You have copyright for that. Patents are a whole different ballgame. They give you a MONOPOLY! You could forbid everyone else to use certain combination of notes if music patents were allowed. It'd be like paying a fee to use the word "and" followed by the word "the". The very building blocks of what you need to use for every day composing, whether in literature, music, or software programming are at stake.

Only thing is that in the programming world, only programmers understand this basic limitation imposed on us. The very building blocks used for composing software is limited to us. But with reserved words, data types and objects, we don't see this in the same way every time. Every programmer will view it in their own heads using their own interpretations and abstractions. But have a patent on just ONE of those views and the other programmers will not see the infringing code. There is NO WAY to check for patents on software. Not only that, but when necessity requires, programmers will solve the problem if it's at all possible in the vast majority of cases. It's a myth that software is clever or non-obvious to other programmers. That defies the very definition of a programmer who's job it is to come up with non-obvious solutions.

I heard it was 4 judges and no jury. One presiding judge and 3 others who are laymen. The three will decide the outcome. In case of indecision, then the presiding judge will decide.

It's both a criminal and civil case all in one.

And as the Swedes like to mention over and over, this is not the US.

Also, the prosecution never mentioned any details about the specific persons who committed the original crime that the TPB is supposedly assisting. Without an original crime, you cannot assist it. This is what I'm interested in hearing about with respect to the decision.

They find you, not the other way around.
When they do find you, you'll notice they will let you state what you have to offer at the beginning and they will interview you, not the other way around. They don't care for your interview although the questions you ask are also reflective of what kind of people you have. So yes, even your questions are analysed. Because of this, most interviewers think these programmers are telling them how to do their jobs and these interviewers resent being interviewed themselves when they believe they are the only ones who has a right to form an opinion. Most superstar programmers will fail your interview because it's not up to them to pass (hence they will often fail on purpose to see how you handle it), so it's up to the interviewer to show their skill. If you turn negative, then it's over. If you turn positive and try and engage in a conversation, bonus.

Also, many jobs say they want superstar programmers, but are only interested in scamming them by not paying them or saying they have a certain range in mind and then later on, they will go below it. That's a deal killer right there.

If you want to know if someone is a superstar programmer, ask them to talk about one of their favourite projects and what challenges they faced and whatnot. Anyone, in any field, that truly loves what they do won't be able to shut up. You have to entice them first though. Once they pick up the conversation and start talking a lot, then you at least know you have someone that has potential. Either way, you'll find out a lot more this way than any other technique beyond the simple programming questions.

Oh, and if you see programmers walk out of interviews, those are either superstar programmers or you're the worst interviewer in the world (likely the latter).