US Government Seeks Extradition of UK Student For File-Sharing 409
Gimble writes "The BBC reports that UK student Richard O'Dwyer has lost a legal battle to block his extradition to the U.S., where he faces copyright infringement charges for running a file sharing site (ruling). O'Dwyer operated the site 'TV-Shack' from 2007 until 2010, which didn't offer any files itself, but posted links to streams and files hosted elsewhere. O'Dwyer was first arrested in June last year by British police acting on information from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The domestic investigation was subsequently dropped, but Mr. O'Dwyer was re-arrested in May on an extradition warrant to face charges in America."
Re:Well. this will be a first... (Score:5, Interesting)
They're just goddamned TV shows. (Score:5, Interesting)
Boycott. Stop watching, stop buying, stop feeding these asshole media publishers. If you must buy, buy used.
that will tieup the courts and jury trials (Score:0, Interesting)
Next up: Extradition because you violated a website's policies.
that will tieup the courts and jury trials.
Good luck getting a jury to under stand the policies and in court it will take a lot of time to read out a 50 page policies any ways.
Re:Well. this will be a first... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's funny you should mention that.
The entire framework of diplomacy and international relations is predicated on the principle of sovereignty, which is being joyously trampled here.
It just means that the UK is not a real country, but rather a protectorate or colony of the US. Here's to hoping the Scots wake up and head for the exit this time around.
Just heard this reported on BBC Radio 4 (Score:4, Interesting)
The item stated that in order for extradition to be considered, O'Dwyer had to have been accused of committing a crime that was illegal in both the UK and the USA. As far as I am aware, no crime was committed in the UK, which is why the criminal investigation was originally dropped.
Google Search is not vetted (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:How is this legal? (Score:4, Interesting)
I really really like Russian extradition law. It's VERY simple:
"Russian citizens can not be extradited for any offences"
If a Russian citizen commits a crime in a foreign jurisdiction then it will be prosecuted in Russia. With some special provisions for evidence and witness testimonials.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Except this isn't an extraditable offence. (Score:4, Interesting)
Nope - same goes for about 20 other countries, and then an even lower standard applies for EU countries. The theory is that the US authorities need to have sufficient evidence back in the US to get their arrest warrant (i.e. satisfying probable cause) that asking them to prove the same in the UK is redundant.
It's kind of like when flying, and taking a connection, not having to go through security twice; if the second flight trusts the first flight, they can assume that you've already been sufficiently checked.
Re:This was a Magistrates' Court (Score:5, Interesting)
The UK has fairly similar copyright laws to the US. Running a torrent site probably isn't illegal in either country as it's only a link, not the actual file. But if it *IS* illegal in one then it's quite probably illegal in the other.
Morally it's all a bit of a mess. The movie and music industries are morally vaccuous, but that doesn't make this kid a good guy. If the accusation is right that he's made "over $230,000 in advertising revenue" from enabling other people to avoid paying for consuming the results of artistic creativity, then he's in the wrong too. However extraditing from a friendly nation with similar copyright laws seems to be vastly overstepping the mark.
Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials (Score:2, Interesting)
Far too much hassle. Why send soldiers when a predator drone can put a stop to his filesharing permanently?
Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem now is even if everyone stops watching movies and listening to music RIAA and MPAA wil simply claim that it is because of the piracy and we need a media tax. Say 20% of your total income. Or 50%. That sounds fair. And if you don't like it, there is nowhere you can go, as US is expanding their policies bought by RIAA and MPAA and paid for by your money to other countries as well.
BBC Audio interview (Score:4, Interesting)
An earlier interview with him on BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16546471 [bbc.co.uk]
Re:His extradition has been granted (Score:3, Interesting)
The DPP Director of Public Prosecution authorized this. Granted your comment is quite valid and there was a Parliamentary debate over cutting ties with the UK USA extradition treaty signed up by Bush and Blair.
The last I heard CI5 arrested this chap and he is now in custody without charge.
Nonetheless he is still being held in detention against his will. I sincerely hope that clarifies some questions of some people and is enlightening.
Love
nsn
Re:ehhhhh (Score:2, Interesting)
- you said u.s. hasnt been capitalist for over a century.
that implies, u.s. was capitalist, a century ago. based on the proposition.
and so we look at what was there 100 years ago (actually 120), and see that entire country being owned by 12 people. not even 'monopolies'. these people directly own these aspects of economy, in person.
and none of what you speak of - ie the intricate concepts like 'barriers to entry', 'demand', 'supply' etc does not mean shit, since these people OWN the economic activity. they can kill you in the market in any way they want, or buy you out, or squeeze you out. and come up as the hero for doing that - and which was what they did, in actuality.
and no, noone 'voted with their vallet'. that is the ultimate end of capitalism - eventually one group gets bigger than everyone else and owns everything. there is no choice in anything. NO - there is no 'make believe' in this - there is no 'invisible hand' somehow 'making intelligent choices' through citizenry and whatnot. that citizenry made their choice in 19th century, and you ended up with rockefeller et al. identically, the same citizenry is making their choices, and elected w. bush 2 times. along with those who brought acta, sopa, pipa, popa, schmogga et al.
therefore, all you are giving me is assumptions and make believe, saying 'this will happen if that happens'. what im giving to you, is what HAPPENED.
12 people owned entire economy of u.s. when it was, supposedly 'capitalist' as you have proposed in your statement.
and yes, the illusion of a participatory economy and choice, is better than there being no illusion. at least, for the masses in your country. for me, they are both the same.
but, that does not justify the stupidity of proposing to go back to 12 people owning the economy, based on the HOPE and BELIEF that 'things will just work out, "because"'.
Re:"WTF happened to the concept of jurisdiction?" (Score:4, Interesting)
Today I believe that both replies have merit and here you come making the same observations for the other side so I will give you the same reply:
(1) How do you what "real capitalism" is if it doesn't exist? For me it is only a theoretical construct that doesn't hold water in the real world.
(2) Why do you think what is happening today in the US (and the whole world actually) isn't the logical outcome of attempting to implement "real capitalism"? "Real capitalism" has had several powerful proponents for more than 2 centuries and often in government and here we are...
Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials (Score:5, Interesting)
Getting as many people on the watchlist creates the fine-grained control the government appears to want. Seems that the powers-that-wanna-be took lessions from Lavrentiy Beria.
Comrade Beria was 'Uncle Joe' Stalin's hatchetman in the NKVD, precourser to the KGB. He came up through the Party ranks in the original 'Cheka' by reputedly setting up his superiors in some kind of scandal, usually coming up with evidence of sexual scandals, either real or manufactured. When his boss resigned in disgrace, Comrade Beria was standing there ready to go to work in his new job, usually purging possibly disloyal 'coworkers' in the process.
When 'Uncle Joe' died, Beria was the frontrunner to become the 'big boss' of the Soviet Union, until Nikita Khrushchev, Gregori Malenkov, and Vyacheslav Molotov (of 'Molotov Cocktail' fame) had him arrested on over 150 counts of rape, sodomy, child molestation, and abuse of office. In the 'investigation' that followed, he was tried for high treason and reputedly executed in December 1953, although apocryphal evidence claims he was actually shot and killed during his arrest in July '53.
Whether Beria did what they say he did is immaterial. The lession we garner from the events is, it just don't matter what you do, at the end of the day, if the powers-that-wanna-be want you bad enough, they'll find a way.
Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials (Score:4, Interesting)
Great ideas. Here's what's wrong with them, worst case scenario.
There are only a finite combination of notes playable on a scale, only so many ways they can be combined. Case in point, Vanilla Ice ripping off Queen, but I digress. There are also only so many stories to be told. Ever notice how all the 'high school kid' movies are all alike? It's the same story told over and over.
Disney has looted everybody's childhood all over the globe and made cartoons of their favorite legends and bedtime stories, all in the public domain. They then proceded to copyright everything they could to 'secure' what they considered to be 'their' intellectual property. They tend to have fairly litigious and agressive attorneys. How long until every concept, every plot idea, every characterisation is is locked away in a Disney vault guarded by rabid lawyers? And even if you come up with what you think is an original idea, can you afford an attorney to prove it against what Disney et al can field against you?