Pirate Bay judge Norström ‘unbiased’
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Judge Tomas Norström (left), who presided in The Pirate Bay trial, Tomas Norström, is fair and square.
So says (in effect) Stockholm District Court, and thus did it argue in its report to the Svea Court of Appeal, which will rule on the issue, says The Local.
In what has to be the biggest scandal yet, “far from being impartial, the judge in the case is a member of pro-copyright groups,” p2pnet quoted emigmax as saying in TorrentFreak.
“The judge has several engagements – together with the prosecution lawyers for the movie and music industries,” he said, going on to list organisations in which the entertainment cartel judge has interests in »»»
Swedish Association of Copyright (SFU) – The judge Tomas Norström is a member of this discussion forum that holds seminars, debates and releases the Nordic Intellectual Property Law Review. Other members of this outfit? Henrik Pontén (Swedish Anti-Piracy Bureau), Monique Wadsted (movie industry lawyer) and Peter Danowsky (IFPI) – the latter is also a member of the board of the association.
Swedish Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (SFIR) – The judge Tomas Norström sits on the board of this association that works for stronger copyright laws. Last year they held the Nordic Championships in Intellectual Property Rights Process Strategies.
.SE (The Internet Infrastructure Foundation) – Tomas Norström works for the foundation that oversees the .se name domain and advises on domain name disputes. His colleague at the foundation? Monique Wadsted. Wadsted says she’s never met Norström although they have worked together. [NOTE: Wadsted is a lawyer who acted for the movie industry - Jon.]
“Every time I accept a case I make an assessment on whether I am part of it or not,” the story had Norström stating, addinbg, “But I have not felt that I am biased because of those commitments.”
Defence lawyers pointed out in appealing the convictions of their clients – Peter Sunde, Fredrik Neij, Carl Lundström and Gottfrid Svartholm Warg – on charges of complicity in breach of the Copyright Act, that one of the organizations receives funding from the recording industry organization IFPI.
But, says The Local, the Stockholm District Court now says criticisms are misplaced.
“The memberships are simply a means to gain increased knowledge of copyright legislation issues and are not therefore grounds to establish bias,” it reckons, says the storyy, going on »»»
On the contrary, the court argues, it is imperative that judges remain abreast of the issues.
Defence lawyers have also maintained that Nordström had been hand-picked for the high-profile trial in contravention of the prevailing practice of the random selection of judges.
“This we strongly reject. The selection was made in adherence with the District Court’s rules of procedure,” Chief Justice Lena Berke at the District Court said.
“Due to a re-organization, the appointment for the case was changed but the procedure was open and objective, the court states,” adds The Local.
The Pirate Bay trial woundup on April 17th and The Pirate Bay four were each sentenced to a year in prison, and ordered to pay 30 million kronor ($3.8 million) in damages.
Definitely stay tuned.
(Cheers, Marc)
The Local – ‘Pirate Bay judge not biased’, June 8, 2009
p2pnet – The Pirate Bay trial judge accused of bias, April 23, 2009
TorrentFreak – Pirate Bay Judge Accused of Bias, Calls for a Retrial, April 23, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy! Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
June 9th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
“On the contrary, the court argues, it is imperative that judges remain abreast of the issues.”
Ok, but how many organizations on the other side of the argument is he a member of? If he’s only a member of organizations on one side of the argument, he’s biased.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
That’s why TPB does’nt stand a chance of a fair trial. Fu**ing b*sta*ds. Just stop voting for their masters the MP’s.
June 9th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Big corporate money has always known the importance of having politicians in their pocket.
June 10th, 2009 at 2:44 am
If this judge was a member of the Nazi party and/or the KKK and the defendants were Jewish/black then it would be ok and not biased?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:00 am
What chance would a judge have of being declared “impartial” in a copyright case if his membership in the Pirate Party had surfaced?
June 10th, 2009 at 5:35 am
This article forgetts one of the most important points; that one of the organizations (can’t remember which one) has a stated aim of strengthening copyright legislation. So much for just reading up on the law. They wouldn’t have said the same if he was a member of Piratbyrån.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:32 am
That is so easy to say that you are not biased, but so hard to prove. Mainly when you are a member of the Swedish Association of Copyright (SFU). They is no f*cking way he is unbiased. Right now it is like saying : ” Oh Hitler? Yeah he was unbiased, you cannot say he was biased just because he killed all those Jews…Hitler was fair”. A fair trial would have led to a complete opposite end.
June 24th, 2009 at 8:59 am
This is clearly a conflict of interests. And a judge does not need the have “knowledge of copyright legislation issues”; he should call independent expert witnesses for that.