A panel of three judges will soon decide whether The Pirate Bay should be blocked in Sweden. The case, which began yesterday in the Stockholm District Court, sees the combined might of several movie, music and TV companies against local service provider Bredbandsbolaget. Despite intense pressure the ISP maintains it will not censor the Internet.

Last November, Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, Nordisk Film and the Swedish Film Industry teamed up against Swedish ISP Bredbandsbolaget (Broadband Company).

In a lawsuit filed at the Stockholm District Court, the entertainment industry plaintiffs argued that Bredbandsbolaget is liable for the Internet piracy carried out by its own subscribers. They say that if the ISP wants to free itself from blame, it should stop its customers accessing The Pirate Bay and streaming portal Swefilmer.

Bredbandsbolaget took just over a month to reject the demands of the entertainment industry groups, announcing that its only role is to provide customers with Internet access while facilitating the free-flow of information.

After a February 20, 2014 district court meeting between the parties concluded without consensus or formal agreement, a full trial was inevitable. That began yesterday in Stockholm, with Bredbandsbolaget facing off against a who’s who of movie and TV companies, local distributors, and the musical might of IFPI.

The plaintiffs’ position is clear. By failing to block its subscribers from accessing the sites, Bredbandsbolaget itself is facilitating copyright infringement and therefore liable to pay damages to the entertainment companies. Previously this aspect of the law has only been tested against file-sharing services such as The Pirate Bay.

Needless to say, the ISP is concerned not only by the copyright implications, but also the thin end of the wedge in respect of other crimes.

“It is dangerous if we are sentenced as accomplices or participants to crimes committed online. In this case it is about copyright infringement, but it is difficult to logically explain why it would stop at that,” company spokesperson Aron Samuelsson explains.

“If one takes the example of WikiLeaks one can easily argue that there is a spread of classified material taking place. Another parallel is on social media where there are threats, defamation and even copyright infringement. Do we have to act, even in those cases?”

Speaking on behalf of the plaintiffs, Per Strömbäck acknowledges the gravity of the case but dismisses fears that any ruling against the ISP will have wider implications.

“It is a question that must be taken seriously but in 13 other EU countries where rightsholders have won similar cases escalation hasn’t occurred,” Strömbäck says.

“This case applies specifically to copyright and it cannot be a surprise to anyone that there is an exceptionally large problem with copyright infringement online. We think it is reasonable for Swedish creators to have the same protection enjoyed by those neighboring countries.”

But while Strömbäck’s comments appear to limit the effect of the ruling in respect of other crimes, the scope in copyright remains enormous.

Should the court decide that Bredbandsbolaget is liable for infringements carried out by subscribers using The Pirate Bay, then by extension all local ISPs can be held liable in the same manner. Furthermore, if ISPs are liable for infringing Pirate Bay users, they can also be held liable for subscribers using every other unauthorized service.

This, of course, is where the floodgates open. If the plaintiffs prevail, all entertainment companies will be able to go to court in Sweden and demand that ISPs A to Z block file-sharing services 1 to 200 – and beyond. It’s a never-ending game that has seen hundreds of URLs blocked at the ISP level in the UK, mostly without any public scrutiny or oversight.