntumlin says "it's just a bunch of ones and zeroes" he completely disregards the intangible but very valuable order existing within them. Smash a glass to smithereens, but keep every one, and you still have "a bunch of atoms". Their arrangement, however, is very different - and far less valuable. Focusing only on the atoms to evade responsibility for the value lost in smashing the glass suggests you don't recognize the value of the unbroken glass, which is nonsense. Of course you recognize the value, which is why framing the situation to suggest otherwise is dishonest. And expecting others to go along with an obvious charade is abusive. Beyond your dishonesty, @ntumlin, there's also real harm in your actions (assuming they reflect your thinking). The thing you have failed to acknowledge is that that, when you make a copy, you create an obligation to pay the holder of the copyright a specific amount of money. In other words, when you make a copy a portion of your money stopped being yours and became the author's. He now has a claim (albeit a small one) on your wealth. In the event of a failure to pay, the thing stolen is not the file itself, it's the money. THAT'S what you're stealing. Not the music, the money. "Ok" you say "but I deleted the file". That's irrelevant. You're legal obligation isn't connected to having the file, it's connected to making it. Obviously, there are fair use laws that specify a range of situations in which making a copy doesn't trigger a corresponding obligation to pay. But if you're operating outside those parameters, then you're on the hook. There's no scarcity of files. But there's a real scarcity of people with the time, talent, and resources to make really worthwhile content. And it's the arrangements - not the bits - is what constitutes our culture. At present, there's no reasonable way to enforce people's obligations to share the cost of what they otherwise "share" freely. That's where you find the deprivation - in the money that is no longer changing hands. And, if you think that a person who goes bankrupt because they can no longer charge for their work isn't harmed, you need a new definition of "harm". One more thing: saying - as you do - that "it's just a bunch of ones and zeroes" to a person who may have sweated blood and tears for years to produce the arrangement that actually attracted your attention is just awful. It's an attitude that reflects something deeply rotten about you as a human being. Just understand this: culture thrives in spite of people like you, not because of them. In addition to the money you owe directly to artists, you own a debt of gratitude to those who did get them paid when you refused to do the same.

scelerat 14y ago

He is, what amounts to, a political prisoner.

jpxxx 14y ago

So Sweden tortures. Cute.

scotty79 14y ago

I don't get what's so wrong about solitary confinement. Being left in peace for 23 hours a day sounds perfectly fine to me especially if they give you stuff to read. I'd probably hate 1 hour when I'm not left alone than 23 remaining ones. Is there some part of monkey brain that is supposed to kick in and cause me some distress on some lower level?

icelancer 14y ago
All research says people suffer greatly from this. You might be one of the very few sociopathic people who could stand it, I guess.
- scotty79 14y ago
  Maybe it gets worse after few weeks. The only effect I've noticed after not interacting with people for few weeks is that it's harder to speak for a short while after that.
  - norswap 14y ago
    We're talking about no-one AT ALL. Except maybe three words with the warden. No going online either.
    - scotty79 14y ago
      Yeah. That was before internet. Just me, books and games. Probably TV. I was watching TV before internet. Best holidays ever. :-) Maybe it's not so much because of the "solitary" part but more about being bored out of your mind.
godDLL 14y ago
I've done a little solitary in military prison. No more than a week at a time though, on two occasions. It's all about piling on anxiety and taking firm ground from under your feet. See before solitary you'd be in prison, you'd have your cell/tent mates around you; and though you're still being run around campus from 5:30AM to 11:30PM by the tired guards, you're suffering the drab food, the constant boot-camp, the fact you have nothing interesting to do at all or any personal time to do it at; but you're in it with the whole unfortunate/unruly bunch of your peers that you can relate to more or less. Not so in solitary. In solitary you have no natural light, no company; they get to you when they get around to it (food or medical-wise), there's always some sicko screaming at the guards from behind his own cell door, kicking it. They don't turn off the lights ever, if they find you messing with your 'bed' that is not at a designated time, or just out of the blue sometimes – you'll get some personal time (a bootcamp and possibly a beating). It isn't at all like they leave you alone. They do not. The guards don't have any 'personal time' either, you see. They are on the job. And their job is to a) keep you alive and awake, b) make your life miserable, and c) keep you in line; in that order. They do shifts, and their job is to keep your head in prison. You stand no chance. And you know it every minute of being there.

seivan 14y ago

They don't even treat convicted rapists this harsh...

Kiro 14y ago

I have friends who have been in solitary confinement and they say it's nicer than jail (which is very nice in Sweden compared to other countries). It's not what you think it is or like how solitary confinement works in the US.