Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
Norwegian site rehosting dozens of comics (including QC)
pwhodges:
--- Quote from: stoutfiles on 18 Jul 2011, 14:08 ---Why doesn't a moderator just contact Jeph about it
--- End quote ---
Or maybe one has done. :wink:
idontunderstand:
--- Quote from: Skewbrow on 18 Jul 2011, 13:12 ---Eh? Isn't this server in Norway, not Sweden? Or are you talking about the Pirate Bay case now?
In neither case would a US court have much to say about it (and most likely would not hear the case). If the server were run by a company that also operates in USA, then you might give it a try.
--- End quote ---
Yur, meant the PB case. A US court wouldn't apply another nation's law, but that's just cause US judges are stubborn little bitches. There have been numerous European cases where another nation's law was applied, because of some foreign element in the ruling.
Skewbrow:
--- Quote from: idontunderstand on 19 Jul 2011, 03:14 ---
--- Quote from: Skewbrow on 18 Jul 2011, 13:12 ---Eh? Isn't this server in Norway, not Sweden? Or are you talking about the Pirate Bay case now?
In neither case would a US court have much to say about it (and most likely would not hear the case). If the server were run by a company that also operates in USA, then you might give it a try.
--- End quote ---
Yur, meant the PB case. A US court wouldn't apply another nation's law, but that's just cause US judges are stubborn little bitches. There have been numerous European cases where another nation's law was applied, because of some foreign element in the ruling.
--- End quote ---
Really? I have always thought it is enough for a judge to be familiar with the local law. I know that EU strives to harmonise the laws in Europe, and a lot of progress and convergence has taken place - even across the civil law/ common law border that separates the British Isles from the rest of EU. Still, I would not expect any average court to be able to apply the law of another sovereign nation. May be they have tried to do that when ruling, e.g. in an international custody dispute? IDK.
The international court of justice in The Hague is, of course, a notable exception to that, as it seeks to apply international law.
idontunderstand:
Yes, it has been applied in custody cases, as well as maritime lien cases and other private law cases. I'm sort of realizing I haven't been very clear. The court does not apply the other nations law as a whole, rather certain relevant portions of it, where necessary (American courts usually refuse to do so, though). Not sure about the PB case though. I just find it idiotic to use that as a defence: "Sweden is not a state of the US, therefore swedes can do what the fuck they want against american citizens". Copyright infringements are crimes in Sweden as well as the US. And to in the same mail threaten with a law suit for harassment. So they can't sue you, but you can sue them? Nice.
Of course, if the copyright infringement would not have been a crime in Sweden, nothing would happen. But it is, so what are they on about? Don't get it.
Skewbrow:
Well the exchanges in that link were surely handpicked by the PB people, so we can't really read too much into that - other than their 'we couldn't care less' -attitude. Also, a Swedish court found the PB dudes guilty. A ruling by the Swedish supreme court on their appeal is due later this year. Meanwhile, in May a Finnish organization responsible for protecting the rights of the artists is seeking a court order commanding all the major internet service providers in Finland to block access to the PB site from their customers. I am not up to date on the status of that case. Surely similar legal actions are being attempted in other countries as well. Those were simply the two first hits I found.
Edit/addendum:
--- Quote from: idontunderstand on 19 Jul 2011, 06:24 ---Yes, it has been applied in custody cases, as well as maritime lien cases and other private law cases. I'm sort of realizing I haven't been very clear. The court does not apply the other nations law as a whole, rather certain relevant portions of it, where necessary (American courts usually refuse to do so, though).
--- End quote ---
I vaguely recall that (presumably with the well-being of the children in mind) there is an international agreement that in an international custody dispute the law of the last country, where the family had lived together would apply. I don't know how many countries have signed that particular treaty. The reluctance of US courts to apply, say, European law may simply have something to do with that civil law/common law differences in practice. One side emphasizes the letter of the law, the other the precedents. A lawyer at our university told me once that the reluctance is mutual. We were told in unmistakable words not to sign a research contract saying that eventual disputes are to be settled in an American or British court for this very reason.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version