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.

Another contribution to my list of shame

A bunch of movie companies have decided to test drive the infamous Ipred law, and have turned to the court in an attempt to gather info on the owner of an Internet subscription, in order to sue him or her for millions of dollars, obviously.

Much like the first Ipred-case a couple of months ago, where a bunch of publishing houses presumably broke the law in order to gather "evidence", and still had the court ruling in their favor instead of throwing them head first out of the court room (yes, the legal system in Sweden is that corrupted at the moment), these morons from the movie industry are doing the exact same thing: Illegally gaining access to a private torrent tracker, SweTorrents.org, trying to secure some sort of "evidence" that it contains copyrighted material:

- Swetorrents tillhandahåller upphovsrättsskyddade filmer som de inte har rättighet att sprida på internet. I vissa fall gäller det filmer som inte ens har kommit ut på marknaden. Det handlar om relativt omfattande verksamhet. Det blir ett dränage på filmbolagens intäktssida, säger Antipiratbyråns ordförande Björn Gregfelt.

Riiight, so we're still not past the completely misleading "torrent trackers contain actual movies that can be downloaded by anyone" reasoning.

Luckily, and quite surprisingly to be honest, the ISP in question, Telia Sonera, has decided to fight this, and not give out any sensitive information to the movie industry without a proper court ruling. Let's just hope this case doesn't end up in the hands of those baboons over at Solna tingsrätt...

I can hereby add the following movie companies to my list of shame, to mock and to boycott for eternity:

• Svensk filmindustrin
• Pan vision
• Filmlance international
• Yellow bird

I wish you all an ever decreasing profit with a future of really crappy movies that absolutely no one will pay to watch. That would serve you right, you criminal bastards.

Another miscarriage of justice

The Swedish ISP Ephone has in an utterly bizarre verdict by Solna tingsrätt ("Framgång för bokförlagen i det första Ipred-ärendet", skriver tingsrätten i ett pressmeddelande) been forced to provide personal information about the owner of an internet subscription to five publishing firms. Why? Because someone using this internet subscription had set up an FTP-server, a private server requiring authentication to access its content. Supposedly this FTP-server contained copyrighted material, which Antipiratbyrån gained access to, presumably either through hacking or just by plain and simple threats. Remember that the next time you upload that MP3-file, image or XVID-movie to your personal online storage facility - the mafia entertainment industry might hack into your account and then accuse you of making the material accessible to the public.

Anyway, this personal information will of course help the publishing firms hunt down and take legal action against the owner of the internet subscription (not the actual perpetrator, mind you!), and most likely be responsible for yet another miscarriage of justice. We all know the court will find him or her guilty without a shred of credible evidence, a screen shot and an assumption that the internet subscription owner and the perpetrator are the same, is enough these days. Recent verdicts in the previously civilized part of the world has shown that one is in fact no longer presumed innocent until proven guilty when it comes to acts of copyright infringement. Instead, we've taken a giant leap backwards in time and embraced the principle of "guilty until proven innocent". Makes it all a lot easier for the court, doesn't it? "So, you can't prove that you're innocent? Can't prove that somebody else was using your WLAN that night? Too bad, that'll be 15 millions in fines. Next!"

Also, I can't help but wonder how the judge in Solna tingsrätt is affiliated with the mafia entertainment industry in this particular case. Or perhaps he too was promised a well paid pro forma job in the industry if he helped them along by making a decision that went against all common sense?

If anyone should be on trial here it should be Antipiratbyrån and Henrik "Pirate" Pontén, as they have illegally gained entrance to a private FTP server. Somehow these computer crimes, regularly performed by Antipiratbyrån to secure "evidence", are never an issue.

Clearly, those with enough money and lobbying power own the justice system.