What are YOU doing to protest SOPA?

[Hellhammer]

Corporation was based in Hong Kong.

For the millionth time, it doesn't matter. They were operating in the US, which gave the US authorities the right to charge them. If they had stayed out of the US soil, the US would not have had the right to act.

Apple was fined to pay $1.2 million in Italy because they were violating Italy's warranty laws. Apple is a US based company but they have to obey the local laws in a country they operate in.

 

[roadbloc]

Murder is illegal universally so it's not equivalent.

So what? Just because they were based in China or wherever, it doesn't mean they can get away with breaking American laws in America.

I think someone is just butthurt that the days of getting digital products for free illegally are slowly coming to an end. And damn right they are. Its about time.

 

[eric/]

So what? Just because they were based in China or wherever, it doesn't mean they can get away with breaking American laws in America.

The US government could have just seized there servers. i don't see agree with my tax dollars being used to be the world police.

I think someone is just butthurt that the days of getting digital products for free illegally are slowly coming to an end. And damn right they are. Its about time.

Well I'm not really butthurt, and that's rude.
I also don't pirate anything
And there will always be ways around these types of measures.

----------

For the millionth time, it doesn't matter. They were operating in the US, which gave the US authorities the right to charge them. If they had stayed out of the US soil, the US would not have had the right to act.

Apple was fined to pay $1.2 million in Italy because they were violating Italy's warranty laws. Apple is a US based company but they have to obey the local laws in a country they operate in.

Apple paid that fine because they would much rather keep doing business in italy. If they didn't want to pay, they could just not do it and not operate in Italy. The Italian police can't just show up in the US and arrest the CEO and take him to Italian jail.

BUT you're continuing to forget an important distinction. The law has to be different in the two countries in order for any analogy to work. I again have to refer to Sweden and thepiratebay.com as a great example.

----------

It was only registered in Hong Kong.

So it's a Hong Kong corporation/entity.

----------

You obviously don't travel much,

Not only is that disrespectful, you have no proof of such and it has nothing to do with anything.

For the record though, I've been to many a country.

every UN country practices the ability to remove one from a country to try them in another, if they broke the law in that country. It is called extradition....it is not the same thing as spitting out gum in the US and getting in trouble in Singapore for it. It is more along the lines of a tourist from the US spitting gum out in Singapore, getting caught by cops, and then getting extradited for it when he tries to flee any fines he gotten by trying leave while "under the radar"

For example, when I ride the train in France without a pass or ticket, I get a fine, if I didn't pay that fine before I left to the US, I could be extradited back to France and jailed. (Not that they would waste police time on that, but it is saying they had the ABILITY to)...BTW, I didn't evade the fare, its just an example..I follow all local laws and customs pretty well whenever I am in a foreign country

It's important to maintain the distinction that in your scenario it's theft, which is illegal in both countries. You actually got on the train and used its services without paying for it.

Refer to Sweden and thepiratebay.com for a more comparable situation.

Its pretty important, as you don't want some guy from Europe coming to the US to be a serial killer, and then going back with no punishment.

Right. And I understand extradition and all of that.

 

[Hellhammer]

BUT you're continuing to forget an important distinction. The law has to be different in the two countries in order for any analogy to work. I again have to refer to Sweden and thepiratebay.com as a great example.

Unless you can prove that TPB had servers in the US, Sweden and TPB is a poor example. The only reason why the US authorities were able to act was because MU had servers in the US. If TPB didn't have server in the US, then that case is totally different and completely irrelevant.

The US didn't play the world police. They played the local police and are trying to protect the big US corporations whose copyrights have been violated.

 

[eric/]

Unless you can prove that TPB had servers in the US, Sweden and TPB is a poor example. The only reason why the US authorities were able to act was because MU had servers in the US. If TPB didn't have server in the US, then that case is totally different and completely irrelevant.

They still broke American law and stole copyrighted American products did they not?

Either way, it's certainly the most comparable situation.

The US didn't play the world police. They played the local police and are trying to protect the big US corporations whose copyrights have been violated.

Lol no they are playing world police since they went after foreign nationals, breaking american law in a foreign country.

 

[roadbloc]

The US government could have just seized there servers. i don't see agree with my tax dollars being used to be the world police.

Tough luck I guess then. Because this is how the world works.

 

[Hellhammer]

They still broke American law and stole copyrighted American products did they not?

Either way, it's certainly the most comparable situation.

Lol no they are playing world police since they went after foreign nationals, breaking american law in a foreign country.

How many times do I have to say this? MU broke the US law because they had servers operating in the US soil. Period.

The location of the company or its owners is irrelevant, they are breaking the law despite their location. They were foreigners, yes. But they broke the US law in the US soil. They just happened to be outside of US during the arrest.

 

[eric/]

Tough luck I guess then. Because this is how the world works.

Ok?

----------

How many times do I have to say this? MU broke the US law because they had servers operating in the US soil. Period.

The location of the company or its owners is irrelevant, they are breaking the law despite their location. They were foreigners, yes. But they broke the US law in the US soil. They just happened to be outside of US during the arrest.

Then the US government should have seized the servers and left it at that, since what they were doing was likely not illegal in the country in which their organization exists.

 

[Hellhammer]

Then the US government should have seized the servers and left it at that, since what they were doing was likely not illegal in the country in which their organization exists.

Why leave it at that when you have the evidence to do more? Should drugs be just taken away from the dealers and let the dealers walk free? Everyone knows that shutting down a few servers wouldn't have stopped MU - and everyone knows that taking the drugs away from the dealer doesn't stop him from dealing.

MU owned servers in the US that were used for criminal purposes. Hence they can be prosecuted for the crimes they have done in the US soil. Most likely they can only be prosecuted for the content on the US servers, though.

 

[roadbloc]

Ok?

Well what is your point exactly? You're complaining that Megaupload got busted by for breaking American laws, in America, to be but on trial by American authorities; saying that it isn't what you want your taxes going towards.

No offence, but if people could choose what their taxes went towards they'd be a lot less world aid and stuff like funding for students. So yes, you can't choose. Get over it, ranting about how unjust you think it all is isn't going to change anything.

Because at the end of the day, none of what happened in this whole Megaupload debacle was unjust at all.

 

[eric/]

Why leave it at that when you have the evidence to do more? Should drugs be just taken away from the dealers and let the dealers walk free? Everyone knows that shutting down a few servers wouldn't have stopped MU - and everyone knows that taking the drugs away from the dealer doesn't stop him from dealing.

MU owned servers in the US that were used for criminal purposes. Hence they can be prosecuted for the crimes they have done in the US soil. Most likely they can only be prosecuted for the content on the US servers, though.

Well it's certainly not the same situation comparing drug dealers to those who own/operate these sites. Though it's funny that you mention it, because like piracy, drugs cartels are propped up by the united states government.

But either way, if it wasn't illegal where they are from, they shouldn't be in trouble for it outside of the US government shutting down the servers.

----------

Well what is your point exactly? You're complaining that Megaupload got busted by for breaking American laws, in America, by American authorities; saying that it isn't what you want your taxes going towards.

My point is that I don't think tax dollars should be allocated to arresting foreign nationals, in foreign countries, for breaking American laws that may not be illegal where they reside.

No offence, but if people could choose what their taxes went towards they'd be a lot less world aid and stuff like funding for students.

Hmm. So if people don't want to give to things why should you be forced to? Do you support every single government program and decision? If not, than you're doing the same thing I am.

So yes, you can't choose. Get over it, ranting about how unjust you think it all is isn't going to change anything.

Doesn't matter. The whole point of an internet forum is to discuss things. I'm free to discuss whatever I'd like and rant about whatever I like under the forum rules. It may not change anything this second, but perhaps somebody else reads what I have to say and agrees or changes their mind?

Because at the end of the day, none of what happened in this whole Megaupload debacle was unjust at all.

That's your opinion. And I disagree.

 

[dontwalkhand]

Well it's certainly not the same situation comparing drug dealers to those who own/operate these sites. Though it's funny that you mention it, because like piracy, drugs cartels are propped up by the united states government.

But either way, if it wasn't illegal where they are from, they shouldn't be in trouble for it outside of the US government shutting down the servers.

----------



My point is that I don't think tax dollars should be allocated to arresting foreign nationals, in foreign countries, for breaking American laws that may not be illegal where they reside.



Hmm. So if people don't want to give to things why should you be forced to? Do you support every single government program and decision? If not, than you're doing the same thing I am.



Doesn't matter. The whole point of an internet forum is to discuss things. I'm free to discuss whatever I'd like and rant about whatever I like under the forum rules. It may not change anything this second, but perhaps somebody else reads what I have to say and agrees or changes their mind?



That's your opinion. And I disagree.

See my tourist example. If they have servers in the US, wouldn't that mean they would have to COME TO THE US TO INSTALL THEM? Therefore its exactly the same thing, they set foot in the US to break US law.

And even if it was your way, where they are from, it is also still illegal, NZ and HK still have piracy laws last time I checked.

 

[snberk103]

Well they are American sites, firstly. Secondly, you should be concerned about this as well, since it has implications across the world.

Two issues here... one is SOPA, and the other is Megaupload. Re: SOPA - as a non-American I can't write my representative.... well, I could but my MP as nothing to do with American laws, so it is a waste of time.... Anyway... I protested SOPA by not buying anything from the US. If the rest of the world really wants to get the American government's attention - we gotta poke them where it will be noticed.... jobs and the economy.

...
Lol no they are playing world police since they went after foreign nationals, breaking american law in a foreign country.

As noted (repeatedly) they were breaking American law in the US because the servers were located in the US. There are lots of examples of alleged criminals extradited in similar circumstances. And to switch-up the examples.... if someone in the US was smuggling guns via couriers into Canada, even though they themselves may never have set foot in Canada, I would want them extradited to Canada to stand trial.... even though they may have been smuggling guns that are legal to own in the US.

I may not agree with this particular American law (back to MU) but they were stupid and located their servers on American soil. And he claims to be smarter than Bill Gates.

....
But either way, if it wasn't illegal where they are from, they shouldn't be in trouble for it outside of the US government shutting down the servers.

My point is that I don't think tax dollars should be allocated to arresting foreign nationals, in foreign countries, for breaking American laws that may not be illegal where they reside.

There are too many countries in the world that have basically no laws due to a collapse of civil authority. Are you saying that warlords/druglords/criminal-masterminds who locate there should immune from any legal repercussions?

...
That's your opinion. And I disagree.

Fair enough....

 

[eric/]

See my tourist example. If they have servers in the US, wouldn't that mean they would have to COME TO THE US TO INSTALL THEM? Therefore its exactly the same thing, they set foot in the US to break US law.

And even if it was your way, where they are from, it is also still illegal, NZ and HK still have piracy laws last time I checked.

No they actually wouldn't have to come to the US to install anything. They simply purchase server space.

NZ may have anti-piracy laws, but I don't think Hong Kong does.

----------

Two issues here... one is SOPA, and the other is Megaupload. Re: SOPA - as a non-American I can't write my representative.... well, I could but my MP as nothing to do with American laws, so it is a waste of time.... Anyway... I protested SOPA by not buying anything from the US. If the rest of the world really wants to get the American government's attention - we gotta poke them where it will be noticed.... jobs and the economy.

Well not buying anything in the US doesn't really affect SOPA.

As noted (repeatedly) they were breaking American law in the US because the servers were located in the US. There are lots of examples of alleged criminals extradited in similar circumstances. And to switch-up the examples.... if someone in the US was smuggling guns via couriers into Canada, even though they themselves may never have set foot in Canada, I would want them extradited to Canada to stand trial.... even though they may have been smuggling guns that are legal to own in the US.

Gun smuggling is illegal in both countries.

There are too many countries in the world that have basically no laws due to a collapse of civil authority. Are you saying that warlords/druglords/criminal-masterminds who locate there should immune from any legal repercussions?

No, because those individuals are usually participating in acts that are illegal in all countries. I can't think of an actual country where like, murdering somebody is legal and just permissible.

Fair enough....

 

[snberk103]

...
Well not buying anything in the US doesn't really affect SOPA.

Sure it does.... it puts direct pressure on American legislators.... they hear from their citizens that passing SOPA is going to affect people's (voters) livelihoods. Probably has more affect than posting online petitions.

Gun smuggling is illegal in both countries.

It's not smuggling if it's legal to cross a border with it. My point is that it is legal to own certain guns in the US that are banned in Canada. If they were legal in Canada, then there would be no smuggling when sending them across the border. How about if I use a less emotionally/politically charged example.

Oranges: It is not illegal to send oranges across the border to Canada. Therefore, sending oranges across a border is not illegal in Canada. It is illegal to send oranges to the US. If I had an operation that sent massive numbers of oranges to the US - would it be enough to simply seize the oranges when discovered, or should the American government also be able to go after the senders - close the operation down.

Because the MU servers were in the US, the analogy is that content was being moved across a border illegally - and that the organization had a physical presence in the US. The US therefore had a direct interest in this operation.

Much more interesting is whether the US would have been able to act had the servers not been in the US.

No, because those individuals are usually participating in acts that are illegal in all countries. I can't think of an actual country where like, murdering somebody is legal and just permissible.

There are several countries where a family can kill a female family member who they feel has disgraced them with no legal repercussions.

But why do you keep bring up the heinous acts to defend a what is simply a piracy/smuggling action?

 

[dontwalkhand]

No they actually wouldn't have to come to the US to install anything. They simply purchase server space.

NZ may have anti-piracy laws, but I don't think Hong Kong does.

----------



Well not buying anything in the US doesn't really affect SOPA.




Gun smuggling is illegal in both countries.



No, because those individuals are usually participating in acts that are illegal in all countries. I can't think of an actual country where like, murdering somebody is legal and just permissible.

By your example a Russian hacker can hack the US govnt without punishment.

 

[Hellhammer]

Because the MU servers were in the US, the analogy is that content was being moved across a border illegally - and that the organization had a physical presence in the US. The US therefore had a direct interest in this operation.

And MU was a huge business, that should not be forgotten. Their revenue was over $100 million per year and they most likely made huge profits since maintaining the servers shouldn't cost all that much. The guys were living in mansions, had luxury cars and millions in cash. For once, they might be able to pay for the companies. It's logical that the US went after them because they will be more than just prisoners living with tax payers money, they actually have money and property.

Also, they knew that MU could be taken down. The content was on the servers so shut them down and the service is gone. Torrent sites are different because the actual content is stored in each user's computer so you don't need high-end hardware to host the site. Heck, the creators of TPB are in prison, yet TPB is operating 24/7.

 

[eric/]

By your example a Russian hacker can hack the US govnt without punishment.

Yeah he can. It's not illegal in Russia is it?

----------

Sure it does.... it puts direct pressure on American legislators.... they hear from their citizens that passing SOPA is going to affect people's (voters) livelihoods. Probably has more affect than posting online petitions.

I disagree. Mainly because there aren't a lot of people protesting American goods.

Oranges: It is not illegal to send oranges across the border to Canada. Therefore, sending oranges across a border is not illegal in Canada. It is illegal to send oranges to the US. If I had an operation that sent massive numbers of oranges to the US - would it be enough to simply seize the oranges when discovered, or should the American government also be able to go after the senders - close the operation down.

Depends, but generally I would just say it's enough to seize the oranges. Especially if the company was operating legally in Canada. How could the American government just walk into Canada and close down a Canadian company operating legally in Canada and charge them with breaking American law when they haven't broken the law in their home country?

Because the MU servers were in the US, the analogy is that content was being moved across a border illegally - and that the organization had a physical presence in the US. The US therefore had a direct interest in this operation.

Which is why I think that shutting down the servers should have been enough.

Much more interesting is whether the US would have been able to act had the servers not been in the US.

Likely. Depends though.

There are several countries where a family can kill a female family member who they feel has disgraced them with no legal repercussions.

And does the US go into those countries and arrest those people? No

But why do you keep bring up the heinous acts to defend a what is simply a piracy/smuggling action?

Where have I done that?

 

[Hellhammer]

Depends, but generally I would just say it's enough to seize the oranges. Especially if the company was operating legally in Canada. How could the American government just walk into Canada and close down a Canadian company operating legally in Canada and charge them with breaking American law when they haven't broken the law in their home country?

When you operate in another country, you have to obey the laws of that country. If you're smuggling 10 oranges, then it's probably enough to simply seize the oranges. However, if you were to smuggle oranges worth of hundreds of millions, authorities would want to stop the business for good and also confiscate all property that was bought with the money made from the illegal business. The Canadian company would not have to be shut down, they could continue operation in Canada - but the owners could be prosecuted for smuggling and other crimes. In MU's case, shutting down the US servers caused the whole service to go down.

 

[eric/]

When you operate in another country, you have to obey the laws of that country. If you're smuggling 10 oranges, then it's probably enough to simply seize the oranges. However, if you were to smuggle oranges worth of hundreds of millions, authorities would want to stop the business for good and also confiscate all property that was bought with the money made from the illegal business. The Canadian company would not have to be shut down, they could continue operation in Canada - but the owners could be prosecuted for smuggling and other crimes. In MU's case, shutting down the US servers caused the whole service to go down.

But if it wasn't illegal in Canada, and they didn't care that you attempted to smuggle them into America, how does the United States have the right to just go in to Canada and shut down the operation? The most they should be able to do is stop the smuggling at the border and/or petition the Canadian government to have them stop. They can't just walk in to whatever country they want and arrest people for breaking laws in another country.

 

[snberk103]

...

I disagree. Mainly because there aren't a lot of people protesting American goods.

You protest your way, I protest my way....

Depends, but generally I would just say it's enough to seize the oranges. Especially if the company was operating legally in Canada. How could the American government just walk into Canada and close down a Canadian company operating legally in Canada and charge them with breaking American law when they haven't broken the law in their home country?

The American Government would not "just walk into" Canada, they would ask for an extradition. (OK, actually on occasion we think we've had citizens, um, 'extradited without the benefit of due process' - and for sure we've had citizens removed from airplanes in transit through the USA, but we're not talking about those issues....) The US asks for an extradition. The lawyers wrangle about whether the bilateral treaty covers this type of crime, and if it does we transfer the prisoner to US authorities. Which is exactly what happened in NZ. The US asked for the extradition, and the NZ authorities decided it was within the scope of the treaty and cooperated. The treaty would also allow Canada or NZ to ask the US to extradite someone back to Canada to NZ.

...

And does the US go into those countries and arrest those people? No

In this case they didn't go into NZ, they asked NZ to make the arrest. NZ could have said no.

Where have I done that?

My bad, I apologize .... when I looked for the references you were just responding to other people's examples.

But if it wasn't illegal in Canada, and they didn't care that you attempted to smuggle them into America, how does the United States have the right to just go in to Canada and shut down the operation? The most they should be able to do is stop the smuggling at the border and/or petition the Canadian government to have them stop. They can't just walk in to whatever country they want and arrest people for breaking laws in another country.

Canada and the USA have lots of treaties. If someone is breaking an American law, and if that action is impacting the US, then they'll ask us to extradite the person. The operative concept here is that the action has to impact someone or some entity in the US. Actions that are illegal in the US, by legal here, can still be practiced here as long as those actions don't impact the US.

The States, in theory, would do the same for us.

The MU servers were in the US, which gives the US clear interest in this case. Kim dotcom was an idiot. I could have told him that putting the servers there gave the US authorities the leverage to have him extradited.

Where it would have become muddy is if the servers had been somewhere else, but he was still serving content to Americans.

 

[Grey Beard]

Not a hell of a lot. We've got Kim Dotcom et al in the slammer down here. As you can imagine, it's not been very popular, with the FBI and our NZ Police in cohorts. Oh, for a quiet life

KGB

 

[mrsir2009]

Man, the past couple of years have been busy news years for New Zealand!

 

[dontwalkhand]

Yeah he can. It's not illegal in Russia is it?

You actually believe this should be able to be done without punishment? Hacking us really???

 

[eric/]

You actually believe this should be able to be done without punishment? Hacking us really???

If you're a Russian, yeah. Just like I don't think Americans should be charged with crimes if they're hacking the Russian government.