John Nyzell

To the delight of me and my fellow pirates, Tele 2, one of the biggest ISPs in Sweden, has chosen to actually follow the law and not save the ip-addresses of their customers to the benefit of the copyright mafia. (IPRED, the law that allows corporate interests to act as a private police force, relies on ISPs saving the ip-addresses of their customers even though other laws discourage them from doing just that: No-one has even accused politicians of being smart.) But it’s interesting to read a few of the things said by Peter Danowsky, the lawyer representing IFPI in the Pirate Bay trial (my translation):

“It’s astonishing that someone claiming to be a serious Internet service provider wants to abet a crime, which is the implication of what they are doing.”

Wrong, Chuckles. They aren’t abeting a crime, they are actually following the goddamn law. Then again, I guess a lawyer partly responsible for one of the most farcical trials in the history of Sweden wouldn’t understand that.

“We’ll see when the day comes, if they dare defy the court.”

They aren’t breaking the law and yet this idiot tries to threaten them with “the court”? I’ve heard of Internet tough guys, so I guess there should be old media tough guys, too.

“All members of the Riksdag have assumed that the Internet service providers are loyal to the law and do not want to abet crime. If Tele 2 adopts this attitude and it is followed by other providers the law will in the future be made more strict.”

Now this is interesting. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Danowsky just a lawyer? Why would he make such definite statements about which laws will be voted through? Shouldn’t that be up to the Riksdag in our parliamentary democracy? Or could it be that Danowsky is a member of the little clique of rich, old, kleptocratic etatists who consider themselves our masters and the will of the people an annoyance at best and a threat to be eradicated at worst?

Nah, that would be crazy.