The single most important question that hasn't been answered

Sweden's first Ipred lawsuit ends up in the European Court of Justice. That's hardly a surprise. What is a surprise to me though is that what I consider to be one of the most important questions in this case hasn't even been touched by the courts:

How did the anti-piracy agency, Antipiratbyrån, manage to legally break into a secure server in order to gather evidence? And furthermore, do the courts find illegal activities to be perfectly ok when performed by representatives of the entertainment lobby?

Enforcing hands-free for car phone use is useless

Sweden is the only European country where using a hand-held cell phone while driving isn't illegal. All other countries require hands-free equipment. Now the lobby organization Motormännen demans similar legislation in Sweden. The questions is, why?

According to studies the distraction of talking on the phone is what causes undesirable behavior in traffic, not whether or not you're holding the phone in your hand. There are no facts to support banning the use of hand-held phones in favor of hands-free equipment.

Motormännen point out that between 10-20 people die or are severely injured in car accidents every year because of phone use, both talking and texting. First of all, between 10 and 20? The difference between those number is way to high to tell anything, really. Second, there is a huge difference between talking on the phone while keeping your eyes on the road, and writing a text message. Combining these two activities in the statistics is just plain wrong.

Let me point you guys to this report (PDF) prepared for the European Commission in June 2009:

Hands-free versus hand-held?
Studies indicate that the use of hands-free phones causes as much
important driver distraction as the use of hand-held phones. Some studies show that in-car telephone
conversations while driving can impair drivers more than listening to the radio or talking to passengers.
An epidemiological study of crash involvement found that mobile phone use was associated with a greater
likelihood of crash than passenger carriage and increasing numbers of passengers

and

Effects of texting?
Many young drivers admit to the largely illegal activity of texting while driving. Text
messaging has a detrimental effect on safety-critical driving tasks such as lane-keeping, hazard detection
and the detection and appropriate response to traffic signs.

There we are. So stop with the bullshit and focus on the facts. If you want to ban phone conversations in cars then by all means do so, but stop pretending that everything will be fine if we just use hands-free equipment. In all fairness, Sweden appears to be the only country in Europe that hasn't based a law on pure propaganda. That's probably a first, and they deserve credit for that.

Diplomatic immunity

I was driving along E18 outside Stockholm today at around 9:30 am, on my way to a customer meeting, when a complete maniac in a dark blue Volvo V70 2.5T almost hit me doing a poorly executed maneuver in which he squeezed in between myself, in the right lane, and another car driving in the left lane, only to continue his journey of insanity. The speed limit on this part of the road is 70 km/h and this complete moron was doing at least 110-120. Enough to lose your drivers licence and get sentenced to jail.

Why this insane behaviour, you might ask? Easy. The licence plates were blue and had the license number BT002B. In case you don't know, that spells diplomatic immunity. This raving lunartic could do whatever he want, speeding, causing accidents, killing innocent people, and there will be no legal reprecussions against him.

Now I do understand the reason for diplomatic immunity, don't get me wrong. In some countries a diplomat could risk all kinds of nasty stuff if he or she weren't immune to prosecution. However I do have a problem with this beeing a carte blanche for people like the driver of this Volvo to do whatever they want without there being any consequences.

How about any legal matters would be transfered to the homecountry of the diplomat, and he or she would be subject to his or her country's laws - by default? Sure the system opens up for that possibility, but how often do you actually see it being used?

Pleading incompetence

I've heard about pleading ignorance, but pleading incompetence, and actually getting away with it? Seriously? The Swedish Security Service has unclear rules on how to treat surveillance material (isn't that the main part of their job?), and to add insult to injury the employees are so incompetent that they can't be held responsible for their actions:

Lind pekar ut oklara beslutsordningar samt brister i interna regler och kompetens på Säpo, men han bedömer att inga tjänstefel begåtts.

Juristens Funderingar has a few more thoughts on the subject.

Since when is religion an ethnic group?

A poster by an obscure political party, Skånepartiet, has caused some controversy with the overly sensitive muslim community, as it depicts a nude prophet Mohammed with one of his 9 year old brides by his side.

Now what I don't get is how this is could be considered agitation against an ethnic group, and thus a criminal offence? Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Mohammed in fact have a 9 year old wife, making this poster more or less historically correct? And since when is a world religion equal to an ethnic group? If it is, I guess posters depicting Jesus Christ in various less flattering settings should suffer the same fate? Come on, take a chill pill and focus on what's important instead.

I'm taking my chances here, hoping I'm not persecuted for showing Jesus Christ in an epic light sabre duel with Santa Claus.

Photo: mootrealm

The Minister of Injustice, part 2

What has to be Sweden's least popular politician at the moment, the notoriously incompetent, spiteful and integrity-hating minister of (in)justice Beatrice Ask (M), has gone ahead and done it again. The video below speaks for itself, as this sorry excuse of a politician goes on record suggesting that the families and neighbors of suspected sex buyers should be informed what they might have been up to:



Mind you this is a suggestion to penalize (no pun intended) potentially innocent persons in the most barbaric, medieval way for a petty crime that has no victim. We're not talking about trafficking, rape or child abuse, those crimes are taken care of by other and much harsher laws. We're simply talking about consenting adults exchanging favors for money that Swedish politicians only recently decided were morally unacceptable, and thus should be criminalized.

Today, after days of increasing criticism, Ask herself comments on her ridiculous suggestion:

- Ja naturligtvis och javisst gör jag en pudel. Det var klumpigt uttryckt eftersom det kan och har missuppfattats.

Say what? She's sorry her suggestion was misinterpreted??? Does she think the Swedish public are that stupid? The message was loud and clear Ask, without room for any kind of misinterpretations: We should put the presumption of innocent until proven guilty to the side and permanently stigmatize anyone suspected of buying sex from a consenting adult.

That's the Swedish (not the Iranian or Chinese, in case you were wondering) Minister of Justice, ladies and gentlemen.

The Minister of Injustice

The Swedish Minister of Injustice, the notorious Beatrice Ask (M), continues her crusade to make Sweden a less safe place to be. Now she wants the police to be able to do random drug tests on kids without the consent of their legal guardian.

She doesn't see any risk of the police taking this opportunity to harass innocent youngsters, because clearly the police have better things to do:

Lagrådet har också varnat för att urinprov under tvång kan användas av polisen som en slags bestraffning. Den kritiken avvisar Ask och menar att polisen har viktigare saker för sig än att ägna sig åt att trakassera unga.

Riiiiiight... Perhaps you should get your head out of your ass and start reading a newspaper every now and then, Ask. And yes, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here, which I probably shouldn't, you disgusting piece of totalitarian garbage.

Let copyright legislation rest in peace

Couldn't have said it better myself. There is no way to uphold copyright laws on a non-commercial scale without introducing fascism. Which is exactly what is being introduced in Europe and the US at an increasing speed these days.

Can I be an Internet expert too, please?

DN published a letter on what was supposedly freedom and Internet today by a guy called Peter Strömbäck. This wouldn't be a problem if they didn't go ahead and wrongfully call him an "Internet expert", something he's clearly not. His CV suggests he's rather an intellectual property expert and/or a lobbyist, anything really but an Internet expert. And that shows clearly in his letter, where he promotes more regulations and intellectual property protection on the Internet. Because clearly more rules and regulations means freedom. Also the argument on Telia's dividend is a pathetic, classic lobby argument. "Bohoo, the ISP's make billions aiding their customers in commiting copyright infringements and stealing our money". Yeah, right.

Why is it so hard for lobbyists like Strömbäck to acknowledge that the same rules and laws that apply in the "analog" world should also apply on the Internet? It's really as simple as that. The mailman doesn't open your mail every day just in case you happen to engage in any criminal activity per mail. Why should your ISP do that? You are able to walk around freely and anonymously in the "analog" world. No one is registering your every step, asking you for "papieren, bitte!!!" at every crossroad. Why should you have to be traced every step of the way on the Internet? Why do lobbyists and politicians want to uphold a DDR set of rules on the Internet and a Western set of rules in the "analog" world?

- Annoyed Citizen, an Internet expert.

Guilty until proven innocent

The mafiosos over at the record companies (yes, the usual "axis of evil", Universal Music, EMI Music, Sony Music and Warner Music) continue their crusade to make the world an insecure place to live. According to Dagens Nyheter, Dagens Industri and Svenska Dagbladet they insist that two of the Pirate Bay founders are still involved in the management of the site, and should be fined accordingly. Not only that, but they seriously expect that mere allegations should be enough, and that the accusers should have to prove their innocence! The witchburners of the 18th century would be proud.

Enligt skivbolagen har de två har brutit mot vitesförbudet "genom att delta i driften av fildelningstjänsten", och skivbolagen anser att bara det faktum att Pirate Bay fortfarande fungerar är tillräckligt för att de två ska anses ha överträtt förbudet - såvida de inte kan visa att de inte längre är delaktiga.

"So, you're not a witch, huh? Prove it, or you're obviously guilty and will be burned at the stake."

I actually had to read that last sentence a couple of times before I realized it was serious. The good old "guilty until proven innocent" tactics that most developed countries abandoned decades ago. You're kidding me. However I'm quite sure the court will continue to obey the entertainment industry no matter how seriously it violates basic human rights.

Social democrats say no to children getting in debt

So the socialist democratic party, Socialdemokraterna, have hatched yet another brilliant idea: Providers of loans via text messages ("SMS loans") will be prohibited to provide loans to anyone under 18 years of age. Wow, that must have taken them a long time to agree on.

And here I was thinking that the law already protected people under the age of 18 against taking loans or any kind of credit really, whether it's approved via SMS, e-mail or in a store or bank. What's the bloody point of making these regulations depend on specific technology that exists today but might very well be gone tomorrow? When will Socialdemokraterna insist that we ban Facebook-loans for people under 18? Or MySpace-loans? Or iPhone app loans?

My god these people are dumber than breadsticks.

Public enemy number 1

Enemy of the Internet and the free world, Monique Wadsted, is taking the absurd rounds in the Pirate Bay farce one step further. She's once again used her comradeship with some rotten apples at Stockholm tingsrätt in order to get what is arguably one of the most bizarre court rulings I've ever heard of here in Sweden:

Nu tvingar Stockholms tingsrätt Pirate Bay att stänga ner. De har vänt sig mot personerna bakom sajten och har bestämt att de ska betala totalt 1 miljon kronor i böter om de fortsätter driva sajten.

Mind you it has not yet been established whether The Pirate Bay is illegal or not, and there is no proof that these two gentlemen are actually involved in the website anymore. I guess if I had a friend in that corrupt institution called Stockholm tingsrätt (or a lot of money to bribe one to be my friend), I could accuse Svenska Dagbladet's website of being illegal, and force them to shut down way before the case had actually been settled. Also, I could just point out a random person who I believed was responsible for running Svenska Dagbladet's site and make this person legally responsible for shutting the site down or pay the consequences. For instance, this person could be my nosy neighbor that I dislike. He'll never know what hit him.

Reminds me a lot of The Trial.
Mrs. Wadsted herself is obviously happy as a clam, as she has once more demonstrated the absolute power of the entertainment industry over the court of law, and the complete and utter contempt of basic human rights that this industry stands for. Money über alles.

– I somras fick vi ett förbud mot Black Internet och nu har vi fått ett förbud mot Fredrik Neij och Gottfrid Svartholm säger Monique Wadsted, som företräder Hollywoodbolagen juridiskt i rättegången om The Pirate Bay.

Evidence in the way of "justice"

According to lawyer (yes, this buffoon is actually a lawyer, believe it or not!) Peter Danowsky, you can't expect the entertainment mafia industry to protect their new business models if they actually need any kind of evidence to obtain info on the person(s) behind an IP-address. Obviously, a mere allegation based on insufficient information gathered using plain criminal methods should be more than enough to get this information from the court, and proceed to ruining a persons life, innocent or not:

Bokförlagens juridiska ombud Peter Danowsky bedömer i överklagandet att syftet med lagen riskerar att undermineras om beviskraven ställs för högt.

What's that? Rule of law? Naw...we don't believe in that.

– Hovrättens beslut är inte acceptabelt för rättighetshavare, säger Danowsky.

Well, Mr. Danowsky, I can assure you it's perfectly acceptable for all those people who would be hunted down and had their life destroyed just because they might or might not have shared the latest Shakira album with others. I think most people, with the exception of politicians, entertainment industry lobbyists and Peter Danowsky agree that no one should be convicted without a shred of credible evidence. That is what has made us a civilized society, you don't burn a person on the stake just because someone accused this person of being a witch. Unfortunately it's the first thing to go now that an increasing number of previously civilized countries have decided that democracy, freedom and human rights are deeply overrated, and are moving back into the dark ages at a frightful speed.

A secure FTP server is...well, secure

Svea hovrätt just announced that having a secure FTP server that requires a username and password to access, means it's files are not publicly available. No shit, Sherlock. Although, I have to say I'm a bit surprised that this incompetent institution actually managed to find a judge that had no affiliation with the entertainment industry, and that actually made some sense. This means the ISP Ephone does not have to give up its customer's integrity.

Now what I want to know is when Antipiratbyrån will be prosecuted for breaking into this server in the first place, to gather the pathetic piece of "evidence" that was presented to the court (and found to be more than enough by the retards at Solna tingsrätt)? Last time I checked hacking into secure servers was still a crime. A much more serious one than copyright infringement, I might add.

Democratic (Banana-)Republic of Sweden

The chance of the guys behind Pirate Bay ever getting a fair trial in the "Democratic (Banana-)Rebublic of Sweden" look slimmer than ever. As if a corrupt police investigator and a legally incompetent judge wasn't enough in the first trial, two of the judges in the upcoming trial, Kristina Boutz and Ulrika Ihrfelt, are involved in entertainment industry lobbying organizations. Which is perfectly fine by Svea hovrätt, even though they contradict themselves quite a bit:

Samtidigt konstaterar dock rätten att SFIR, som Kristina Boutz är medlem i, ser efter rättighetshavares intressen och rättigheter.

Trots det har det "inte framkommit några konkreta omständigheter som tyder på att SFIR har ett särskilt intresse av utgången i just detta mål eller att SFIR engagerat sig i de konkreta frågor som ska prövas i målet"

I guess you'd have to be on the entertainment mafia payroll to get the reasoning. One of the defendants, Peter Sunde Kolmisoppi, sums it all up pretty well:

"Men det var ju såklart inte oväntat, det verkar finnas en lag §13.3.7 som säger att "i tillfälle pirate bay anmäler för jäv, så stämmer inte detta. Jäv får enbart utdelas i tillfälle målsägande sidan så bestämt"

By default any claim by the defendants is completely ignored by Svea hovrätt, and everything put forward by the claimants is instantly accepted - no questions asked. It's pretty obvious who's calling the shots, to say the least, and I don't really see the point in hosting another mock trial wasting a lot of tax money when we'll just get a default ruling for the claimants anyway. I have to say I'm completely fascinated by the fact that this miscarriage of justice is so blatantly being carried out here in Sweden. I mean, had it been Congo or Iran or something, but Sweden?

Surveillance, inc.

Opassande.se has published a brilliant, and chilling, list of all the new and oppressive surveillance laws passed, implemented and being discussed in Sweden and the EU, many of them bizarrely enough written and directed by the entertainment mafia themselves, giving them a carte blanche to continue their extortion business at the sacrifice of ordinary people's integrity and legal protection.

It's an utterly revolting list, and it certainly makes you question what kind of society you live in.

Mona Sahlin is not a fan of justice and integrity

Social democratic opposition leader Mona Sahlin wants to tear up the much debated FRA law, apparently out of concern for people's integrity. How convenient. Of course she wants to replace it with another, similar law... Quite frankly I fail to see how Sahlin's option is any more edible.

Also, Sahlin doesn't seem to understand that the legal abomination called the Ipred law is equally damaging (we're already seen the first examples of how the entertainment mafia abuses the law, and this is only the beginning), she simply sees it as a way for the entertainment mafia to protect their rights. You know, the classic "the goal justifies the means" argumentation:

Ipred handlar om hur man garanterar att artister, låtskrivare och författare också får möjligheter till att få inkomster. Det tror jag att alla tycker är självklart.

Oh well, as long as those greedy bastards are able to fill their pockets at an increasing pace, to hell with integrity and justice.

This nonsense leads me to the conclusion that Mona Sahlin is either dumb as a rock, or completely ignorant when it comes to questions of integrity and the Internet.

The farce continues

The Court of Appeal in Stockholm have managed to get hold of a Spotify employee, Fredrik Niemelä, to be one of the lay judges when the Pirate Bay trial is to be tried again. As we all know Spotify is partly owned by the very same record companies who are part in this trial, so any moron would see that Mr. Niemelä ought to be disqualified at once. Except himself, of course:

– Jag har noga övervägt min anställning och kan inte se att det finns risk för jäv. I så fall skulle ingen som någonsin arbetat med försäljning kunna vara nämndeman i ett misstänkt stöldfall, säger han till SvD.se.

I'm sorry? You're saying you wouldn't consider it a problem if you were an Ica-employee and were set to be a lay judge in a trial where Ica was a party? There's no chance of you being biased with your employer sitting on one side of the courtroom? I'm impressed.

After the scandals surrounding the first trial you'd think the Court of Appeal would spend just a little extra time making sure none of the judges was on the entertainment mafia's payroll.

*Update 2009-09-24: Seems like there's more than just a Spotify-employee amongst the judges... I'm fascinated by how impossible it seems to be given a fair trial with unbiased judges here in Sweden. What is this, a banana republic?

Shut Posten down now!

Right, that's it. I've had it. The postal services need to be shut down immediately if they do not manage to block packages containing illegal substances. I don't care if they need to open each and every envelope to do so. If they don't, they're guilty of accessory.

On second thoughts, though, drugs aren't really that bad. And opening everyone's mail just to get to a few people who are abusing the postal service is really quite out of proportion. Plus, you can't really hold the postal service accountable - all they really do is provide a service that lets people communicate with each other. That wouldn't be fair. Had this happened on the Internet though...damn we would've messed those bastards up real bad, right?

Now go figure why drug dealing in real life is considered much less harmful than engaging in file sharing activities on the Internet.

– Men vi har varken rättigheter eller möjligheter att kontrollera alla försändelser. Det faller under ”brevhemligheten”.

Stockholm tingsrätt dismantling the judicial system

The scandals surrounding the corrupt bastards over at Stockholms tingsrätt continue...

Read Peter Sundes blogpost here, and Piratpartiets press release here.

It seems if you ever end up in Stockholm tingsrätt, unless you've got the mafiosos at Danowsky & Partners representing you, you know you're screwed no matter how good your case is. Way to go completely destroying the public's faith in the judicial system.