And the farce continues:http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/27197.htmlhttp://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_673757.htmlGood Lord.Elrondhttp://members.rogers.com/eelvish/Boycott-RIAA.gif]"A musician without the RIAA, is like a fish without a bicycle."[/font://http://members.rogers.com/eelvish/B...cle."[/b][/font://http://members.rogers.com/eelvish/B...cle."[/b][/font

According to an official from the Greek consulate in Hamburg, there are two completely unrelated things: The spirit of the legislation, and the actual wording of the law. So it seems that even in government circles it is acknowleged that they somewhat overshot the mark.As to the trial, I don't have any experience with the Greek judiciary, but in other jurisdictions I worked in, the lower instances of the courts of appeal were always reluctant to set new precedents, let alone overturn entire laws enacted by the legislature, unless every aspect of the prescribed trial procedure in the original trial court was followed to a T. I suspect a similar thing happened here - from what I've read, the original trial was over fairly quickly. (As an example, a bail hearing in an English Magistrates' Court normally takes about 5 minutes, but if all procedures were followed, it should take about half a day...) The fact that the appeals court did not substitute a verdict, but ordered a retrial seems to point to a procedural issue, i.e. they want to make sure that all the i's have been dotted and t's crossed before deciding on the matter. So I wouldn't read too much into it, the matter will go back and forth for some time before a final decision is made (unless, of course, the legislature decides to repeal the law).Cheers,Gosta