British Student Loses Extradition Battle Over Copyright Violation

[Saulkar]

Sorry to repeat myself, but I believe that the government need to know our displeasure.
If you are a UK citizen please sign this if you want to.
We need to change this one-sided Extradition Act. Epetitions have been successful in the past, so this could work.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22467

Edit:

If you hide behind legal technicalities to make money out of advertising piracy don't be surprised when the big boys find some other legal technicalities to drop on you from a great height. If you can't do they time don't do the crime.

It isn't a crime in the UK. I'm also pretty sure that Google does this on a larger scale.

I tried to sign but I am not a UK citizen.

 

[Electric Alpaca]

We can argue about whether he deserves this or not as much as we like (I'm sure his ill gotten revenue can pay the legal fees required to get him off and he'll be back to square one), the main point I believe of this is to have an example made.

We all know the issues surrounding piracy websites like Pirate Bay, immune to prosecution because it's a Swedish website, cause for a lot of IP holders.

What should be more of a focus, is that if this does go through, and this gentleman is sentenced - Sweden et al could potentially stop being a safe haven for Piracy hosting and a big shake up will ensue.

So when presented in this manner, as much as it is a rather poor situation for an individual to be in, potentially it will have great and good effects as a whole.

Unless you like to pirate property...

 

[tangoprime]

TVShack didn't use US servers.

Bingo! the crime was committed on the country in which the website was hosted on the server. Not in the US.Any ending domains has no relevance as any organisation/register may have any domains especially .com and .net because there are no restrictions of use.

We all know why this is happening, the UK government doesn't have any balls to stand-up against the US in case it may damage this "special relationship".

If you hide behind legal technicalities to make money out of advertising piracy don't be surprised when the big boys find some other legal technicalities to drop on you from a great height. If you can't do the time don't do the crime.

In the US, it's illegal to drink if you're younger than 21, right? That age is 18 in Sweden for example. Does it sound sane to you that I could be charged for a crime in the US despite never being there, because I'm a 20 year old drinking in Sweden?

If you're doing it at a US embassy or consulate in Sweden, then it doesn't sound insane. Even if it's shaky, and will probably not work here in the US (especially with the kind of lawyer this young man should be able to afford), there was jurisdiction shown. He violated a US law, and the US demonstrated enough for the British government that it was done under their jurisdiction.

 

[DataSnake]

Question for the people who don't see anything wrong with this: do you think Saudi Arabia should be able to demand US citizens who have committed adultery be sent over for execution? Should China be able to demand we send over anyone who speaks out in favor of Tibet?

 

[tangoprime]

Is there anything we can do about this? Like raise money to pay his bail or something?

He was making a lot of people's yearly salary PER MONTH benefiting off of pirated material. He can pay his own bleeping legal bills, trust me.

He was making that from a search site that kept itself to a defined niche. That shouldn't be a crime, and may even be a freedom of speech issue in the US.

The offenders are those who uploaded the copyright material. Those are the ones that should be getting hoisted off to American gulags.

I'm not defending the government here, I'm just saying that we shouldn't be shedding any tears or giving any of our hard earned money to help a 23 year old who did something to assist in illegal activity, and made a lot of people's yearly salary a month doing it. He can pay his own legal bills.

 

[Mullahgrrl]

Imperialist shitheads.

Why does the governments of the world put up with it I wonder?

There was no repercussions when it was discovered that all their embassies in Scandinavia was spying.

 

[tangoprime]

Question for the people who don't see anything wrong with this: do you think Saudi Arabia should be able to demand US citizens who have committed adultery be sent over for execution? Should China be able to demand we send over anyone who speaks out in favor of Tibet?

No, but if we did it UNDER THEIR JURISDICTION, then I would expect at least a bit of a legal hassle at the very least.

Also, like another poster pointed out earlier, America can only police the world as far as the world lets it-

 

[tangoprime]

TVShack didn't use US servers.

Bingo! the crime was committed on the country in which the website was hosted on the server. Not in the US.Any ending domains has no relevance as any organisation/register may have any domains especially .com and .net because there are no restrictions of use.

We all know why this is happening, the UK government doesn't have any balls to stand-up against the US in case it may damage this "special relationship".

If you hide behind legal technicalities to make money out of advertising piracy don't be surprised when the big boys find some other legal technicalities to drop on you from a great height. If you can't do the time don't do the crime.

In the US, it's illegal to drink if you're younger than 21, right? That age is 18 in Sweden for example. Does it sound sane to you that I could be charged for a crime in the US despite never being there, because I'm a 20 year old drinking in Sweden?

If you're doing it at a US embassy or consulate in Sweden, then it doesn't sound insane. Even if it's shaky, and will probably not work here in the US (especially with the kind of lawyer this young man should be able to afford), there was jurisdiction shown. He violated a US law, and the US demonstrated enough for the British government that it was done under their jurisdiction.

Did we not just read the same article, or are you just making shit up? In what way does the US have jurisdiction? The internet is property of the US now?

I've violated tons of US laws. Possibly more than this guy ever has, and I can say the same for my fellow countrymen. How is it different?

Yes, we did read the same article, hence the reason I said it was shaky legal ground whether or not the US has jurisdiction, BUT according to the British, HIS GOVERNMENT, the US does have jurisdiction. So... who didn't read properly?

If you violated tons of US laws in a way that your own government deemed to be under their jurisdiction, then you might be in some trouble, and that's what's going on here. All of this said, I doubt it'll hold up in court in the United States, but dealing with this is apparently his reward for assisting in illegal activity.

 

[Wargamer]

From now on, Americans should only be allowed to demand Extradition if they first execute the first-born child of a Senator or the President. Maybe then they'll stop playing World Police.

 

[OriginalLadders]

In the country where the actions were performed he broke no laws, if he had then he would face trial in the UK. This is utterly ridiculous, just more proof that the "special relationship" consists of Britain bending over and getting fucked.

 

[tangoprime]

From now on, Americans should only be allowed to demand Extradition if they first execute the first-born child of a Senator or the President. Maybe then they'll stop playing World Police.

They only get to play world police in places where they're allowed to do so. How about people make some changes in their own country that stop allowing such international policies?

 

[OriginalLadders]

SNIP

They only get to play world police in places where they're allowed to do so. How about people make some changes in their own country that stop allowing such international policies?

If they're not allowed to, they'll do it anyway. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.337240-Obama-blacklists-Spain-and-more-internetdestroying-problems]

 

[tangoprime]

SNIP

They only get to play world police in places where they're allowed to do so. How about people make some changes in their own country that stop allowing such international policies?

If they're not allowed to, they'll do it anyway. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.337240-Obama-blacklists-Spain-and-more-internetdestroying-problems]

And I say way to go Spain for saying no initially, it's a shame they didn't call Obama's bluff. Again, they weren't being forced, they could've still said 'no' and either saw that it was a bluff, or dealt with the outcome. The policing only goes as far as it's allowed to go. They folded and allowed the policing to continue.

Edit: As a US citizen, I wish we'd deal with our own BS instead of trying to police the rest of the world too, lord knows we have enough of our own crap to deal with. I just wish more countries would stand up and stop allowing it to happen, and more people here in the US would vote down the idiots doing it.

But that's another topic. The topic here is about someone who assisted in a criminal activity without violating the law in his home country via a loophole, and now a loophole was used to prosecute him, and his own government seems to support the prosecution. I think he's reaping what he's sown.

 

[Daverson]

Yeah... the guy significantly profited from adspace on a website that aids illegal activity. It's not like he wasn't aware people would use his site for illegal purposes, he clearly knew.

Just because he's found a loophole in the law, doesn't mean he should be let free. As for the idea the Yanks have somehow stolen him off us... it's not like Navy Seals stormed the courtroom and stuffed him in a burlap sack, is it? If we didn't want to extradite him, we wouldn't have.

 

[Gamergeek25]

Now for non US viewers. Please note that the people of this country that are not like the ones are really vocally loud. Also this guy does deserve to face punishment. Its bad to steal someone elses work but to get money for it is a new level of bad

 

[tangoprime]

Yeah... the guy significantly profited from adspace on a website that aids illegal activity. It's not like he wasn't aware people would use his site for illegal purposes, he clearly knew.

Just because he's found a loophole in the law, doesn't mean he should be let free. As for the idea the Yanks have somehow stolen him off us... it's not like Navy Seals stormed the courtroom and stuffed him in a burlap sack, is it? If we didn't want to extradite him, we wouldn't have.

Thank you. Thank you. Someone else understands my position.

 

[GonvilleBromhead]

post="7.338398.13696014"]In the country where the actions were performed he broke no laws, if he had then he would face trial in the UK. This is utterly ridiculous, just more proof that the "special relationship" consists of Britain bending over and getting fucked.

In the country where the actions were performed he broke no laws, if he had then he would face trial in the UK. This is utterly ridiculous, just more proof that the "special relationship" consists of Britain bending over and getting fucked.

The major difference, and a point I have made several times yet constantly get ignored, is that what he was doing is a crime in the UK (specifically, facilitation of copyright infringement), which he is clearly guilty of. The decision to extradite was confirmed by the home office (effectively the government) and the courts (independent from government) - for both to agree means there must be pretty good, legal, reason for the US government to want him extradited and for the UK to feel such would be more appropriate then a prosecution over here - and no "kissing up to America's arse" would not be a reason any more then "because the magic moon ponies demanded it" would be. There would need to be a strong basis in law.

Now, what is the betting I get ignored because it's not what people want to hear?