TVShack Creator's US Extradition Approved 253
chrb writes "British student Richard O'Dwyer, creator of the TVShack website, has had his extradition to the United States approved by Conservative Home Secretary Theresa May. Mr. O'Dwyer now has 14 days to appeal the decision. The extradition was requested by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which has accused O'Dwyer of aiding copyright infringement by publishing links to pirated content hosted on external sites."
Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm more afraid of the US government than I am of any terrorists.
USA! USA! (Score:5, Insightful)
Way to go big boys! Extradite a harmless college kid who might be doing something moderately illegal but who's transgressions don't amount for a hill of beans, all things considered.
Leave those nice bankers and upstanding Wall Street financiers to ruin the economy with nothing more than an indignant letter and a small fine.
Yep, leaders of the free world we are.
Uh huh.. right. (Score:5, Insightful)
And again I ask: (Score:5, Insightful)
Why isn't the U.S. on the Enemies of the Internet 'under surveillance' list? Russia and Australia and the UK are there, but the U.S. isn't? It makes no logical sense.
Why should it be otherwise? (Score:2, Insightful)
The rich rule. The rich have always ruled, and always will rule.
When some non-rich punk does something that pisses the rulers off, expect punishment.
"Justice" is just a fancy word the rich use to get the poor to buy in to their rulership. There is no reason to be surprised when any real sort of justice is sacrificed for the sake of enforcement of the Highest Law (the rich are entitled to wealth).
Something that is important to point out: competence and popular approval have *no bearing whatsoever* on actual power. All that matters is wealth.
Extradition? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Extrajudicial law (Score:5, Insightful)
So, what this guy did is not a crime in the UK, but because it is in the US he is being sent to stand trial there. Basically, UK citizens are subject to US law (albeit it can only be selectively applied).
Something to worry about for everyone in a country that has an extradition treaty with US.
Re:WTF (Score:4, Insightful)
So totally broken ... (Score:5, Insightful)
He didn't break any UK laws. But he can get extradited. That makes no sense. Never mind the fact that he never actually provided any copyrighted information, just links to it.
This is so horribly flawed, it isn't funny. Welcome to a world in which extraterritorial laws can be applied whenever someone wishes -- or, more accurately, when the government in question can exert enough pressure on your own. Which basically is the US.
Can't wait for Americans to be extradited to Iran or somewhere else for violating their laws ... because it would be hypocritical to deny the request now.
After all, if you can ask for the extradition of someone who didn't break any laws in their country, you can't deny to extradite your own people who broke the laws of another country. But, we won't see that.
Someone jumped the shark here, not sure if it was the UK or the US to be honest. I think both have set a horrible precedent.
Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which has accused O'Dwyer of aiding copyright infringement by publishing links to pirated content hosted on external sites."
Kind of like me pointing to a naked woman in the street and saying "look". She gets arrested for indecent exposure and I get arrested for pointing to it.
His mother put it well. (Score:5, Insightful)
On Tuesday his mother said: "Today, yet another British citizen is being sold down the river by the British Government.
Dear British government: Please grow a pair and tell the US to fuck off.
Dear America (Score:3, Insightful)
I predict he will be extradited (Score:5, Insightful)
He will be charged with everything they can think of. Made up stuff, real stuff from jaywalking to treason.
He will be facing 300 years possible sentence if convicted of even half of it.
He will be facing a 5 years incarceration just waiting for a trial.
They will offer a plea deal: plead to being a bad boy and you can go home tomorrow, wear a radio on your ankle for a year and that's it.
He will do the deal.
The US will get a conviction, which they will trumpet from the rooftops. They will have a precedent that they covet, and anyone running any similar operation will pretty well have to stop it, lest they meet with a much worse fate.
The American's, no doubt, believe they are doing this fella a favour, since their first instinct was to scoop him up into a black helicopter, or even just nuke him remotely while he rides his bike to school.
How is this different? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:WTF (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:WTF (Score:1, Insightful)
When you elect people who's only concern is for the "free market", why would you expect them to act against the wishes of their corporate masters? The problem here has nothing to do with "big government", indeed that stereotype plays right into the hands of the libertardians who brought us this ridiculous travesty.
Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
The more you outlaw, the less meaning your laws have. More laws never created more justice. Just more criminals.
And if there's no way to avoid being a criminal... well, why bother trying?
Re:USA! USA! (Score:5, Insightful)
And all was sorta OK until the regulations were relaxed. NOT a coincidence.
Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Pinochet didn't get extradited (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So totally broken ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Can't wait for Americans to be extradited to Iran or somewhere else for violating their laws ... because it would be hypocritical to deny the request now.
Compare this case with that of the American soldier, a sergeant I believe, who while serving in Afghanistan decided to go on a shooting spree in a village close to his camp. He broke into several civilian dwellings, and killed 16 people, including many children. The Afghanis are understandably furious, and are demanding that this soldier be handed over to them, to be tried and sentenced in an Afghan court. So far the Americans have refused, and it is likely that they will continue to do so. Now, irrespective of what excuses they might come up with (and I'm struggling to think of any that might be termed reasonable), what does this say about America's attitude to other nations, and their rule of law? Again, compare the extradition to America of a citizen of another country, for doing something which was not illegal in the country in which he did it, to the murder of 16 people in a country by a citizen of the US, and not allowing that country to even try the man.
Hypocritical doesn't even begin to say it!