Judge Chris Hensen, who ordered the Dutch Pirate Party to censor all links to The Pirate Bay recently (something Techdirt calls Censorship Crazy), appears to have quite a bit of dirt in his baggage.
This morning, @Kanarieman pointed me to an article of my own from 2010: just under two years ago, another very strange case went down in the Netherlands. The same judge, Chris Hensen, ordered that talking about file names was legally the same thing as distributing the actual files so named, and ordered the discussion forum FTD shut down. Yes, a discussion forum distributing no files was ordered to be shut down.
At its time, this case was decried as a blatant violation of free speech (but, alas, actually confirms that you can’t have the copyright monopoly and free speech at the same time).
However, something odd appeared in the aftermath. A brochure was discovered, where the plaintiff’s representative in the case – a professor Visser – offered commercial courses in anti-piracy, together with the judge, Chris Hensen. The plaintiff and judge were running a commercial enterprise together, one that had a direct bearing on the subject matter of the case.
Let me take that once more, for this is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case. Money was involved. Commercial interest was involved. The judge was, as it appears from this brochure for the quite expensive course, getting money. Shortly after the case. In a directly related matter together with the plaintiff. That makes the judge not only corrupt, but textbook corrupt.
(UPDATE: @LeHoax explains, “It’s not just any course they do together, it’s part of the Dutch bar association’s official training program for lawyers.” This is relevant to the context, of course, and mitigates the situation somewhat, but doesn’t detract from the fact that plaintiff and judge were together in a commercial venture on the direct subject matter – the plaintiff’s side, piraterijbestrijding (fighting piracy), is clearly readable in the brochure.)
This judge, this corrupt judge Chris Hensen, is the exact same judge Chris Hensen that has now banned links to the Pirate Bay from a political party, another equally crazy whackdown on fundamental freedoms of speech. But seeing this background, things fall better into place: the judge Chris Hensen was corrupted to begin with, and has been since at least 2010.
I can’t help feeling that this is getting ridiculous. From the IPRED champion in the European Parliament who was married to the Vivendi chairman, to the lead police investigator in The Pirate Bay case who got a job with Warner Brothers (a plaintiff) immediately on finishing the investigation, to the judge in the Pirate Bay case who was a member of the plaintiff’s pro-copyright organization, and now this – can’t the copyright industry fight for the monopoly ideas on their own merits, without needing biased, prejudiced, and corrupted officials?
UPDATE 2: There are several more interesting references, links, and facts surrounding this story over at the discussion thread on Hacker News. Also, here is a Dutch source that confirms the factual circumstances regarding the business relationship between plaintiff and judge in the FTD case.
(Footnote: before somebody points out that this would be libel or slander against the corrupt judge Chris Hensen, I am a licensed journalist in the Kingdom of Sweden, making this site run under constitutional Freedom-of-Press laws (Swedish: utgivningsbevis). This kind of whistleblowing against corrupt officials is what those laws were made for.)
So linking to this very article can now be declared illegal in the Netherlands.
Definitely. If a political party can be banned from linking to proxies, it can definitely be banned from arguing the case why the copyright monopoly should be politically reduced, too.
Incorrect. Only after a judge says so. Remember the just adopted netneutrality-law.
it is the ‘incorrect’ part of your answer that is incorrect.
Yes indeed, linking to this article can be declared illegal in the Netherlands.
ANYTHiING can be declared illegal in the Netherlands.
I hereby declare the act of typing on a keyboard illegal in the Netherlands.
eeh, maybe but no. I assume there is some primary legislation in the netherlands that incorperates the ECHR into national law? The supremacy of parliament might reign supreme in theory but only in theory, in practice they would not dare
I don’t understand.
Since when a judge makes the law there in Netherlands ?? A judge can merely interpret a law and expose his own view on several articles of certain law, not more.
At anytime, another judge can break his opinion, based on the ground of an educated view, and arguing based of that same “law”.
Only parliaments make laws.
Oh, but maybe this corrupted judge just hate the members of a political party (which CAN become members of the parliament … and CAN CHANGE THE LAWS !!)
So ….. YOU’VE GOT THE POWER, Mr Falkvinge ! Go ahead and “no worry” 🙂
No, the jurisprudence is based on civil law. Persons who manage website that facilitates illegal file sharing are usually required of the alleged crimes. Judges just orders them to take steps to reduces the effect of there service on the illegal file sharing, by removing such links or implement a filter.
I meant that are acquitted of the alleged crimes.
Only with that I would not go as far as to say that he *is* corrupt (definitely enough to make an inquiry, though), but he was definitely prejudiced and should have never been the judge in that case.
I’m making the assumption here that once you’ve corrupted yourself on a subject matter as an offical, you can never un-corrupt yourself; you stay biased, if nothing else in the eyes of the public opinion, so you can’t be trusted to be an impartial judge again.
Quite correct. I for one would never trust such an individual again. It says something about that persons character, or lack thereof. And partial biased trials is something I have had personal experience with recently. It is a soulcrushing experience.
That’s it: we can’t say he was corrupted (that is, he received money/gifts for making that judgement), but we can say he wasn’t neutral, and was biased.
You are wrong, this IS textbook corruption. Conflict of interest if you will. This is how it always works. Do you think there will be a written contract about what exactly happens? No, this is exchange of favors and money.
Why It reminds me strongly on the Pirat Bay trial farce in sweden?
Am I paranoid to see a kind of a pattern?
You’re not paranoid – I’m getting tired of finding dirt in every corner as soon as the copyright industry is involved in a court case. I’ve been thinking of doing a corruption summary post, naming all the individuals in question.
The Pirate Bay lead investigator with the Police (Jim Keyzer) getting a job with the plaintiff immediately on finishing the investigation – meaning he must have negotiated for salary while doing the investigation – was the icing on the cake.
What is the most disturbing for me is that it’s done in the open. They are corrupted, advertize it and see nothing against it. How did we arrived at this situation ? (and most importantly, what can we do ?)
Waldo is right.
I’m from the U.S. and I’m not all that familiar with European legal systems. So, two questions.
1. Referring specifically to this case, is the Pirate Party being talked about a Dutch branch of the Party, or is it located in another European country?
2. If it’s located in another European country, why would the Pirate Party even care what this judge had to say, other then to tell him to kiss his own patooty? Or is that contra-indicated because of Euro Confederation laws (sorry if that’s wrong, I don’t remember the exact name)?
Other than that, for the life of me I can’t figure out why the case was even brought in front of this judge (or any other for that matter) in the first place, as any negative ruling by the judge has the proverbial “snowballs chance in hell” of being effective.
1) This concerns the dutch pirate party. The pirate parties, while we do pull in the same direction and cooperate where we can, are on a national level.
Hence the judge has no say in what happens if the German pirate party, the Swedish pirate party or any of the other 50-odd pirate parties in the world decides to mirror the TPB redirect.
However…as you can see for yourself, the judge assumes that informing people of a way in which you might theoretically break the law is a crime. In the same way a murder mystery novel would. This is, as far as jurisprudence goes, a bad thing.
2) The dutch pirate party is located in Holland. And just as you might assume, the ruling is direct information control It makes assumptions about the link of information to crime in the same way in which a chemistry handbook on exotherm reactions could be construed as an encouragement to build bombs. I.e. not at all.
The Dutch providers tried to get a different judge via a so called wrakingsverzoek (recusal request?), because he ruled in favor of the Dutch copyright organization Brein before. The request was turned down: http://www.boek9.nl/files/2012/2012-04-06_Wrakingskamer_Den_Haag_KPN_Brein_anon.pdf and
http://tweakers.net/nieuws/81238/pirate-bay-zaak-brein-tegen-providers-krijgt-geen-andere-rechter.html (both in Dutch).
Mark, that was in the other trial (Brein vs ISP’s) That was about judge Blok.
Mark, that was in the other trial (Brein vs ISP’s). That was about judge Blok.
Yes. Just because he considered a similar case before is no reason that he couldn’t preside over a similar case again.
They SHOULD have brought up the dirt Rick c.s. dug up. No way judge Chris Hensen was impartial.
The Dutch have a nasty habit of not looking at judges as individual human beings and just refer to them as “the judge”. The idea that is put in people’s subconscious minds is that it doesn’t really matter which actual judge renders the verdict, they will always come to the same rigtheous conclusion.
Well, no more.
From now on, in any IPR case, make sure that (1) the judge in question is named and (2) there’s a little sidebar (lol) with the judge’s other activities both current and in the past.
tpb.ppetrov.net
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
Mister Falkvinge,
Is it alright if I link this article to a well known website in the Netherlands, whom try to flush out these kind of things and provoke the people into taking action? If this article hits the dutch media, I think it might unleash a sh*tstorm that will render the Judge’s ruling inadequate and wrongfull thus hopefully having thepiratebay, and other blocked website, unblocked. Of course, this is done in the interest of freedom of speech, not to try and have C. Hensen fired, or even arrested for what is considered a crime in the Netherlands.
Elias.
Of course it’s OK, the whole point of an article such as this one is to raise awareness. 🙂
Of course. Just go to town on them, and happy hunting!
Cheers,
Rick
Its already hitting the dutch news.
Happy to hear it! How, where, and when? Is there a link?
http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2012/05/onafhankelijke_rechtspraak_onze_reetd.html#comments
And let’s not forget Monsieur Sarkozy, champion of HADOPI and “internet wild west” sheriff extraordinaire, whose wife is a pop star and his son a record producer.
I’m sure there was no conflict of interest there, either.
Nope, no pattern here. Nuh-uh.
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
So if a share a link to TPB proxy, am I commiting crime in UK / NL ?
in theory no, based on the traditional view of negative rights that underlines the UK constitution you cannot be guilty of an offence unless it is specifically proscribed, in practice not really, though a civil wrong is a different matter. If you were doing it on a commercial scale (see the tv shack case) you may find yourself deported to a democratic backwater ie USA. Strictly speaking it is not illegal though these are dark days and getting darker
Watch out for Chris Hensen’s new show: To Catch a Torrent Pirate.
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
In the Netherlands we pay a levy on blank media to compensate “the industry” for downloading, and this is one of the reasons downloading is legal in the Netherlands.
In a 2008 case of the recording media manufacturers against the organisation that handles these levies, this same judge ruled that downloading from illegal source is itself also illegal. The judges in this case were mr. Chr.A.J.F.M. Hensen (!!), mr. P.G.J. de Heij and mr. P.W. van Straalen.
Dutch links: http://blog.iusmentis.com/2008/06/28/wellesnietes-de-thuiskopie-uit-illegale-bron/
http://nieuws-uitgelicht.infonu.nl/pc-en-internet/21037-downloaden-nu-wel-illegaal.html
This ruling was later revoked, but it seems judge Hensen has not changed his mind.
This doesn’t seem all that sensational to me. A judge who teaches lawyers about the particulars of a law, that kind of thing happens all the time here in the Netherlands. The fact that the judge is an expert in the field doesn’t mean he is biased.
I’d not be surprised if the judge took action against you for defamation of character if this article gets out in the Dutch media.
He’d be surprised to learn of the strength of the Swedish freedom-of-press laws.
Henk are you a troll???
if not then why would you be against freedom of speech???
looks to me like you don’t agree with freedom???
Rick has a right to speech and as a member of the press he is in his rights!!
HENK = TROLL
$$ + TROLL = HENK
Of course I’m for freedom of speech. That doesn’t mean I’m in favour of making allegations without hard evidence and without hearing both sides of the argument.
There is a limit to all civil rights. If I support the right to bear arms, does that mean I must also support the right to bear arms in schools or in court rooms?
The difference between a “right” and a “privilege” is that the former is assumed to be irrevocable.
Hence you can either support the right to bear arms or you can not. Whether this is applicable in a school room or a court room is entirely up to whether the owner of said premise is a private individual or not.
In short, the state can not prevent you from bearing arms but private individuals can bar you from their property if you do so.
If this is not the case in your nation then you do not possess a “right” to bear arms. You have that “privilege” – which can be freely revoked.
Hi Chris Hensen… I mean, “Henk” 😉
All this legal batling seems to be great for the Dutch Pirate Party. The cases brought by BREIN just might be the best thing that could have happened in the run up to the september national election. PP NL has had more positive coverage in the last two weeks than during the entire 2010 election cycle. The fact that the judge indeed appears to be corrupt is just the icing on the cake really.
That’s optimistic.
But let’s hope you’re right. I was just thinking about how baffling and seemingly contradictory the legal situation of filesharing in the Netherlands is. (with censorship coming so close on the heels of things like this: http://torrentfreak.com/dutch-parliament-downloading-movies-and-music-will-stay-legal-111224/ ) So I take that to mean there is ample support the Pirate(ish) position to oppose the current decisions. Still, when such corruption is left to run wild totally out in the open…
But let’s hope the optimistic view ends up being the right one.
Just like in the UK the blockade of TPB has lead to a wave of attention for the site (and many new visitors!) and Pirate issue’s in the Netherlands. You can’t beat a 5 minute item on the eight ‘o clock news (for several nights) in terms of media attention. And all for free!
The other important thing is that the blockade is completly failing in having *any* measurable effect. It is just too easy to circumvent (as research by Amsterdam University has shown). So it makes BREIN look a bit silly. Winning all the legal battles, losing the war…
The big question is if the PP nl will be able to translate all this attention into seats in parlaiment after the september national election. So far all this suff seems to be helpfull 😉
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
There are many more sources on the details around the story (and the judge) over at Hacker News.
[…] Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Found To Be Corrupt […]
@Henk
I support Rick Falkvinge. Be warned that I am going to do some very nasty stuff if the corrupt censorship fascist Chris Hensen takes legal action.
I am going to republish this article along with Hensen’s picture, home address and phone number on the darknet hacker boards.
I am a Dutch expatriate living in the US, and believe me. The First Amendment protects the publication of pictures, home addresses and phone numbers. There are already websites where vexing details about public officials are published without legal repercussions.
To win a defamation action in the US courts Hensen considered a public figure must prove that the speech is either knowingly false or made with reckless disregard for its falsity.
In some regards, the First Amendment is better than the law in Europe. The burden in a defamation action is on the plaintiff who must prove that the allegation is false, not the other way around.
If you don’t understand the wider implications, Google Streisend effect.
Also be aware that a defamation plaintiff can’t get around the First Amendment by pinning liability on the internet service provider.
At least in the US, an ISP enjoys absolute immunity from most civil actions arising from the speech of its users.
@Henk
I support Rick Falkvinge. Be warned that I am going to do some very nasty stuff if the corrupt censorship fascist Chris Hensen takes legal action.
I am going to republish this article along with Hensen’s picture, home address and phone number on the darknet hacker boards.
I am a Dutch expatriate living in the US, and believe me. The First Amendment protects the publication of pictures, home addresses and phone numbers. There are already websites where vexing details about public officials are published without legal repercussions.
To win a defamation action in the US courts Hensen considered a public figure must prove that the speech is either knowingly false or made with reckless disregard for its falsity.
In some regards, the First Amendment is better than the law in Europe. The burden in a defamation action is on the plaintiff who must prove that the allegation is false, not the other way around.
If you don’t understand the wider implications, Google Streisend effect.
Also be aware that a defamation plaintiff can’t get around the First Amendment by pinning liability on the internet service provider.
At least in the US, an ISP enjoys absolute immunity from most civil actions arising from the speech of its users.
—
I am taking a copy of this article just for future reference. If the fascist censor happy judge takes legal action, I am prepared to do a Streisend on him.
Posted rumours as facts? Way to go Falkvinge…
Refering to documentation about something is normally considered to take it well out of rumor territory. While the documentation can certainly be brought into question, the burden of proof is normally on somebody doing that.
The burden of proof is on the accusers side. And in this case its you.
Changing subjects, are we?
I did present my case, and documentation is squarely out of rumor territory. If you want to question the documentation, the burden of proof is on you.
actually thats entirely true, the decision should be reviewed by a higher court if there is a hint of corruption. There is no burden of proof, there is the valid facts, the decision and how they relate, no further evidence is needed. Read too much john grisham eh?
It’s amusing. You know you are doing it right when you start attracting clueless trolls that can’t keep up with an well based discussion. Good job Rick!
Most of the Judges in The Netherlands are Corrupt. Not only the Judges but the legals (curatoren, advocaten) are the same. I call them Legal Criminals always on the move with gloves.
Dave, what Falkvinge does is bring evidence to light that makes C. Hensen seem corrupt, certainly a case that has to be followed up on because if it is true (and the evidence we see here is strong) this man ought to be disbarred and these cases re-opened. What Falkvinge does do is immediately accuse him of outright corruption and although many people may agree with this we can only be sure after an impartial investigation (which is probably unlikely) has found him to be corrupt.
What you are doing is outright slander, you give us no evidence about Dutch judges being corrupt.
Don’t worry, Ioannus, Mr Falkvinge can bring proofs even to European Court of Human Rights, if needed, at some later stage !
Why do you mistakenly think that only the Dutch justice is in question here, by the way?
Be sure that the other Europeans will not look with the same indulgence at that corrupt judge as maybe do his own friends in Holland …
On a slightly related note I was wondering where one might find/start their local pirate party?
This is where the Dutch pirate party resides:
https://depiratenpartij.wordpress.com/
You wanna check http://www.pp-international.net as a starting point.
This is not corruption, it is a conflict of interest.
Similar effect, but different legal concepts. It WOULD be corruption if the judge took a bribe from the plaintiff. It is not corruption if the plaintiff and the judge both get money from students and share that sum.
It is possible that it has a specific legal meaning, but this is not a legalese post – it is a post in everyday speak, or possibly political speak.
I find it odd to interpret the word to a context that’s not implied. (In a file system context, “corruption” means a read error on a magnetic disk, for example.) To people on the street, corruption means that you let money destroy the impartiality of authorities, which is exactly what has happened here.
Correct, a conflict of interest is not corruption.
However even in legal terms, a judge who knows he has a conflict of interest and doesn’t voluntarily step down from the case is corrupt.
WTF why argue pointless semantics, conflict of interest leads to corruption, at which point one becomes the other who cares, when the justice system is involved it should be beyond reproach regardless of how long it takes and how many hands the incentive passes through it is the same outcome.
Tomorrow morning I should read about how the judge is in prison (or who knows) for a very long time. But, nobody is going to do a thing about this. Because many expect the system to handle flaws in the system, but few realize, the entire system is broken and corrupt.
A judge corrupt. Noooooo. IMPOSSIBLE. Judges are just like politicians, police officers, lawyers, CEO’s and clergymen. They are all honest good-hearted people who are looking out for our best interests.
[…] meer actief was in de zaak tegen de Piratenparij, blijkt corrupt, aldus Rick Falkvinge op zijn website, één van de oprichters van The Pirate Bay. De rechter zou een verleden van corruptie hebben in […]
By the same reasoning, if the same judge would come to the conclusion that some one is not guilty of piracy, the blogger should also call that corruption.
If the judge had been involved in a commercial venture with the defendant, finding in favor of the defendant would be obviously corrupt too. He is involved in a commercial venture *with the plaintiff*. I don’t know how dutch law works, but in many places, a judge with a financial conflict of interest in a case is expected to recuse themself.
Yes, exactly. You can’t share money with the side you judge in favor of and expect to be seen as impartial.
This is exactly why in some countries even a spouse cannot testify against/for the other, because he/she cannot be impartial at all.
If the judge had been found to hold joint commercial ventures with the blogger in question and stood to lose big if the blogger went to jail, then certainly it would be corruption.
Was that you brought to the table a straw man argument or just honest confusion?
Judges are supposed to be impartial. This is why they aren’t allowed to perform their office in any case involving close friends, family or business partners.
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
I don’t see how you can say that they had a “commercial venture” together simply because they both were involved with teaching a class, along with a number of other individuals, for the Netherlands Bar Association. At best, it appears to be a highly misleading mistake on your part.
It is a fact that the course was commercial in the terms that it cost the participants quite a bit of money. It is a fact that these two characters where key in running it. Whether they had the commercial venture together, or were commercial colleagues under in a venture owned by somebody else, is not a matter for the question of bias/corruption.
There’s simply nothing corrupt about two colleagues in similar fields being invovled in a class about a topic that both are knowledgeable about. You’re really being dishonest and hyperbolic here.
It seems you missed the point. There’s nothing wrong in the judge teaching law at a law school. The problem is teaching about anti-piracy focused law in a course related to or promoted by anti-piracy outfits then judging a case of copyright in favor of the anti-piracy side. Sounds biased.
No, actually you are trying a dishonest argument here.
If a Judge and the plaintiff are cooperating in a field which is of high interest to the plaintiff then the judge should not be consider “impartial” when judging in a case where his good friend and colleague represents one side.
It is indeed corruption – or conflict of interests – if a judge is to preside over a case where a long-term business partner of his happens to represent one of the sides.
A teaching class, for profit, with someone that has a vested interest, on points of law that had not been decided yet? Are you serious? How do you think the justice system should work? If the Netherlands Bar Ass is involved it is a sorry show for the decline of a once great system. Who are these other individuals? Name and shame
What is this, a joke? There exist laws to protect IP. There’s nothing undecided about that.
lol yes there does exists laws to protect such things, how the statutes are interpreted is the job of the judiciary, yes? So which law is it you are refering to and i will explain the absurdities?
sorry i release i was not very clear there. The laws that protect ip are generally dated, for instance where i am it is techinically illegal to put my CD collection on my mp3. To what level these laws should be inforced is open to interpretation. Add to that the balancing act required when dealing with human rights law its not a clear cut issue, if the judge who is deciding on how to apply dated laws to a modern situation has a vested interest there is obviously a conflict. Besides the whole ip argument is bollocks anyway
If a judge has a long-standing business partner then he should not preside over a case where said partner is a plaintiff as that introduces bias by default.
It doesn’t matter if all they cooperated in was a cake sale.
That the judge’s business partner and the judge were actually involved in IP law classes as viewed by the plaintiff in this case makes this bias far far worse.
[…] matter together with the plaintiff. That makes the judge not only corrupt, but textbook corrupt. Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Found To Be Corrupt – Falkvinge on Infopolicy Adv Reply Reply […]
And the funny thing is.. no mainstream media in the Netherlands will pick this up. All those only report what the official channels tell them to
I really hate the nazi scum. No wonder why Hitler had several judges on the payroll.
Here in Sweden, the Pirate Bay process opened up my eyes for judges having commercial side activities that are related to the judicial system. It should be prohibited to have any side income or activity that would cast any doubt on their impartiality. E.g. doing some teaching or researching at universities is perfectly fine, or repairing cars or selling flowers, but consulting in judicial matters or anything remotely like it should be prohibited. Doing work for interest groups like for example collecting socities is not academic work, it is partial to economic interests.
Judges who opposes this, and in practice claim a need for extra money, seems to have money problems. Money problems are not good for someone in an official, supposedly impartial, very important position. A judge is one such position.
Just my two cents (no, I am not giving them to a judge)
Yeah right, FTD is (uhm, was) a discussion forum. That’s a joke, right? That statement degrades this whole story to something not to be taken seriously: in fact, this article is found to be soaked with incorrect statements and assumptions – well done!
[…] Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Found To Be Corrupt – Falkvinge on Infopolic…. This entry was posted in Copyrights, Human Rights, Personal by herman.harperink. Bookmark the permalink. […]
[…] en mogelijk aan corruptie (wat mij betreft hetzelfde in het geval van rechters). Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Found To Be Corrupt – Falkvinge on Infopolicy Ik vind het een tragische dag voor Nederland, voor de de Nederlandse rechtsstaat en voor de […]
[…] [Falkvinge via TorrentFreak] […]
Credit where credit is due: it is the response by ‘Eecom’ at 20:19 in http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2012/05/geef_het_nou_gewoon_op_timmeh.html that made me search the net.
Note that that reaction also has a link saying the judge has a function in the “Beneluxraad voor Intellectuele Eigendom”. (Translates as “Benelux council for Intellectual Property”). http://bit.ly/JpibHq
I have not been able to confirm that the Chris Hensen on this list is the same person, although it seems likely.
[…] [Falkvinge via TorrentFreak] […]
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
[…] "CRITEO-300×250", 300, 250); 1 meneos El juez holandés que ordenó censurar enlaces de The Pirate Bay, descubierto en corrupción [ENG] falkvinge.net/2012/05/12/dutch-judge-who-ordered-pirate-b… por ffuentes hace […]
Nothing new… Everyone who want trade their freedom for corporations is corrupted.
“You will get money, but you wont get your soul back”…
[…] Full Article […]
Maybe the public can hire a private investigator to follow him around for a while documenting everything he does I’m sure theyd find him doing other illegal activities
No you really cannot be at that kind of thing, nefarious activities do not balance each other out. The logic behind that statement is so unbelievably screwed, lets follow everyone about and spy on everything someone is bound to be doing something wrong and therefore we will be 100% justified. A review of the decision yes, an invasion of privacy no
[…] pagos por dictar clases de derecho anti-piratería bajo las órdenes de uno de los querellantes. http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/12/dutch-judge-who-ordered-pirate-bay-links-censored-found-to-be-corrup… […]
[…] Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Found To Be Corrupt […]
[…] Hensen blijkt zoals natuurlijk te verwachten viel wanneer je je in criminele sectoren begeeft, zwaar corrupt te zijn. Deze vertegenwoordiger van het corporatisme heeft al eens eerder laten zien waar zijn vriendjes […]
It is not corruption, not even conflict of interest. The judge is a expert on the Auteurswet 1922, incorrectly translated as Dutch Copyright Law, and gives courses in them.
In no way you showed, legally – Dutch standard- that the judge accepted bribes, nor that him giving this course is a conflict of interests. Remember society he gives the course for is an independent organization in The Netherlands.
Your slanderous and libelous piece does the cause more harm than good. The debate should civil and legal. I wouldn’t want to hire you to speak on a convention of idiotic liars, let alone on a serious convention.
The level of your information, and the nature of your disinformation puts you on the level of demagogues, politicians and other crooks, out for their egotistical mental masturbation.
TTFN *Publish if you dare*
I believe you didn’t get the point made. The legal difference of corruption or conflict of interests doesn’t matter here, it’s the perception of corruption. For the general public both things amount to the same corruption.
And if there are inconsistencies please point them. I’m sure Rick is reasoned enough to review his positions. From my understanding it’s clear that the judge is not qualified to conduct this case as he wasn’t on previous cases because there is a conflict of interests. While I do agree that teaching is not a problem, he was teaching a very sensitive and oriented subject (whether he was impartial or not in his teachings about copyright can be discussed) and received for it.
So I’d say that in this sense both you and Rick can be wrong.
[…] mensen die roepen dat hier sprake is van corruptie, zijn écht knettergek. Ja jij, Falk Vinge, mafkees die je bent. Ik moet me inhouden om niet “ga eens deaud” te zeggen. En niet […]
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
It’s good journalism principle to base such a serious claims on it’s own merits. Corruption implies that this judge is payed to rule in favor of one party. The mere fats that this judge was payed to teach and the plaintiff was his employer, does not even come close to proving that the plaintiff payed judge to rule in his favor. All that you have proven is that you don’t care much for accuracy, ethics and compassion.
I’ve seen here a large mass of idiots doubting the proofs and rationale brought here by Rick. These people did not understood (or did not made the connection) with some other people, proven as corrupted (ex: police guy hired by a media company, and so on, and so on.)
You are so stupid to not understand that the plaintiff did chose to cooperate with the dirty judge just because the judge had to decide in a trial where he was involved, too? If it’s to believe the good faith of the plaintiff (because, after all, all parties must prove that, not only Rick – isn’t it, Alex? and even you), it should be even the plaintiff the one that might had to refuse to cooperate with the judge, disregarding the fact if the course was intended for any “independent” client or not. The fact that both parties shaken their hand (and NOONE REFUSED to cooperate, for mutual advantages) enforces the idea of a biased decision, because of being rooted not only on personal mistake of the judge (as proven from previous decisions of him regarding similar topics) but on a collusion. Definitely, corruption, not only conflict of interests.
Conflict of interest would be something of a lessen extent, if judge only would execute some commercial activities of any kind, complimentary to his main job, even if in that respective period he wouldn’t have to decide in any trial whatsoever. The fact of just exposing himself to pecuniary “attractions” (out of his already big salary) would be enough to erode his credibility as a justice maker.
On top of that, when people see that he even gets paid and cooperate with the plaintiff, it is obvious that his decision can’t be accepted as being fair.
For all dickheads here – don’t misunderstand Rick or anyone else, nobody has something personal against the judge himself, however they just dispute the final decision that was made. The judge might deliver a perfect intellectual product (his decision) and he just failed to do so, and that’s all.
Why are you going crazy because of the main point (when some other judge would decide the matter) ? It seems you are just desperate to keep that decision (and that judge in place) more than to reinstate justice, as a final outcome ! That is not impartiality at all, and you dare to speak about integrity here ?
Alex, even you might prove good faith.
Now back to the point. In short.
Plaintiff might prove good faith. He didn’t. Else even he wouldn’t accept to cooperate with judge.
Judge might prove good faith. He didn’t. Either he or the plaintiff attracted the other to cooperate for business together. Is at all relevant who did that first ? It isn’t at all. It’s a jointly and huge mistake.
When both parties, it is collusion, which is more bad than conflict of interest. It goes straight into corruption.
It is of no importance that their client was, or not, independent, because he was not the one receiving the money, after all. They took the money. Together.
Conflict of interest is when, even while NOT having any trial to debate, the judge would engage himself in commercial activities. Because that would show the people around that he is corruptible, or easy to be attracted in various endeavors that would compromise his impartiality.
Even more: make no mistakes, not the person of judge is doubted here, but his decisions – he might deliver a perfect intellectual product, which he did not made. Moreover, he was proved to have made mistakes even earlier, in a trial held over a similar topic.
However, the people that argue with Rick, seems to defend more the judge than the justice itself. And that cannot be ever acceptable ! Throw that corrupt judge, void his decision and change the judge, for the sake of a fair decision.
I`ve seen this news break from the first hour and still nothing from the mainstream dutch media and as a Dutch citizen I wonder why..
[…] Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Fount to be Corrupt … the plaintiff’s representative in the case – a professor Visser – offered commercial courses in anti-piracy, together with the judge, Chris Hensen. The plaintiff and judge were running a commercial enterprise together, one that had a direct bearing on the subject matter of the case. … It’s not just any course they do together, it’s part of the Dutch bar association’s official training program for lawyers. […]
[…] Falkvinge, the founder of the first Pirate Party and a speaker and writer about information policy, writes that Chris Hensen, the judge who censored the Pirate Party, two years ago ordered that talking about […]
[…] oprichter van de Piraten Rick Falkvinge gooit af en toe een bom. Op 12 mei was dat het stuk ‘Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Found To Be Corrupt‘. De Haagse rechter Chris Hensen zou corrupt zijn. Maar bewijs ervoor ontbreekt. De […]
[…] out the judge in this case was the exact same judge, leading Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge to accuse him of beiing “not only corrupt, but textbook corrupt”. Don’t they have conflict of interest rules in the […]
[…] namelijk een drastische wijziging van de auteursrechtwetgeving.Wat Engelfriet furieus maakt is dat Falkvinge de rechter in de zaak tegen de Piratenpartij corrupt heeft genoemd. Deze rechter beunde tot een paar jaar terug namelijk nog bij met het geven van cursussen over […]
[…] the judge in this case was that exact same judge, leading Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge to accuse him of beiing “not only corrupt, but textbook corrupt.” Don’t they have conflict of interest rules in the […]
[…] the judge in this case was that exact same judge, leading Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge to accuse him of beiing "not only corrupt, but textbook corrupt." Don't they have conflict of interest rules in the Netherlands?Permalink | Comments | Email This […]
[…] por falar em copyright e negócios da MAFIAA, Dutch Judge Who Ordered Pirate Bay Links Censored Found To Be Corrupt ; Microsoft-Funded BitTorrent Disruptor Won’t Make Pirates Pay, But Might Break The […]
[…] de oprichter van de eerste Piratenpartij en een spreker en schrijver over information policy, schrijft dat Chris Hensen, de rechter die de Piratenpartij gecensureerd heeft, 2 jaar geleden de uitspraak deed […]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMYJviX_FA0
not only is Hensen corrupt, so are the other Dutch judges working for the EU. The Dutch judge originating from Groningen is known to have ties to Energy Valley, a gas project involving polluted gas tankers from Russia (like the probo koala). Its likely that he’s already been bought by the anti-internet industry.
Its also likely that a majority of the judges of all the member states in the european court are corrupt. Why do we know this? Because Belgian politician De Gucht (who has been tried, but unfortunately not convicted for tax fraud), reasons that the court will give advise that’s favorable for ACTA.
[…] judge who ordered censorship of proxy servers in the Netherlands has corrupting financial interests in his […]
[…] “This is truly mind-boggling: not only was the plaintiff and judge personally and closely acquainted, the plaintiff in a controversial copyright monopoly case was running a commercial anti-piracy outfit together with the judge in the case,” Falkvinge writes. […]
Thanks for this article and the informations within.
WTF …. Still trying to belief it ….
Follow the Money ==>
wij zien u wel in de rechtszaal”
(klassenjustitie in Nederland?)
van Mr. Paul Ruijs ISBN 90 5911-0-11-0.
http://www.sdnl.nl/irm.htm
Zie ook “BREIN” rechtszaken Den Haag ?
C O R R U P T I E R E C H T E R L I J K E M A C H T N L
http://www.sdnl.nl/irm.htm
This is a report over HOW THE JUDGE SYSTEM IS (NOT) WORKING
YOU CAN READ THE FULL REPORT (DUTCH!) HERE
Mogelijke partijdigheid, afhankelijkheid, belangenverstrengeling,
klassenjustitie en corruptie ook bij de Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
IRM . . Juristen . . Court Watch SDN . . Klokkenluider . . N.C. Burhoven
Rapport Integriteit Rechterlijke Macht
(Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Rechterlijke Macht)
hasn’t made any difference whether the judge is corrupt or not or what is thought of the comments describing as such, TPB links are still censored. to me that indicates that there are many more that are just as corrupt, if not more so!
[…] Source Share this:EmailPrintDiggLinkedInRedditStumbleUponTumblrPinterestTwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. […]
and regardless of how many comments, how much publicity this situation has received, as far as i am aware, there has been no changes to the blocking of TPB or the proxie and no action taken against the judge, Chris Hansen. this shows to me exactly how corrupt things have got, particularly in the legal system. the US entertainment industries, via the US government, are not only threatening countries with action if their wishes are not adhered to, they are literally getting people that are completely bought and biased into positions of power everywhere. that means that whatever the industries want to happen, wherever they want it to happen, is gonna happen! the protests against SOPA and ACTA stopped those dangerous and freedom-removing laws from coming into being but this type of corruption goes much deeper and will take a worldwide effort of millions to stop, simply because those going along with it think more of money than doing the job they were elected to do. whoever is elected to change things on their promise of doing so, is found out to be nothing less of a liar than the very industry execs themselves. everything is promised but nothing is delivered! basically, what i mean is we, the people, the electorate, are well and truly screwed!!
http://www.mirrorbay.net maintains a list of up to date mirrors that allows access to The Pirate Bay.
[…] host infringing material. But in a recent blog post Rick Falkvinge may have jumped the shark. He called out Dutch judge Chris Hensen and accused him of corruption because of his involvement in running […]