The long arm of the USA law.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Happybunny, Jan 13, 2012.

  1. Happybunny, Jan 13, 2012
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012

    Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #1
  2. remmy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #2
    The british political elite are slow and spineless when it involves foreign agencies.
     
  3. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #3
    Tony Blair proved that, in spades.
     
  4. Votekinky06 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    #4
    What a joke, you would never see an American getting extradited on a case like that.
     
  5. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #5
    What a farce.

    He didn't commit this act within the US; extradition is supposed to be for real criminals who commit crimes in your jurisdiction and then flee.

    Here's hoping for some jury nullification.
     
  6. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #6
    How about the fact that the crime itself barely should warrant a criminal court case? The guy hosted a site linked to entertainment content. In a day and age where it can be difficult to deliver a murderer over to another country, this!?
     
  7. Happybunny thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #7
    I know it makes you wonder some times if the world has lost it's moral compass.

    Just a question I see you are from Norway, would the Norwegian authorities hand you over to the US for just a crime. The Netherlands I very glad to say would not.
     
  8. benthewraith macrumors 68040

    benthewraith

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #8
    Why aren't search engine providers thrown in jail for providing links to copyrighted materials? Oh, that's right, they have shiploads of money. Expect more of these cases to appear when the U.S. passes SOPA and PIPA.
     
  9. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #9
    I honestly don't know, I know I have a lacking faith in our current government, but it's really a toss up. Sometimes they stand ground and refuse to be steamrolled, other times they get on their knees and take the full load to the face. I guess that's politics.
     
  10. mobilehaathi macrumors G3

    mobilehaathi

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Anthropocene
    #10
    Wow that is seriously twisted. Then again, what else should one expect from the US?
     
  11. MagicBoy macrumors 68040

    MagicBoy

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #11
    Tony Bliar signed up to the damn thing in 2002. The legacy of the damage "New" Labour caused from 1997 to 2010 will be with this country for another 25 year at least. Meanwhile TB is making millions in private consultancy to tinpot dictators and morally bankrupt multinationals off the back of it.

    Yeah, I'm not a fan.
     
  12. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #12
    Well, Sweden is taking part in the attack on Julian Assange. How similar is Norway to Sweden?
     
  13. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #13
    I agree in general with the sentiment that internet "piracy" is unworthy of zealous prosecution, but I am far more concerned with a justice department that can claim to enforce its laws anywhere the US has a beneficial relationship defined by a treaty. That is a much bigger problem in the long term ability of citizens to resist a coercive police state.
     
  14. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #14
    Of course. But I'm unsure as to how this is defined within jurisdictions, how is the crime defined? You can't apply geographical borders to crimes committed in a dimension without borders, I guess. But then again, it would nullify the action as a crime, since no there are no laws in said dimension.

    I guess it gets kind of complicated.

    However, when the policy is intended for crimes committed within geographical borders where the suspect runs, that is where it applies. It can't apply to this.
     
  15. wackymacky macrumors 68000

    wackymacky

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Location:
    38°39′20″N 27°13′10″W
    #15
    First he was making so $264,000 a year from advertising for the site so he was profiting quite nicely. And also he was a little dumb for they way he set it up.

    Second the whole copy-write thing is going crazy when countries around the world are putting laws which are harsher than violent crimes with little recourse.

    Third England should stop being a lap dog. As said above if it was a US citizen that England was trying to extradite on a multi-rape charge, they would have a harder time than this sad sack got.
     
  16. iStudentUK macrumors 65816

    iStudentUK

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #16
    It's caused a lot if controversy over here, but actualy the US have been quite reasonable in cases where the UK has asked for extradition. Since the new agreement came into force the US has made twice as many requests as the UK, but the UK has refused ~10% of them. However, the US has not refused a single request by the UK.
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    Quite. And more Britain's visit the US than Americans visiting the UK so them having more requests seems reasonable.

    Additionally the comparison between a site like this and Google is more than a little far fetched. Morally at least what this guy was doing is wrong.

    Not true at all.
     
  18. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #18
    Victims are expendable, and replaceable too. ;) Another reason to ban abortion & contraception? :rolleyes:

    Profit/Taxes, and subliminally power/control, are not.
     
  19. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #19
    It's actually not complicated at all. The US doctrine on this has been clear since the 90s; criminal acts proliferated on the internet are only prosecutable where they occur. Even if we grant that this kid committed a crime, he didn't do it within the US. We should not have any jurisdiction, period.

    If this kind of logic is followed to its end, then Dutch citizens could be extradited for smoking pot, or Japanese citizens when they eat shark fin soup.
     
  20. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #20
    It's settled then. Thanks for explaining it. :)

    If the doctrine is so clear, why is this even being considered?
     
  21. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #21
    Mostly because this doctrine evolved to restrict the power of states trying to prosecute citizens in other states when internet content is delivered across state lines.

    My guess is that the federal government created jurisdiction out of thin air by passing a statute and getting the UK to agree to such a preposterous treaty. The Constitution leaves the definition of US jurisdiction broadly up to Congress, so the even more perverse part of this whole thing is that its probably not going to be easy to get a court to hear a constitutional argument on this issue.

    As an aside and on a highly technical note, the wording in the Constitution implies, based on what was the norm in the 1700 and 1800s, that in order for a nation to have jurisdiction over an area, that nation must exercise control over the territory in some capacity. This treaty seems to imply that the UK is a territory of the United States, because Congress is exercising its authority over the people living there.
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    The difference online is that US citizens could download stuff directly from this guys website, whereas US citizens can't buy pot from the Dutch without going to the Netherlands and smuggling it home.
     
  23. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #23
    Eh, he is profiting from pirated material. He should at least have to pay all the money back and some fines. Prison shouldn't occur though IMO.
     
  24. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #24
    We can't get Roman Polanski extradited for drugging and ****ing a 13 year old but we can get a kid for posting links to crappy TV shows. Gotta love international law :rolleyes:
     
  25. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #25
    Can't believe how far this is being stretched. He has committed a crime, but is very extreme to extradite him for this.

    Can someone clarify where in the US he'd be extradited? Don't different states have different penalties?
     

Share This Page