| reply to P Ness
Re: if you can't beat them, buy them out...and then... I'll bet the Pirate Bay team that sold out decided to cash in before their sentences came down in court. They can cash in, clear out, and then ignore the court decision. |
|
|
|
| said by fAcEtIOUs:I'll bet the Pirate Bay team that sold out decided to cash in before their sentences came down in court. They can cash in, clear out, and then ignore the court decision. I'll bet someone hasn't been reading up the past few months and missed the part where they were sentenced to jail time and fined out the ass. |
|
| said by PapaMidnight:said by fAcEtIOUs:I'll bet the Pirate Bay team that sold out decided to cash in before their sentences came down in court. They can cash in, clear out, and then ignore the court decision. I'll bet someone hasn't been reading up the past few months and missed the part where they were sentenced to jail time and fined out the ass. The court appeals will be ongoing for months at a minimum. Still plenty of time to clear out.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
| said by fAcEtIOUs:said by PapaMidnight:said by fAcEtIOUs:I'll bet the Pirate Bay team that sold out decided to cash in before their sentences came down in court. They can cash in, clear out, and then ignore the court decision. I'll bet someone hasn't been reading up the past few months and missed the part where they were sentenced to jail time and fined out the ass. The court appeals will be ongoing for months at a minimum. Still plenty of time to clear out. You mean the appeal they were denied?
»feeds.arstechnica.com/~r/arstech···ased.ars |
|
| You mean you don't know the difference between a retrial and an appeal? The appeal hasn't even occurred yet. Your link referenced a retrial. |
|
| reply to PapaMidnight
They did it wrong. They should have followed the example of the big boys and formed a company—making sure that the legal liability is tied to it rather than them. Then when trouble is on the horizon, resign from the company—dissolving it in the process, leaving no entity to sue—and walk away, free as a bird. |
|
| reply to PapaMidnight
actually, for clarity, you seem to be missing some facts, the conviction "appeal" was NOT "Denied" the media in its need for headlines got it and reported it wrong....
»torrentfreak.com/media-misreport···-090613/
"Media Misreports on Biased Pirate Bay Judge
Written by Ernesto on June 13, 2009
Three judges are currently reviewing the judge that handled the Pirate Bay trial to discover if he was biased or not.
No decision has yet been made but the New York Times and several other publications report inaccuracies and plain wrongs that claim otherwise. Time to get the facts straight.
"
"Earlier this week the District Court of Stockholm handed in their statement to the Appeal Court, arguing that they don’t believe that Norström was biased. This was not really a surprise since they appointed him and admitting that he is biased would be admitting to having made a mistake before the “bias case” is reviewed.
However, many publications mistakenly concluded from this statement that a ruling was made on the bias issue, or even worse.
“The four men convicted for operating file-sharing site the Pirate Bay suffered a further setback this week when they failed to get the case thrown out because of alleged bias by the sentencing judge,” the Hollywood reporter wrote.
This was picked up and twisted even further by none other than The New York Times who reported: “A Swedish court has denied the appeal of four men convicted of violating copyright law for their involvement in the Pirate Bay.”
...."
"The biggest challenge for the media on the other hand, is to get their facts straight instead of writing up nonsense. Props to our friend David Kravets at Wired who was one of the few who got it right. »www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/0···nbiased/
" |
|
