UK 'Piracy' student to be extradited to US

[chadachada123]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

 

[Thyunda]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

 

[Antari]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

 

[theultimateend]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-16544335

Another example of America believing they can police the world. And frankly as a UK citizen I'm sickened by the "special" relationship our government has with the US. Would the US allow one of their citizens to be extradited here for such a charge? I doubt it. In my opinion his trial should take place here within our courts. As his lawyer said, he's merely acting as a guinea pig for this practice to become common place.

What do you all think?

To be blunt the answer is "No".

The US would tell Britain to fuck off, and I'm almost willing to bet it wouldn't even be much nicer than that. There would be some mention of the Tyranny of the British government, Fox would be all over it, and the entire case would be propped up to show that we never hand over our citizens to Orwellian nations.

At least that is the feeling I have, I can't fathom us ever sending a citizen to another country for that sort of thing, since it opens up politicians to being extradited (since quite a few folks have been pirating from their government IPs apparently).

 

[Thyunda]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

 

[Antari]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

 

[Thyunda]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

The case so far seems fair. The U.S.A. authorities believe they have enough evidence to prove the owner of the website has broken the U.S. law and deprived individuals and companies of an income--and to an extent, stolen it. If a country's law is broken by an individual in another jurisdiction, surely the internet should not provide a shelter. For example, if I call someone from a phone in another country and stalk them, but my country has no stalking laws and the victim is on another continent, should the fact that I used a phone to commit the act and never set foot in their homeland mean I am free from justice?

The world should not be so divided and segregated, in my opinion. The internet has brought about an age of connection and more than ever the people of Earth are able to interact with and influence people and parties miles upon miles away, well outside another's legal boarders.

Hopefully he is innocent of the crimes and the situation can be sorted out with little more fuss.

 

[Antari]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

Realistically the British Judge may have done him a favor. 5 years is actually a pretty light slap compared to what some copyright violations in europe have brought in. And 5 years usually is about a year if its a non-violent crime and there is good behavior, so hes not exactly in for the long haul. The only thing he'll have to worry about is future travel to the USA. Which after this I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't plan a return.

 

[Thyunda]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

Realistically the British Judge may have done him a favor. 5 years is actually a pretty light slap compared to what some copyright violations in europe have brought in. And 5 years usually is about a year if its a non-violent crime and there is good behavior, so hes not exactly in for the long haul. The only thing he'll have to worry about is future travel to the USA. Which after this I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't plan a return.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned. I'm just really not comfortable with the fact he's been handed over to a different country for a $230,000 misdemeanour. I don't mean to say it's not much money, but those corporates and those politicians have been punished with a lot less for a lot more.
I firmly believe our leaders are in place to guide and protect us...a job they don't seem to have been doing. We don't need protecting from the big, bad wilderness. We need protecting from national decline and....OTHER GOVERNMENTS. If he had shot somebody and fled to the UK, by all means, hand him back.
But this isn't a criminal offence. It's a technical one. The money wasn't illegitimately gotten, per se. He advertised for the advertisers. They paid him for allowing them to advertise on his site. So the money isn't the problem here...one would think.

 

[Antari]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

Realistically the British Judge may have done him a favor. 5 years is actually a pretty light slap compared to what some copyright violations in europe have brought in. And 5 years usually is about a year if its a non-violent crime and there is good behavior, so hes not exactly in for the long haul. The only thing he'll have to worry about is future travel to the USA. Which after this I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't plan a return.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned. I'm just really not comfortable with the fact he's been handed over to a different country for a $230,000 misdemeanour. I don't mean to say it's not much money, but those corporates and those politicians have been punished with a lot less for a lot more.
I firmly believe our leaders are in place to guide and protect us...a job they don't seem to have been doing. We don't need protecting from the big, bad wilderness. We need protecting from national decline and....OTHER GOVERNMENTS. If he had shot somebody and fled to the UK, by all means, hand him back.
But this isn't a criminal offence. It's a technical one. The money wasn't illegitimately gotten, per se. He advertised for the advertisers. They paid him for allowing them to advertise on his site. So the money isn't the problem here...one would think.

In this case they are protecting the country old fashioned. They are protecting trade agreements. Even if that means handing a 23 year old over. Without the trust of cooperation in place, there wouldn't be much trade. As much as this kid may be caught in the crossfire, its legitimate crossfire with a very serious purpose.

 

[ryanxm]

This is just...getting dragged from the UK over here to the US over internet piracy, when even then he just directed people to other sites? It wasn't right, no, but the US needs to quit screwing around with stupid things like this and let the UK deal with it. And I agree with the guy getting taken, he is just going to be used a test subject for new piracy laws. This right here is why I hate 75% of humans.

 

[Thyunda]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

Realistically the British Judge may have done him a favor. 5 years is actually a pretty light slap compared to what some copyright violations in europe have brought in. And 5 years usually is about a year if its a non-violent crime and there is good behavior, so hes not exactly in for the long haul. The only thing he'll have to worry about is future travel to the USA. Which after this I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't plan a return.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned. I'm just really not comfortable with the fact he's been handed over to a different country for a $230,000 misdemeanour. I don't mean to say it's not much money, but those corporates and those politicians have been punished with a lot less for a lot more.
I firmly believe our leaders are in place to guide and protect us...a job they don't seem to have been doing. We don't need protecting from the big, bad wilderness. We need protecting from national decline and....OTHER GOVERNMENTS. If he had shot somebody and fled to the UK, by all means, hand him back.
But this isn't a criminal offence. It's a technical one. The money wasn't illegitimately gotten, per se. He advertised for the advertisers. They paid him for allowing them to advertise on his site. So the money isn't the problem here...one would think.

In this case they are protecting the country old fashioned. They are protecting trade agreements. Even if that means handing a 23 year old over. Without the trust of cooperation in place, there wouldn't be much trade. As much as this kid may be caught in the crossfire, its legitimate crossfire with a very serious purpose.

This isn't trust of co-operation. This is just handing people out like a commodity. Co-operation would be the U.S. saying 'Hey, this guy's violating that agreement we had', and Britain replying 'Soz guv, we'll give 'im a good rogerin' and send 'im on 'is way'.

Why not a fine? You suggested it (almost in passing) in the PM, and I think it's a perfectly valid punishment. You have ill-gotten money, pay it back. With interest.

 

[Antari]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

Realistically the British Judge may have done him a favor. 5 years is actually a pretty light slap compared to what some copyright violations in europe have brought in. And 5 years usually is about a year if its a non-violent crime and there is good behavior, so hes not exactly in for the long haul. The only thing he'll have to worry about is future travel to the USA. Which after this I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't plan a return.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned. I'm just really not comfortable with the fact he's been handed over to a different country for a $230,000 misdemeanour. I don't mean to say it's not much money, but those corporates and those politicians have been punished with a lot less for a lot more.
I firmly believe our leaders are in place to guide and protect us...a job they don't seem to have been doing. We don't need protecting from the big, bad wilderness. We need protecting from national decline and....OTHER GOVERNMENTS. If he had shot somebody and fled to the UK, by all means, hand him back.
But this isn't a criminal offence. It's a technical one. The money wasn't illegitimately gotten, per se. He advertised for the advertisers. They paid him for allowing them to advertise on his site. So the money isn't the problem here...one would think.

In this case they are protecting the country old fashioned. They are protecting trade agreements. Even if that means handing a 23 year old over. Without the trust of cooperation in place, there wouldn't be much trade. As much as this kid may be caught in the crossfire, its legitimate crossfire with a very serious purpose.

This isn't trust of co-operation. This is just handing people out like a commodity. Co-operation would be the U.S. saying 'Hey, this guy's violating that agreement we had', and Britain replying 'Soz guv, we'll give 'im a good rogerin' and send 'im on 'is way'.

Why not a fine? You suggested it (almost in passing) in the PM, and I think it's a perfectly valid punishment. You have ill-gotten money, pay it back. With interest.

In this case its cooperation to resolve a legal dispute. They want to try the case locally. The british authorities believe the law is valid, because it basically falls inline with what they already have in place. So agree to hand him over. As for once he gets to the USA, there's no garentee he'll see jail. He could walk away with a heavy fine. Or the case could get thrown out once he gets there. If the role was reversed and an american citizen was profitting off a british citizen's property there would be the same agreement due to the crime. If they couldn't do this, copyright law would be absolutely pointless. This is why trade agreements with China are taking such a long time. They really don't see patents as being all that nessisary to the whole process. Where as most of the world thinks otherwise.

 

[Thyunda]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

Realistically the British Judge may have done him a favor. 5 years is actually a pretty light slap compared to what some copyright violations in europe have brought in. And 5 years usually is about a year if its a non-violent crime and there is good behavior, so hes not exactly in for the long haul. The only thing he'll have to worry about is future travel to the USA. Which after this I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't plan a return.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned. I'm just really not comfortable with the fact he's been handed over to a different country for a $230,000 misdemeanour. I don't mean to say it's not much money, but those corporates and those politicians have been punished with a lot less for a lot more.
I firmly believe our leaders are in place to guide and protect us...a job they don't seem to have been doing. We don't need protecting from the big, bad wilderness. We need protecting from national decline and....OTHER GOVERNMENTS. If he had shot somebody and fled to the UK, by all means, hand him back.
But this isn't a criminal offence. It's a technical one. The money wasn't illegitimately gotten, per se. He advertised for the advertisers. They paid him for allowing them to advertise on his site. So the money isn't the problem here...one would think.

In this case they are protecting the country old fashioned. They are protecting trade agreements. Even if that means handing a 23 year old over. Without the trust of cooperation in place, there wouldn't be much trade. As much as this kid may be caught in the crossfire, its legitimate crossfire with a very serious purpose.

This isn't trust of co-operation. This is just handing people out like a commodity. Co-operation would be the U.S. saying 'Hey, this guy's violating that agreement we had', and Britain replying 'Soz guv, we'll give 'im a good rogerin' and send 'im on 'is way'.

Why not a fine? You suggested it (almost in passing) in the PM, and I think it's a perfectly valid punishment. You have ill-gotten money, pay it back. With interest.

In this case its cooperation to resolve a legal dispute. They want to try the case locally. The british authorities believe the law is valid, because it basically falls inline with what they already have in place. So agree to hand him over. As for once he gets to the USA, there's no garentee he'll see jail. He could walk away with a heavy fine. Or the case could get thrown out once he gets there. If the role was reversed and an american citizen was profitting off a british citizen's property there would be the same agreement due to the crime. If they couldn't do this, copyright law would be absolutely pointless. This is why trade agreements with China are taking such a long time. They really don't see patents as being all that nessisary to the whole process. Where as most of the world thinks otherwise.

Have to disagree with you on the vice versa note. The U.S. has too big a 'We're better than everybody else' nationalist vibe going on to actually hand over any of its citizens. No doubt this'll become the topic of conversation for a little while - How the States made the Empire their *****.

Also...it's interesting you mention that. Patents are a symbol of sacrificing progression for personal gain. It's a sign of capitalism, a system that is dying very, very quickly. While yes, patents protect the inventor's profits, is it not true that when somebody goes to jail to protect your income, you've chosen money over freedom?
And I don't mean in the same way as theft. Piracy and theft are two different things. Both wrong, but on different levels.

 

[Antari]

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Whoa there. The UK is just as much at fault in this as the US for agreeing to hand him over.

Most (intelligent) Americans are just as upset about this as British citizens are. At the very least, try to distinguish between the US government and the US as a whole. Our government is the power-hungry group full of assholes that we all agree should be fucked, here.

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

You American? I hope so. It makes this internet handshake even more beautiful.

Fuck Tony Blair for writing this.
Fuck America for telling him to.
Fuck David Cameron for not fixing it.
Fuck America for going through with it.
AND FUCK THE TREACHEROUS JUDGE WHO TURNED ON THEIR OWN COMMUNITY TO HAND THIS GUY OVER!

Maybe I'm overreacting. Or maybe I feel betrayed...it's one thing to cheat us out of welfare, out of work, to take every opportunity you can to step on us just a little bit more, England, but when you start handing out the right for other countries to do the same...it's out of order.

While this is certainly a very slippery slope for presidence. The key point of him making over $230,000 from advertising revenue while doing this puts him squarely into criminal territory. Once you profit from piracy it is absolutely a copyright offense. At which point extradition is called for. As much as I'd like to support him on this one, I can't. He didn't go about it too intelligently.

Money legitimately earned under British law. Where he lived. Where he worked. What business has he with the US? Why don't we send a few Qur'an burners over to the Middle East? Y'know what, while we're at it, let's hand that Danish cartoonist over.

Fuck the U.S. Stop trying to arrest our citizens.

Even under British law, directly earning profit from another person's copyrighted material is a crime. And has been for a long while. This has nothing to do with him indirectly hosting or not hosting the files. Its the fact that hes profitting off other people's property. Its pretty cut and dry. Thats why you didn't see a whole lot of arguement from the British authorities.

So. Why is he lining up for his mugshot in the U.S., and not his homeland?

Because the property being profitted on is American by origin, which gives them the right to have the case tried in a court local to them. Which causes extradition.

But it's not their place to say. They don't make the laws, they don't own the courts. They should just be content with their fat wallets and arrest the owners of file uploading sites. You don't arrest the Yellow Pages for giving criminals the ability to track local businesses, why would you arrest a guy for simply providing a conduit? And even better, how is the advertisement revenue illegally gotten? Shouldn't we be questioning the morals of a company who advertise on a piracy site? Shouldn't they have brought the site to the attention of the lawbringers earlier?

The part of copyright law he violated is international, and a common law between both countries. If he'd been in Iran who have not joined those conventions, well lets just say he wouldn't be getting extradited. Likely he'd be getting a medal. If anything you can blame the UN and WW2 for this level of cooperation. But still I agree with the process for what he did. Directly profitting from other people's stuff is not a good way to do things.

As for the questions you raise .. well yes alot of people should be asking alot more questions than they do. It would improve things.

My concern is that shoving this guy in prison won't change anything. It's wrong that he's been handed over to the U.S. for his sentence. What happened to dealing with our own? I'm reminded sorely of the Lockerbie 'bomber'.

But your last point is very valid. The only problem is...this guy goes to prison. Somebody else takes up the mantle. The advertisers contact them and start gaining traffic again. Soon enough, that guy gets arrested, and imprisoned. The advertisers contact the next guy, who can rest assured that his website will fund itself through these advertisers.
While they're all working for their own gain, nothing will change.

Except some poor student just had his life fucked from behind by the trans-Atlantic dick of the Yanks.

Realistically the British Judge may have done him a favor. 5 years is actually a pretty light slap compared to what some copyright violations in europe have brought in. And 5 years usually is about a year if its a non-violent crime and there is good behavior, so hes not exactly in for the long haul. The only thing he'll have to worry about is future travel to the USA. Which after this I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't plan a return.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned. I'm just really not comfortable with the fact he's been handed over to a different country for a $230,000 misdemeanour. I don't mean to say it's not much money, but those corporates and those politicians have been punished with a lot less for a lot more.
I firmly believe our leaders are in place to guide and protect us...a job they don't seem to have been doing. We don't need protecting from the big, bad wilderness. We need protecting from national decline and....OTHER GOVERNMENTS. If he had shot somebody and fled to the UK, by all means, hand him back.
But this isn't a criminal offence. It's a technical one. The money wasn't illegitimately gotten, per se. He advertised for the advertisers. They paid him for allowing them to advertise on his site. So the money isn't the problem here...one would think.

In this case they are protecting the country old fashioned. They are protecting trade agreements. Even if that means handing a 23 year old over. Without the trust of cooperation in place, there wouldn't be much trade. As much as this kid may be caught in the crossfire, its legitimate crossfire with a very serious purpose.

This isn't trust of co-operation. This is just handing people out like a commodity. Co-operation would be the U.S. saying 'Hey, this guy's violating that agreement we had', and Britain replying 'Soz guv, we'll give 'im a good rogerin' and send 'im on 'is way'.

Why not a fine? You suggested it (almost in passing) in the PM, and I think it's a perfectly valid punishment. You have ill-gotten money, pay it back. With interest.

In this case its cooperation to resolve a legal dispute. They want to try the case locally. The british authorities believe the law is valid, because it basically falls inline with what they already have in place. So agree to hand him over. As for once he gets to the USA, there's no garentee he'll see jail. He could walk away with a heavy fine. Or the case could get thrown out once he gets there. If the role was reversed and an american citizen was profitting off a british citizen's property there would be the same agreement due to the crime. If they couldn't do this, copyright law would be absolutely pointless. This is why trade agreements with China are taking such a long time. They really don't see patents as being all that nessisary to the whole process. Where as most of the world thinks otherwise.

Have to disagree with you on the vice versa note. The U.S. has too big a 'We're better than everybody else' nationalist vibe going on to actually hand over any of its citizens. No doubt this'll become the topic of conversation for a little while - How the States made the Empire their *****.

Also...it's interesting you mention that. Patents are a symbol of sacrificing progression for personal gain. It's a sign of capitalism, a system that is dying very, very quickly. While yes, patents protect the inventor's profits, is it not true that when somebody goes to jail to protect your income, you've chosen money over freedom?
And I don't mean in the same way as theft. Piracy and theft are two different things. Both wrong, but on different levels.

I wouldn't be quite so sure of that. That last thing the USA can afford to do is loose any trade right now, or Britain, or Canada, or France ... or any number of debt ridden countries.

 

[Byrdy]

This is B******T he broke American law in England. That's like saying i live in Australia and i have two children Oh no the Chinese government is going to take my second child away. There are plenty of sites like this in America but no you have to arrest the only one that isn't illegal where it is set up. Next thing you know The Pirate Bay will get arrested and be held in court in America where its illegal not Sweden were its a fully legal website. The american government need to get there priories right. They should spent more money on getting them selves out of debt, education and the poor instead of wasting it arresting innocent British Civilians

 

[Elivercury]

I'm unsure how much I agree with the actual case, as there are MANY websites that link to pirated material, and I don't see them being shut down and the owners arrested. I'm willing to bet several are Americans and therefore don't require extraditing either.

On the other hand, I'm at least glad this is a "real" case and not just "Zomg some granny went and downloaded a NES emulator and copy of super mario bros for her grandchild! Lets give her 20 years in prison and fine her $5mil!"

 

[Jewrean]

In the movies Zeitgeist (part 2 of 2), a movie that talks about conspiracies, world governments, religion, politics, and money, the movie makes a point that if we were living in a resource-based system and not a scarcity/monetary-based one then publishers would be creating things for free to give to people because it is their passion and not because of money (I'm talking of course of a world where money isn't needed, therefore there is no scarcity, wars and crime mostly disappear, and everyone it happy). I can totally understand piracy for those very reasons. Fight the (/current) power!

 

[GeneralFungi]

This worries me. If I need to study every single law in every single country, (over 300 of them) to make sure that I remain a law abiding citizen, then I might ALREADY be a criminal in several countries. I could potentially be fined for breaking a law in a country I've never even heard of by walking down the damn street. It is completely unreasonable to charge someone for breaking laws in OTHER countries. Are you expected to read the rules for your local library every time you go to a video rental store? Then why is someone in the UK expected to know the laws that someone in the USA would have to follow?


Another smaller point; is the site that actually hosted the illegal content being punished for this? Because punishing someone for linking to a site is a complete waste of your time if you're just going to let the site being linked to alone. How about you make the illegal link completely useless by removing the site it leads to? Because even if you take down the site that contains that link, people are STILL VISITING THE SITE THAT ACTUALLY HOSTS THE CONTENT INFRINGING THE LAW. Nothing has been accomplished. Unless ruining a young adults life is an accomplishment in some countries.