Several major online events have been rolling along in the press recently, two of which are particularly 'landmark' in their influence on the internet, and net morality in general.

The first is the Pirate Bay court case in Sweden. This has been an ongoing court case for several months now, and wherever you stand in terms of the piracy argument it could have large repercussions for both sides of the fence. The Swedish court recently found the four defendants guilty (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/apr/17/the-pirate-bay-trial-guilty-verdict) but seemed to give them a verdict that is wholly out of sync of what they were originally pushing for. So it appears more of a token gesture than crippling blow to the Pirate Bay.

The other point of contention that seems to be gathering momentum at the moment is a Goldman Sachs complaint site. www.out-law.com (http://www.out-law.com/page-9944) rounds up the article nicely here. The gist is that a disgruntled investment banker has started a blog http://www.goldmansachs666.com that is aimed at highlighting the evils of Goldman Sachs. Obviously they have taken offence at this, and decided to sue. The argument they have seems quite weak to me, they are arguing that his site may be confused for actually being affiliated with them. This is partly due to the domain name, and the fact that all the content is Goldman Sachs related.

There have always been controversial domain registrations for nefarious or otherwise purposes, but in this case it appears that neither side is willing to back down, and with the public perception of banks being pretty dim at present it will be interesting to see if this opens the floodgates for public online criticism or slams them shut in their faces.