Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Piracy News Your Rights Online

Cambodia To Extradite Gottfrid Svartholm 126

judgecorp writes "The Cambodian authorities have said they will extradite Gottfrid Svartholm who is wanted in Sweden for his part in founding file sharing site The Pirate Bay. As there is no extradition treaty between Sweden and Cambodia, Svartholm is being extradited under immigration law, so it is not yet clear whether he will actually be sent to Sweden."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cambodia To Extradite Gottfrid Svartholm

Comments Filter:
  • Extradition Laws (Score:5, Informative)

    by Quick Reply ( 688867 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @11:04AM (#41222975) Journal

    I think that it is quite clear by now that the laws don't really matter in cases like this. The MAFIAA will get him one way or another.

    • by slick7 ( 1703596 )

      I think ... the laws don't really matter in cases like this.

      Two words, Pol Pot [nytimes.com]

    • Gottfrid should have returned to Sweden to begin serving his sentence January 2nd this year, but again he failed to appear. All were sentenced to one year in prison and ordered to pay $3.6 million to entertainment companies. The Pirate Bay doesn't actually host any copyright-protected material itself. Instead, it provides a forum for users to download content through so-called torrent files. The technology allows users to transfer parts of a large file from several different users, increasing download spee
  • Deport NOT Extradite (Score:5, Informative)

    by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @11:13AM (#41223087)

    Deport and Extradite are not the same thing.

    Deport - Kick out of the country and we don't care where you go

    Extradite - Hand over to the authorities of another country which which you have an extradition treaty.
    TFA says Deport .. TFS says Extradite. Sheesh .. I'd be embarrassed if I was paying for access to this site.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      TFA says:

      “We just know we will deport him. As to which country, that would be up to the Swedish side,” the spokesperson said.

      Why would it be up to Sweden?

      • >> Why would it be up to Sweden?

        Cambodia fears a replay of the Great Meatball Embargo of 1817.

      • by aliquis ( 678370 )

        Maybe because they will ask us?

        Nice of them.

        Personally I don't think Anakata is responsible for millions of other peoples copyright violation or should be punished for it. He's not the one commiting the crime (well, I guess helping make it happen is the reason they use but in my ideology/thoughts/reasoning rather than the law.)

        Imho the reason the TPB guys are targetted is that they are few and it's much easier to get acceptance for catching them rather than various people themselves (such as the one million

      • by tnk1 ( 899206 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @11:37AM (#41223361)

        Probably because the Swedes made the request.

        Extradition treaty or not, if the Swedes request him, and there is no bar to complying, the Cambodians can very simply comply with the Swedes' request. If he had not broken immigration law, there would probably be some protections for him, but not necessarily. In this case, the Cambodians want to deport him and the Swedes have asked for his return. There is really no reason for them to not accede to that request.

        The interesting thing with a deportation is the deporting country will generally want to place the deportee in a place where they will be able to be taken care of, usually their home country. Sweden is probably very willing to put him up, all expenses paid, in a nice jail cell. Win-win for everyone. Except for Gottfrid Svartholm, of course.

        • by Anonymous Coward
          According to Cambodia Daily, US top trade representative Ron Kirk met with ASEAN economic ministers in Siem Reap City the day he [Gottfrid] got arrested... Kinda like the decision to raid and prosecute TPB had absolutely nothing to do with the Swedish politicians' visit in the US shortly before..
          • by tnk1 ( 899206 )

            I wouldn't be surprised. Even if he was not extradited to the US, US interests are served by having him in a Swedish jail.

            Or it could be a coincidence. Either way, if the US can snare him more easily for breaking Swedish law, that doesn't seem like a particularly nefarious deed. Unless you're suggesting that Sweden should not enforce its own laws to protect him from a legal indictment in the US and possible extradition.

      • by jrumney ( 197329 )
        Sweden has to agree to take him. You can't deport someone to a country that isn't willing to take the person you are deporting (though if he is a Swedish citizen, I don't think Sweden has any grounds for refusal, so this is probably just a formality).
      • TFA says:

        “We just know we will deport him. As to which country, that would be up to the Swedish side,” the spokesperson said.

        Why would it be up to Sweden?

        If you deport someone, you have to decide where you're deporting them to. You don't just take them to your nearest sea border and drop them in the ocean.

        Normally you deport people to their country of origin, unless they are in danger of torture/death. I don't see any reason for Cambodia not to deport him to Seden.

    • http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/08/12/220224/is-sexual-harassment-part-of-hacker-culture?sdsrc=popbyskid [slashdot.org]

      "Is sexual harassment part of the hacker culture?"

      Well.. Just take a look on the Facebook Wikileaks group and the posts after posts after posts regarding Assange and people who think he should get away from a rape investigation.


      • If you are going to accuse someone of some sort of sexual deviance when the entire NSA and black ops establishment is pissed off at them there better be DAMN good proof. If not whoever makes the accusation should be held with the highest suspicion you can muster. If you think the US if puppeteering people everywhere you must be naive.

        • by aliquis ( 678370 )

          It's just an investigation. He haven't been sentenced. (English isn't my native language but what I mean is that the court haven't decided and judged him for anything.)

          I don't know what all you wrote mean but I suppose the suspicion can be pretty low for and an investigation would still be ok. Why should they (the police) ignore an investigation? With total lack of evidence maybe it would be hard to get somewhere and hence one reason.

          People blend Swedish police wanting him for questioning in a rape case and

          • by aliquis ( 678370 )

            And yeah sorry for possibly using the wrong words. I don't really know how it is and what words I should use. I think it's questioning? So maybe not investigation. The intent isn't to make it seem worse than it is or trash talk Assange.

          • by tsotha ( 720379 )

            The concern is regardless of the outcome of the rape charges, extradition to Sweden will mean eventual extradition from Sweden to the US. If your goal was to get him to Sweden as the first step in getting him to the US, these charges are a great vehicle for the purpose - they're purely based on accusation with no associated physical evidence. Assuming the Swedes are willing to extradite him to the US, it doesn't matter if the rape case falls apart the minute he sets foot on Swedish soil. Eventually he'll

        • Assange isn't even wanted for sexual assault or any crime for that matter, he is wanted for questioning. He has time and time again said that he would submit to questioning via video chat, but the Swedish Government has said that is not acceptable
          • by Goaway ( 82658 )

            He is wanted for questioning and arrest. You can not arrest him over video chat.

          • He is wanted for arrest in Sweden, and questioning whilst under arrest. Having a video chat with somebody is hardly a viable substitute for arresting them.
        • I'm fairly sure the "entire NSA and black ops establishment" could have come up with something a bit more damning for Assange if they'd really wanted to, such as planting some child porn on him, or drugs if he went somewhere that carries the death penalty for possession..
    • They will deport him to another country where he will be extradited. Easy-peasy.

      I must say, I'm rather disappointed by the lack of civil disobedience in these sorts of cases recently. The perps flee jurisdictions to save their own skins, rather than show how corrupt the system is by being unjustly imprisoned. What would Dr. King say? Nelson Mandela didn't flee to Angola to escape an unfair judicial system. A fleeing perp is just another lousy criminal, a martyr is a hero forever.

      • Dr. King would be in the Supermax right now.

      • If you think we need martyrs, by all means, be one yourself. Do not ask other people to be one for you.

        Civil disobedience does not imply in surrendering yourself, it means fighting the system. The act of not complying with government decisions as criminal sentences or arrest warrants is civil disobedience in itself.
        • by fnj ( 64210 )

          Civil disobedience does not imply in surrendering yourself, it means fighting the system.

          Actually, what separates civil disobedience from general resistance against unjust laws is pretty much acceptance of the consequences. Do you think Rosa Parks tried to run away before the arrival of the police who were summoned? The bus driver stood in front of Ms. Parks and told her if she didn't stand up and move, he would "have to" call the police and have her arrested. She replied that she recognized that was his prerogative, and stood her ground.

          In Sophocles' play, Antigone decides that there is an imp

          • That may be your opinion, but it is based solely on your aesthetic sense not on any real logic. Civil disobedience is by definition just that: disobedience. It has nothing to do with any posture regarding the consequences. If running away would be counterproductive to the cause is highly debatable and dependable on the cause and several other factors, but regardless, the act itself to refuse to comply with unjust laws as you see them is civil disobedience in itself.
            • by fnj ( 64210 )

              It's not a matter of opinion. It's common [thefreedictionary.com] usage [stanford.edu].

              • Your overly narrow definition comes from Rawls and is just his vision of it, his opinion. There are several discordant opinions and you will see that the narrowness of his definition is pointed even in the texts you link if you bother to read them. Just to give you an example, what some Germans did, hiding Jews from the government, in WWII is civil disobedience by any meaningful definition of the term, and none of them delivered themselves (and the hidden people) for execution just to show their cause.
                • by fnj ( 64210 )

                  Utter nonsense. That's not civil disobedience. That's defying institutional tyranny and evil. That's intervention against mass murder.

                  • That was civilians disobeying the unfair (and in this case homicidal) laws approved by their democratically elected government (which by definition is not a Tyranny). If civilians disobeying laws is not civil disobedience for you, you have a problem. Seriously.
      • by hairyfeet ( 841228 ) <bassbeast1968 AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @12:59PM (#41224475) Journal
        Dr King wouldn't "say" anything, he'd been in solitary if he was lucky, in Gitmo as a terrorist if not.
        • Is that actually true, or is it just what you want to believe? "Gitmo" is for terrorists captured on the battlefield, although a certain sort of person will not be dissuaded from believing otherwise.
          • by hairyfeet ( 841228 ) <bassbeast1968 AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @09:11PM (#41230063) Journal

            After the president stated (and wasn't stopped or even challenged) that the POTUS has the right to kill Americans without trial? I think all bets are off. We don't even know for certain WHO is being held at Gitmo and the rendition prisons, we know that people from countries we are supposedly allied with like Canada and the UK have been tortured and held without trial, and the simple fact that you have a government that not only admits it tortures but has members of it openly bragging about it means that frankly your rights don't mean jack shit anymore.

            I would urge you to watch this video [youtube.com] from start to finish. Just a simple little lecture, the person giving it is not a rabble rouser but an accomplished journalist and self proclaimed "little Jewish girl" who is already feeling the chilling effects like watchlists being aimed at her. Her crime? Talking about constitutional rights and what we need to do to preserve our freedoms. When openly talking about the constitution can get you put on watchlists friend then i think we both agree the shit ain't what it seems and most of those 'rights" that many here talk about are just useless platitudes. Because if you ever get into a position where you actually need those rights the state has already implemented mechanisms where they can take them away.

          • Is that actually true, or is it just what you want to believe? "Gitmo" is for terrorists captured on the battlefield, although a certain sort of person will not be dissuaded from believing otherwise.

            Afghanistan only became a "battlefield" because the US invaded a sovereign country.

            If US troops invaded my country and started killing my neighbours, I would feel entitled to try to kill as many of them as possible. If that is your definition of a terrorist, then fuck you.

    • by Rei ( 128717 )

      To complicate it further, what's going on with Assange is yet another term altogether, "surrender" - surrendering (under an EAW) being neither deportation nor extradition, but more like what goes on between states in the US with handing a prisoner between jurisdictions.

    • by tsotha ( 720379 )

      While that's technically true, there's a difference between leaving a country and being deported. When you leave it's your choice where you go next. When you're deported the government typically decides where you go - almost always to the country on your passport. In this case it would be very unusual for him to end up in any country other than Sweden. Even if it's not technically extradition, you'll be hard pressed to find a practical difference.

  • If you google for "gottfrid svartholm cambodia us high trade", the first hit reads:

    Latest News - Cambodia Guide
    www.camboguide.com > Country
    5 days ago - Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm Arrested In Cambodia - Latest
    News ... Iran, Cambodia Have High Potentials For Enhancing Ties - Latest News ....
    Top U.S. trade official heads to Southeast Asia for talks - Latest News ...

    Any change the first and the last item are in any way related?

  • by uigrad_2000 ( 398500 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @11:32AM (#41223291) Homepage Journal

    I visited a friend in Phnom Penh a couple of years ago. They have lots of "DVD shops" in any of their shopping areas. 100% of the DVDs are pirated. If you want a non-pirated DVD, you have to find an airport. I think there's also one high class mall that contains one dvd store with non-pirated DVDs and software.

    Cambodia has no taxes. The money the government runs on is half bribes and half foreign aid. To bring in more foreign aid, they know they have to stop piracy, but that's their only incentive. When foreign ambassadors come to visit, they'll send out a signal to all the DVD shops, and they'll all close down. 3 days later, they all come back.

    • by Hatta ( 162192 )

      The proper question is, what would Cambodia get out of a high profile extradition fight?

    • by manaway ( 53637 )

      I visited a friend in Phnom Penh a couple of years ago. They have lots of "DVD shops" in any of their shopping areas. 100% of the DVDs are pirated.

      The US, when it was parting ways with the British, was the same way; publishing texts with British copyright. All first world countries ignored copyrights and patents of other countries until their local publishers established themselves because there just wasn't all that much original content available. Then the newly-established country, with its now active content-producing businesses, starts making agreements with other first world publishers while harassing poorer countries for ignoring copyrights, pat

    • Look it up, Cambodia has business taxes. Cambodia has corporate income tax, and also additional taxes for companies that deal in natural resources.

  • by moniker127 ( 1290002 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @11:36AM (#41223349)
    I stand as chairman for the Society for Advancement of Rapists Murderers and Bank Robbers, and I would like to pledge my most sincere thanks to you, Sweedish government, for prosecuting crimes like this instead of continuing to persecute us.
  • I Guess.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by avandesande ( 143899 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @12:19PM (#41223847) Journal
    I guess his 'Holiday in Cambodia' is over!
  • I feel much safer sleeping at night know that people who share movies and songs are perused with the same tenacity as Nazi war criminals. The world is much safer knowing this vermin is almost apprehended. God save the queen!!
    • I feel much safer sleeping at night know that people who share movies and songs are perused with the same tenacity as Nazi war criminals. The world is much safer knowing this vermin is almost apprehended. God save the queen!!

      What's our Queen got to do with the insanity of US law enforcement?

  • The Wall Street Journal referred to him yesterday as the "mastermind" behind the "notorious" Pirate Bay, which was an amusing use of language. Or alarming.
  • I could have broken this story; before it was issued and I do not need to read the article as the person gets deported to Sweden and then onto the USA.

    Russia Today was first out of the blocks with this! Danke Timothy and others this story is informative and some people might hate the truth but the story is exactly what it is!

  • It's important the appreciate that the Swedish arrest warrant for Svartholm isn't for file-sharing, it's for skipping bail and fleeing after his last round of appeals failed. Irrespective of the soundness of the original trail, the guy is a fugitive with a current conviction who's sentence has not been served. The charges he will face if he is caught now are far more serious than the ones he faced with Pirate Bay.

Perfection is acheived only on the point of collapse. - C. N. Parkinson