AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2005-01-04, 07:07   Link #41
LynnieS
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: China
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamui4356
I could have sworn a judge ruled that these type of lawsuits were illegal and these companies had to get the actual names first. Of course such a decision could have been reversed, or I could have misread some article. It's also possible I dreamed the whole thing...
Don't remember fully any more, to be honest. Getting the actual people - their IP addresses anyway - is pretty easy with BT; you can still hide your information, though, I suspect, so a John Doe method might still be useful.

You can also go against the ISPs, which come to think of it, have been tried, I think.

Quote:
If the links LynnieS posted are correct, then it would seem they are doing something illegal in their country. Even if they aren't, they can still be sued in england or the US. Sure they act like they're safe, but the people at piratebay probably know as much about law as I do, and most of my knowledge comes from watching law and order on tv. I doubt they consulted a lawyer of any kind, even the one passed out drunk in an alley they mention. One day they're going to get a very nasty surprise in the mail.
Small correction. I had posted earlier that the site that I found would indicate that the ISP used by PB has an obligation, under Swedish statute, to remove anything that violates copyright.

Additionally, that Swedish Personal Registry act, even after amendment in 1999, can result in damages, fines, and a prison term of up to 2 years. The only good thing about this for PB is that its scope is rather vague, so until it goes through the courts or is amended, a lot of people are just leaving everything as-is. The same, it seems, goes for the EU version, but I suspect people aren't taking stupid chances just in case. I'm not sure how much sympathy PB will get, though, if push comes to shove; they look to be rude to everyone arguing against them.

What I don't know is if the 1960 statute they are quoting remains in effect. I suspect not, given its age and Sweden having joined both the EU and the WTO in 1995. Some of a country's soverign powers are supposed to have been transferred when it joins the EU, but I haven't yet found anything in the EU treaties that makes exemptions.

I'm not even sure that the EU can exempt itself from the WTO regulations in any way, shape, or form.

Of course, these treaties are a real pain to read; I've now found my new bedtime reading. Guaranteed to put you under in 10 seconds, or your money back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappater
Really you can't be arrested and brought to the UK if you are doing something in sweden that is legal in sweden but is illegal in the UK.
Umm, I believe that actually you can. I've heard of cases in which extradition has been denied because of insufficient evidence having been presented to the country doing the extraditing, because the chap was convicted and sentenced to death, or such. It can also be refused, I think, if the person requested is a national of the country. It's basically mutual cooperation.

I'll be honest, though, and say that the cases I do remember involve criminal acts - either alone or together with a civil crime. This, I don't think, is a criminal event - unless there's something special about PB and LT? From a civil law point of view, oof, I really don't see how their being in Sweden is going to protect anyone, especially(?) if they're using the U.K. courts.

(Where is a lawyer in EU law when you really need one? )
__________________
"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!
LynnieS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-04, 08:19   Link #42
zappater
zapper
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sweden, Basement
Age: 24
What I mean is, -just say that if killing someone would be legal in sweden (it isn't)- if you kill someone in sweden you can't be brought to the UK and arrested there because it is illegal in the UK, after all the act had been commited in Sweden and not in the UK and because of that you are under Swedish and not english law.
Otherwise what would the meaning of swedish law be? if you can just be prosecuted in the UK under UK law even though the act was done in Sweden?
__________________
Ignorance is bliss.
-
Life is all about joy.
zappater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-04, 08:31   Link #43
Inuzuka
now with 20% more ego!
 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Singapore
Age: 23
Send a message via MSN to Inuzuka
Quote:
Originally Posted by zappater
What I mean is, -just say that if killing someone would be legal in sweden (it isn't)- if you kill someone in sweden you can't be brought to the UK and arrested there because it is illegal in the UK, after all the act had been commited in Sweden and not in the UK and because of that you are under Swedish and not english law.
Otherwise what would the meaning of swedish law be? if you can just be prosecuted in the UK under UK law even though the act was done in Sweden?
Well, no. (IMHO you picked a bad example, sorry.)

I agree with microlith, seeing as how these are the people breaking the laws and the rights (Although they do seem somewhat stupid after reading) here.
Inuzuka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-04, 12:27   Link #44
Kowalski
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sweden
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by LynnieS
Wait. So the PB boys are using Varumarkeslag 1960:644 as their defense? I have yet to find a version of Sweden's laws on-line and in English; the database listed in Google doesn't look to be up, but that 1960, it predates the mass acceptance of the Internet by, what, 30+ years?

It predates Sweden's joining the EU by 35 years.

It predates Sweden's joining of the WTO by 35 years.

Hell, it's probably older than most everyone on the AS forums! Can't they come up with something, I don't know, a bit more recent and less likely to be changed/replaced by something else?
1960:644 hasn't been revoked but it has been changed. But, I think, in Swedish law you refer to laws by the SFS-number when they were instituted. Thus 1960:644 refers to the current Varumarkeslag (Trademark Act in english) with changes included.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LynnieS
If this article is correct, Svensklag 1998:112 does place an obligation on the ISP to remove anything that affects copyright.

It doesn't say anything about only protecting the rights of Swedes only, and I suspect that other EU countries will be very upset if it did. Is there something more recent than this?

Has the Swedish Personal Registry law been changed also since 1999? There are exemptions to protect journalists, but PB isn't a journalistic site.
Yes, according to 1998:112 there's certain restriction regarding copyright as what is said in Lag (1960:729) om upphovsrätt till litterära och konstnärliga verk kap. 5(Act (1960:729) regarding copyright for literary and artistic works Article 5). From what I can figure out from the text (only in Swedish unfortunately, however I might translate it if I have some time) this might be a grey zone. I think it however treats Swedish and foreign works regardless. I'll ask in another, Swedish forum where there's people who's more knowledgeable in Swedish law than me.
Kowalski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-04, 21:25   Link #45
LynnieS
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: China
Quote:
Originally Posted by zappater
What I mean is, -just say that if killing someone would be legal in sweden (it isn't)- if you kill someone in sweden you can't be brought to the UK and arrested there because it is illegal in the UK, after all the act had been commited in Sweden and not in the UK and because of that you are under Swedish and not english law.
Otherwise what would the meaning of swedish law be? if you can just be prosecuted in the UK under UK law even though the act was done in Sweden?
That's a confusing example. My interpretation:

They wouldn't bring such a person to the U.K. for trial since the crime was committed in Sweden. From a jurisdiction point of view, the Swedish authorities would have it. If the person fled to the U.K. after committing the crime and was found/arrested, it'll be the British officers who make the arrest; there may be a Swedish one present, though, if given notice, I suspect. Sweden should then invoke any mutual extradition treaties it has with the U.K. to request that the person be returned for trial. If the person had committed a crime in the U.K., it might end up in a tug-of-war. If the person will face the death penalty in Sweden, it's possible that the U.K. (or several other countries out there) will refuse extradition because of existing laws; I think that Canada has such a law in place?

In the last case, I'm not sure if this person can be tried in the U.K. courts or just be prevented from leaving the country till an agreement has been made. I wonder if the trial can be moved to an EU court instead, though?

There was a case like this in Japan, I think, recently. A Japanese man committed a crime (murder?) in South Korea, and was caught in Japan. Now the South Koreans want him for trial. The last I heard was that he'll be extradited to South Korea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kowalski
1960:644 hasn't been revoked but it has been changed. But, I think, in Swedish law you refer to laws by the SFS-number when they were instituted. Thus 1960:644 refers to the current Varumarkeslag (Trademark Act in english) with changes included.
Gotcha. That's a bit confusing from this side; I'm used to the year, if one is there, being when the law came into effect. Cheers.

What's the effect if EU law conflicts with one for one of its member countries, BTW? It should be defined under treaty - since it's likely to happen - or will they have to face an EU judge to decide that first? It seems like Sweden's laws have been brought in line, however, with EU directives instead of the other way around.
__________________
"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!
LynnieS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-04, 22:04   Link #46
gunner
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
what about a hooker ..
have sex whit a hooker in some place that's legal ..
then fly to another country where its illegal .. they wont arrest you
gunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-04, 23:58   Link #47
Kowalski
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sweden
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunner
what about a hooker ..
have sex whit a hooker in some place that's legal ..
then fly to another country where its illegal .. they wont arrest you
Of course not, they won't arrest you. If a Swede would go to Germany, and have sex with a prostitute (which is illegal in Sweden,- off topic- while on the other hand selling sex is legal. Thus buying sex illegal, selling sex legal), the Swedish authorities wouldn't be able to arrest, because the crime happened on German soil and on German soil, German laws rule, and according to them buying sex is not a crime.

However, the analogy is wrong. There's no victim in this analogy, while there is in the case with Pirate Bay (the companies in question). A more fit example would be a theft case. Let's say an American woman went to a land where theft was allowed, and in that country was stolen on her valuables and money, that's a better analogy. However, I still think, that USA wouldn't be able to claim that the country in question should follow their laws because a citizen of USA was affected, since their laws are valid on their soil and only their laws (unless their laws state that their some authority higher than the state's laws, like Sweden and EU, then of course that higher authorities laws are the ones to be consulted).

Quote:
Originally Posted by LynnieS
They wouldn't bring such a person to the U.K. for trial since the crime was committed in Sweden. From a jurisdiction point of view, the Swedish authorities would have it. If the person fled to the U.K. after committing the crime and was found/arrested, it'll be the British officers who make the arrest; there may be a Swedish one present, though, if given notice, I suspect. Sweden should then invoke any mutual extradition treaties it has with the U.K. to request that the person be returned for trial. If the person had committed a crime in the U.K., it might end up in a tug-of-war. If the person will face the death penalty in Sweden, it's possible that the U.K. (or several other countries out there) will refuse extradition because of existing laws; I think that Canada has such a law in place?
Yes, I believe that all of it is correct. However in this particular case, the crime, out of an American point of view, was committed on Swedish soil, therefore it's up to the Swedish laws and the Swedish Court System to decide whether this is a crime or not, and if it's, what kind of punishment (or "consequence" as the Swedish system puts it) is fit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynnie S
What's the effect if EU law conflicts with one for one of its member countries, BTW? It should be defined under treaty - since it's likely to happen - or will they have to face an EU judge to decide that first? It seems like Sweden's laws have been brought in line, however, with EU directives instead of the other way around.
I'm quite certain that most of the time EU law beats Swedish law. However I'm not quite sure about the details in this case. And then there's EU "Hard law" and "Soft law". "Hard law" works like a normal law, but "soft law" is more of a cooperation form, which resides quite a bit on voluntarism among the countries. The biggest sanction (or "punishment") EU can hand out, in this case, is a slap on the wrist and say "Bad, country, bad. Shame on you". Thus not very effective.
Kowalski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-05, 00:00   Link #48
Testing321
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by zappater
What I mean is, -just say that if killing someone would be legal in sweden (it isn't)- if you kill someone in sweden you can't be brought to the UK and arrested there because it is illegal in the UK, after all the act had been commited in Sweden and not in the UK and because of that you are under Swedish and not english law.
Otherwise what would the meaning of swedish law be? if you can just be prosecuted in the UK under UK law even though the act was done in Sweden?
However, if someone killed a British citizen in Sweden, he most certainly could ...and probably *would*...be tried in UK courts for the crime. Great Britain would demand that the murderer be extradited from Sweden to the UK to be tried.

Edit: I see that LynnieS had already responded to this, however, and in better detail. Tis a pity I can't delete my post now. Perhaps a kind Mod would remove this post (and only this post) for me...
Testing321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-05, 05:41   Link #49
LynnieS
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: China
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kowalski
Yes, I believe that all of it is correct. However in this particular case, the crime, out of an American point of view, was committed on Swedish soil, therefore it's up to the Swedish laws and the Swedish Court System to decide whether this is a crime or not, and if it's, what kind of punishment (or "consequence" as the Swedish system puts it) is fit.
I don't think that this constitutes a violation of a criminal statute, and civil rules are, IMHO, a bit less strict. A white-collar crime, from a definition point of view, would be something of a stretch. Being sued for damages would, however, be bad enough.


Quote:
I'm quite certain that most of the time EU law beats Swedish law. However I'm not quite sure about the details in this case. And then there's EU "Hard law" and "Soft law". "Hard law" works like a normal law, but "soft law" is more of a cooperation form, which resides quite a bit on voluntarism among the countries. The biggest sanction (or "punishment") EU can hand out, in this case, is a slap on the wrist and say "Bad, country, bad. Shame on you". Thus not very effective.
ROTFL. I went when I read this the first time, and then I read an article in the WSJ about the EU and languages. Afterwards, I grinned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by From the article (and no, I'm not posting the entire thing!) credited to Monsieur A. Barrionuevo
As sovereign nations, EU members don't easily give up their prerogatives in the name of common cause. Member countries can -- and often do -- exercise their rights to block key initiatives or keep inefficient practices in place.
(Of course, I was also grinning over the price tag for translating EU regulations into every official language - almost 1.6 billion dollars U.S. and growing - to not offend anyone. Do the taxpayers even know that this is happening? And I thought the struggle between the U.S. government and the state ones was a chuckle. )

Whether or not this cuts PB any slack, I have no idea. I suppose the usual brute force/sledgehammer approach will still work regardless.
__________________
"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!
LynnieS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-05, 09:36   Link #50
zappater
zapper
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sweden, Basement
Age: 24
The point I was trying to do was that everything that PB does is on swedish soil 'cause the server is on swedish soil. And what they are doing is legal in Sweden, thus it doesn't matter if it is illegal in some other country.

Then I should note that the only thing that they have on their servers is information on were you can get access to some files. To download some of those files are illegal others are not illegal to download, but they them selves (PB) doesn't have any of those files, just information on were to get them.
__________________
Ignorance is bliss.
-
Life is all about joy.
zappater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-01-05, 14:09   Link #51
Kowalski
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sweden
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by LynnieS
I don't think that this constitutes a violation of a criminal statute, and civil rules are, IMHO, a bit less strict. A white-collar crime, from a definition point of view, would be something of a stretch. Being sued for damages would, however, be bad enough.
Yes, probably, but the bill for PB in Sweden would be much lower then for instance in USA. Getting over 100 000 $ is very rare, even around 50 000$ is rare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LynnieS
ROTFL. I went when I read this the first time, and then I read an article in the WSJ about the EU and languages. Afterwards, I grinned.
Yeah, but, to be fair, there's also advantages with soft law. It's much easier to cooperate if the outcome will be soft law and not hard law. If there were only hard law, EU wouldn't have come far as they have today on areas like social security or labour protection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LynnieS
(Of course, I was also grinning over the price tag for translating EU regulations into every official language - almost 1.6 billion dollars U.S. and growing - to not offend anyone. Do the taxpayers even know that this is happening? And I thought the struggle between the U.S. government and the state ones was a chuckle. )

Whether or not this cuts PB any slack, I have no idea. I suppose the usual brute force/sledgehammer approach will still work regardless.
Again, there's advantages with translating to all languages in the EU (except maybe some miniority languages), since then all documents will be able to all citizens and to most of the citizens in their mother tongue. The democracy within EU gains from this and not translating probably would anger more people than the cost of translating.

On topic again, PB case would take maybe 1-2 years in the Swedish court system, if you assume they go up to the Supreme Court. However, it may take several years in the European Court, which may deterr many companies from taking legal action.
Kowalski is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.