Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Home Office To Ignore Wikipedia Founder's Petition Against O'Dwyer Extradition

Comments Filter:
  • Time and Place (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Dan B. (20610) <slashdotNO@SPAMbryar.com.au> on Tuesday July 03, 2012 @02:28AM (#40524759) Homepage

    So if you do something that is not a crime in your own country, but is in another, yet you never set foot in that country, you can now be extradited? Wouldn't that fall under persecution grounds for asylum? Maybe I should check with the Equadorian Embassy...

  • Re:Time and Place (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Zemran (3101) on Tuesday July 03, 2012 @03:30AM (#40524993) Homepage Journal

    Errr, you do realise that Scotland and England are the same country??? There is no reason to extradite as the Scottish policeman can just arrest you as you are still in the UK... Other than that and you are talking about a crime rather than a civil offence etc., good point.

  • by Yvanhoe (564877) on Tuesday July 03, 2012 @05:09AM (#40525479) Journal
    Congratulation, media industries : you clearly made your point : innovation in media content distribution will not be tolerated, even if it is done according to the laws.

    If you were not already boycotting the people behind this, I think you can begin now.
  • I would say YES because while i haven't gone to TVShack i have gone to others to see shows i have already paid for by paying for cable TV but simply missed because of one thing or another. I mean why the hell should i shell out money to build a fricking DVR or add extra drives so my PC can do it when i can just use the net to find a show i missed and watch it whenever?

    and I thought the whole point of the Betamax ruling was if something had a non infringing use even if others used it differently it couldn't just be banned outright? or did the cartels get that one tossed when i wasn't looking?

  • by Ash Vince (602485) * on Tuesday July 03, 2012 @07:38AM (#40526231) Journal

    It was the last lot that signed the extradition agreement in the first place. Why we are extraditing someone for "copyright" offences, which should really be a civil matter, is beyond me

    Simple really, it is not a civil matter as far as UK law is concerned. You are right in that he shouldn't be getting extradited but that is because he committed all his crimes in the UK, he should be prosecuted in the UK really. The thing is though, what he is accused of is still a crime over here (not a civil wrong or tort), otherwise we would not be allowed to extradite him.

    A better idea might be that we tried to get the law changed so this was not a crime over here. I am not 100% sure if the UK public would actually be in favour of us relaxing copyright law though and unfortunately some serious public support would be needed for this sort of change.

  • by horza (87255) on Tuesday July 03, 2012 @05:57PM (#40535307) Homepage

    That's not really true. Cameron has done a lot of good things. Junked the DNA database, repealed some of the drastic anti-terror laws, killed the ID card scheme, and stopped the unifying of all the government databases. They are making good headway to repairing the wanton destruction of civil liberties by Brown and Blair.

    Currently it's the justice system, independent of the government, that is showing itself to be either broken or corrupt. A government crying shy of meddling with an independent justice system is not necessarily a bad thing, and in fact highlights a broken justice system where the US can get Assange fast-tracked into solitary and a throw a teenager creating a tv fan web site into the a foreign corporate-sponsored jail cell.

    Phillip.

Nothing will dispel enthusiasm like a small admission fee. -- Kim Hubbard

Working...