British Student Loses Extradition Battle Over Copyright Violation

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

One thing that no-one has pointed out is that the extradition agreement under which the chap is being deported is bilateral - the British government can request the extradition of US citizens with the same criteria in the reverse; and the UK government has indeed had the US government extradite suspects to the UK (in fact, the US government has not refused extradition to the UK for anyone. The UK has.)
Interestingly enough, prior to the 2003 treaty, the extradition laws were exceptionally unfair, as the UK only needed reasonable suspicion to have someone extradited from the US, whereas the US needed to demonstrate prima facie evidence to do the same. The new act requires the US to show reasonable suspicion, and the UK probable cause (these are the same thing, the difference merely being the names given to the concept either side of the Atlantic) for an extradition to proceed.

In addition, to be extradited the act the person is being extradited for has to be considered a crime in both countries, as is the case here.

seraphy:
US seems such a third world country here again. The criminal system in there must be a joke.

To be fair though UK is much bigger joke here if they actually extradite him. How can they even considerer with a straight face to extradite one of their own citizens who has not broken any laws in uk or done anything illegal in there either. Perhaps UK should grow a bit of a backbone.

It is, no really.

In the U.S. a man can rob a house, get injured by the owner, and sue the owner of the house for damages, and get away with it. Even if he doesn't, his case of assault would be seen as a higher case than an attempted robbery, thus delaying his case for well on 10 years, while he COULD be figuring out a way to leave the country or go into hiding.

Duol:
You obviously have no idea how International Law works.

A pretty good, and coherent grasp of how it works? Yeah, yeah I do.

Well all I can say is dam you USA for trying to prosecute people for crimes that they have already admitted to. The guy broke international copyright law, you cant argue that point, its a fact.

Starke:

Duol:
You obviously have no idea how International Law works.

A pretty good, and coherent grasp of how it works? Yeah, yeah I do.

Just because there is an international treaty or agreement does not extend jurisdiction for countries that are a party to it. Just because both the countries involved have agreed to a IP treaty doesn't mean that the one country has jurisdiction to prosecute all infractions of the agreement everywhere in the world. Not to mention the fact that I doubt the UK is a party to a treaty that makes what he has done illegal, otherwise there would be English law against it, and UK authorities would be prosecuting him.

The UK has an extradition treaty with the US, that's what's being used.

this makes me sick, I dont have much else to say about it, theres nothing I can do about it either and that makes me want to cry a little.

when the rebellion comes I hope I'm not too old or dead to enjoy it.

He gets sent to America, but we refuse to extradite the duchess of york, even though she actually committed crimes in the country that want to prosecute her, that seems a tad unfair, but fuck it after all he nothing but dirty peasant scum.

Grouchy Imp:
snip

Yeah, not to offend anybody, but right now, britains abit higher on the totem pole than Spain. Spain is looking to go the way of greece and has never really been know for its great stability and ability to roll with the big boys. I would think Britain could put a foot down, but if they choose not to, then thats their problem and says more about that country than the one trying to "police the world".

which if you read the thread you'd see I said the same thing.

Trillovinum:
snip

To say Britain is a "small country" pretty much invalidates yours as well.

If anyone has the pull and means to tell the US to knock their shit off (other than china) its Britain. If they want to go spineless, its not the US' problem. Get better leaders.

I've made my feelings about this very known.

It's disgusting and everyone should be disgusted with it.

If you think this is okay then there is something wrong with you. Something very fucking wrong.

And yet when it comes to extraditing radical clerics, we are forced not to by the EU.

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16150470

This reeks of throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. I'm sure that in due time the charges will be thrown out and he'll be sent on his way. Granted it still sucks he has to go through this and he probably won't get even an apology from our government, but I don't see this being some sort of "The beginning of the end" trial.

I vaguely remember hearing of this site, ironically on The Escapist when someone was looking for Dr. Who episodes or something and someone recommended the site. Unsurprisingly, that person who suggested the site was punished and the thread was closed.

Remember folks, on this site, recommending specific torrent sites is a BIG no no!

emeraldrafael:
Before all the "America is policing the world" comments come in, just remember britian could have told us to fuck off, but they chose not to. You can only police the world when the world lets you.

Do you think that somehow negates the fact that the US is trying to police the world?

In my opinion, the judge was paid off. That doesn't make the UK any less responsible. Because they should have told the US where to stick it. But realistically, that isn't going to happen.

A lot of people are to blame here, but that doesn't absolve the US's involvment.

If he hasn't broken any UK laws, he should NOT be extradited. End of story.

Xiado:
Let's just let the US have SOPA, and make a second, free internet for international citizens, seeing as the US feels the internet belongs to them.

Didn't u here the news? The U.S. govt apparently shelved the SOPA bill. It's over.

Shadie777:
I'm also pretty sure that Google does this on a larger scale.

Google does this on a massive scale. Google is the number one hub for online piracy. Need a torrent or an nzb file (Oh Usenet I just can't quit you)? Just hit up Google and you will have what you're looking for in a matter of seconds. Need a particular crack or rom? Again if you are even marginally handy with Google it should be yours in less time than it takes to type it in the search box.

The bottom line is that providing a search tool shouldn't be illegal. Just because Google doesn't advertise that millions upon millions (maybe even billions?) of people use it every day for piracy doesn't mean that Google isn't doing the exact same thing that sites like the above mentioned one is accused of doing and last I checked nobody is trying to throw anyone at Google behind bars.

Abandon4093:

emeraldrafael:
Before all the "America is policing the world" comments come in, just remember britian could have told us to fuck off, but they chose not to. You can only police the world when the world lets you.

Do you think that somehow negates the fact that the US is trying to police the world?

In my opinion, the judge was paid off. That doesn't make the UK any less responsible. Because they should have told the US where to stick it. But realistically, that isn't going to happen.

A lot of people are to blame here, but that doesn't absolve the US.

No, but its a hell of a lot easier when countries just roll over and die for you to walk all over them.

EHKOS:
This is bullshit. This reminds me of the autistic kid in Europe who hacked into the US to find out about aliens. I hate how my country is such a huge dick. Sorry guys.

It's ok, we all know it's not the fault of individuals.

emeraldrafael:
Before all the "America is policing the world" comments come in, just remember britian could have told us to fuck off, but they chose not to. You can only police the world when the world lets you.

Regardless, the US is trying to police the world. If someone is bullying me it's not my responsibility to stand up to them, it's their responsibility to stop.

Sweet juxtaposition.

Regardless, does anyone know if there's anything that can be done by British Citizens?

twaddle:

Xiado:
Let's just let the US have SOPA, and make a second, free internet for international citizens, seeing as the US feels the internet belongs to them.

Didn't u here the news? The U.S. govt apparently shelved the SOPA bill. It's over.

It's by no means over. PIPA or whatever is threatening to go through now. And its not like these people aren't going to try anothe Bill. ACTA was killed, then SOPA popped up. Now there's PIPA. What next?

I don't see these bills stopping anytime soon.

GonvilleBromhead:

In addition, to be extradited the act the person is being extradited for has to be considered a crime in both countries, as is the case here.

I'm pretty sure he broke no uk laws, that's half the reason we're discussing this. We can only hope that he doesn't get jailed; as far as i can see he's done nothing wrong.

StBishop:

Regardless, does anyone know if there's anything that can be done by British Citizens?

There's this petition if you don't already know about it. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22467

It needs as many signatures as possible. As much exposure as possible.

emeraldrafael:

Abandon4093:

emeraldrafael:
Before all the "America is policing the world" comments come in, just remember britian could have told us to fuck off, but they chose not to. You can only police the world when the world lets you.

Do you think that somehow negates the fact that the US is trying to police the world?

In my opinion, the judge was paid off. That doesn't make the UK any less responsible. Because they should have told the US where to stick it. But realistically, that isn't going to happen.

A lot of people are to blame here, but that doesn't absolve the US.

No, but its a hell of a lot easier when countries just roll over and die for you to walk all over them.

I never said it doesn't. You'll fine most of the British public actively detests their government. We're constantly moaning about how spineless they are. But your logic is faulty. You don't blame a bully victim for being bullied. Same logic here.

666Satsuki:
Well all I can say is dam you USA for trying to prosecute people for crimes that they have already admitted to. The guy broke international copyright law, you cant argue that point, its a fact.

You can't really pass a law which pertains to a country without it's permission.

If Australia decided to pass a law which prohibited driving over 130km/h (<100 m/h) and just said it was international and hot New Zealand and a couple other randoms to sign up too would the Governement here have the right to have Millions of Germans extradited for driving on the Autobahn?

StBishop:
You can't really pass a law which pertains to a country without it's permission.

If Australia decided to pass a law which prohibited driving over 130km/h (<100 m/h) and just said it was international and hot New Zealand and a couple other randoms to sign up too would the Governement here have the right to have Millions of Germans extradited for driving on the Autobahn?

People like you who have zero knowledge about law should not be talking in this thread. It just astounds me that you dont understand how idiotic your post is.

StBishop:

EHKOS:
This is bullshit. This reminds me of the autistic kid in Europe who hacked into the US to find out about aliens. I hate how my country is such a huge dick. Sorry guys.

It's ok, we all know it's not the fault of individuals.

emeraldrafael:
Before all the "America is policing the world" comments come in, just remember britian could have told us to fuck off, but they chose not to. You can only police the world when the world lets you.

Regardless, the US is trying to police the world. If someone is bullying me it's not my responsibility to stand up to them, it's their responsibility to stop.

Sweet juxtaposition.

Regardless, does anyone know if there's anything that can be done by British Citizens?

This is far from bullying, so really that analogy doesnt mean anything. The US has been given the power by other countries to do this because none of them feel the need to establish a boundary for the US to follow (or if they do, they dont feel a need to follow).

You want the US stopped, go to the UN to do THEIR job and police the world.

Abandon4093:

emeraldrafael:

Abandon4093:

Do you think that somehow negates the fact that the US is trying to police the world?

In my opinion, the judge was paid off. That doesn't make the UK any less responsible. Because they should have told the US where to stick it. But realistically, that isn't going to happen.

A lot of people are to blame here, but that doesn't absolve the US.

No, but its a hell of a lot easier when countries just roll over and die for you to walk all over them.

I never said it doesn't. You'll fine most of the British public actively detests their government. We're constantly moaning about how spineless they are. But your logic is faulty. You don't blame a bully victim for being bullied. Same logic here.

Nol because this isnt bullying. I've laready said this. the US is given the power tod o this, it didnt take it. after WW2 (which is when most people like to say the US started policing the world) there were a few countries that could have policed the world. in fact thats the reason we have the UN, so countries dont do this. If the UN (and much of the world) is too incompetent to do its job and say no, then you cant blame someone who does their job for them when they're giving the power to.

This sounds... interesting. If I were British I'd be feeling pretty insulted at this. Yea, Britain should tell the US to shove off on this one.

Maybe he should have used a middle man through one of those mafia states like Russia or China.

I didn't realize the US had jurisdiction in a country they have nothing to do with.

mad825:

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".

This. Nothing to do with hating on the US, it's we that are allowing ourselves to be walked on all over even when we have legitimate grounds to defiantly stand our ground and defend our own.

Can any of you honestly picture David Cameron growing some balls and speaking with authority and convition to people he doesn't have supreme authority over? He acts big and tough in parliament with the party supporting him, but shrivels like a cold day in the locker room with anyone outside the uk goverment.

He gets pwned hard by the other european leaders, we have become jokes to the russians and saudi arabia has us wrapped around their little finger to the point that should a revolution occur there, it will likely be british security forces shooting british made weapons that will violenty surpress the rebellious populace. No surprises we are letting the US walk all over us on this one.

emeraldrafael:

Nol because this isnt bullying. I've laready said this. the US is given the power tod o this, it didnt take it. after WW2 (which is when most people like to say the US started policing the world) there were a few countries that could have policed the world. in fact thats the reason we have the UN, so countries dont do this. If the UN (and much of the world) is too incompetent to do its job and say no, then you cant blame someone who does their job for them when they're giving the power to.

Euh no, US took the power violently and can even tell you when it happened. After ww2 USA didn't become number 1 all of a sudden and the previous dominant powers, uk and france for example, didnt just roll over and pass the torch to the US.

The turning point was the canal de suez incident where the US threated to NUKE uk and french forces opposing them. This was the moment british and french power was permanently shattered and everyone realized it was the US calling the shots now.

I still think thats kinda a bitch move imo, "argue with us? we nuke you!". But hey thats the way the cookie crumbled.

emeraldrafael:

Grouchy Imp:
snip

Yeah, not to offend anybody, but right now, britains abit higher on the totem pole than Spain. Spain is looking to go the way of greece and has never really been know for its great stability and ability to roll with the big boys. I would think Britain could put a foot down, but if they choose not to, then thats their problem and says more about that country than the one trying to "police the world".

which if you read the thread you'd see I said the same thing.

I saw where you were coming from with your first post fella; namely that the UK shouldn't have just rolled over and given in. And maybe we shouldn't have. What I was trying to imply with my post is that we probably didn't just roll over - that there was an "or else" tagged onto the end of the US request for extradition. Hence the Spain, Sweden and Holland news stories.

I fully agree that if we had a choice we should have stuck up for one of our own. The point I was raising was: were we given a choice?

Again, I re-iterate, what he did was against the law in UK - the next person to post that it isn't is clearly too idiotic to be able to post a response worth reading - however the judge ruled that due to the .com domain, the US effectively had the jurisdiction and the right to prosecute him over the UK. If someone was in the US, and was doing the same thing but using a .co.uk domain, exactly the same thing could have happened except in reverse. This isn't some grand conspiracy, it's just the agreement that both countries have signed and works the same both ways. The US isn't screwing over the UK any more then the UK is screwing over the US; and indeed the US has extradited many people to the UK due to the same treaty.

Grouchy Imp:

emeraldrafael:
[quote="Grouchy Imp" post="7.338398.13693762"]snip

Yeah, not to offend anybody, but right now, britains abit higher on the totem pole than Spain. Spain is looking to go the way of greece and has never really been know for its great stability and ability to roll with the big boys. I would think Britain could put a foot down, but if they choose not to, then thats their problem and says more about that country than the one trying to "police the world".

which if you read the thread you'd see I said the same thing.

I saw where you were coming from with your first post fella; namely that the UK shouldn't have just rolled over and given in. And maybe we shouldn't have. What I was trying to imply with my post is that we probably didn't just roll over - that there was an "or else" tagged onto the end of the US request for extradition. Hence the Spain, Sweden and Holland news stories.

I fully agree that if we had a choice we should have stuck up for one of our own. The point I was raising was: were we given a choice?[/quote

I have yet to see. Now, I will agree with you, waht the US did to spain was... going too far. But spain is just one of those countries that needs help, just because they dont seem... stable.

If it comes out the US did try to do something the same way it did to spain, my opinion will likely change. Honestly, I do get tired of the US doing this, but really, we're in a position to, and no one is really stopping us from it. Any country of power does when they have power. Spain did it, Britain did it (and for the longest time too), france to an extent, and after the US loses its dominance to china china will do it too. Its how the world works.

emeraldrafael:
Before all the "America is policing the world" comments come in, just remember britian could have told us to fuck off, but they chose not to. You can only police the world when the world lets you.

Hi, England here. Fuck off.

That good for ya?

Seriously though, it's not like we were given a vote on this, Cameron is a little bitch and our judicial system is even worse, we get to watch as someone from our country doing something which is ENTIRELY LEGAL gets extradited for what is a crime in another country? Well fuck USA, that seems fair doesn't it?

Fucking pricks whoever ordered the extradition and I'm seriously disgusted that our government is letting this happen. If the trial isn't a fucking laughing stock I'm gonna get seriously pissed.

Go to Google. Type "filetype:torrent" plus whatever you are looking for. Congratulations, Google is now potentially doing the same thing this guy is. Only they're actually in the US. This case is bullshit. The extradition is even more bullshit. I hope all the people involved in making it happen suffer eternal malware infestation and identity theft.

All i can think of saying is BASTARDS. surly .com is not exculsivly american for them to exploite. What benifit does it emply, i am sure the cost of all of this is stupidly high to the point you could call it pointless.

If you do something, anything even your thoughts are not oh no i should not do this it is elegal in (insert country name here).

That would be like me walking across the road and being charged for J walking cause that is the law in the states, not in the uk we are not stupid.

Hugga_Bear:

emeraldrafael:
Before all the "America is policing the world" comments come in, just remember britian could have told us to fuck off, but they chose not to. You can only police the world when the world lets you.

Hi, England here. Fuck off.

That good for ya?

Seriously though, it's not like we were given a vote on this, Cameron is a little bitch and our judicial system is even worse, we get to watch as someone from our country doing something which is ENTIRELY LEGAL gets extradited for what is a crime in another country? Well fuck USA, that seems fair doesn't it?

Fucking pricks whoever ordered the extradition and I'm seriously disgusted that our government is letting this happen. If the trial isn't a fucking laughing stock I'm gonna get seriously pissed.

Eh, I can take it. Now go give your politicians to give ours the message. Since your country's politics are SO much better than ours.

or like I siad, tell the un to get on its job. the Us (and what China is trying to do) is pretty much exactly why it was made and formed.

The reason why he's being extradited to the US rather than facing trial in the UK is rather simple - his lawyers had claimed that due to the .com he was not eligible to be prosecuted in the UK.

Hoisted on his own petard, I say

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here