A question about the legality of this ruling. (Score 1)

Although I'm sure it's been beaten to death already, I do remember reading somewhere (www.2600.com I think) that the judge who presided over this case had done legal consulting for some or all of the member companies of the MPAA. When asked (if memory serves) the judge stated that he had no conflict of interest. Can a judge actually do that? If so, I think the law needs a major overhaul in that department, if not, then why hasn't this ruling been challenged in a higher court?