Judge: TV Shack website owner can be extradited to US

That's what bad law does

Whether or not O'Dwyer broke any laws or not is not the issue for me (although he should have known better).

What is more important to the nation as a whole I believe is the ease with which British citizens can now be extradited to the US since the law changed with the anti-terrorism Treaty between the US and UK.

It's always the same - something terrible happens, the press goad the politicians into hasty action, no safeguards are added and later we find the anti-terror legislation being used for copyright issues, and other things totally unrelated to why the law was set up.

People say they want to be free of 'the rule of Brussels' but for some reason nobody seems to care about legislation that takes away your freedom. This treaty is a bigger threat to UK sovereignty than anything the EU has ever done.

If O'Dwyer did wrong, he should be tried in the UK. Today, it's copyright issues, tomorrow, it'll be something you say on Twitter and next thing you know you'll be in a US gaol with no escape or family visitors possible.

By SwissMac on 13 Jan 2012

____________

"we find the anti-terror legislation being used for copyright issues, and other things totally unrelated to why the law was set up".

You mean ostensibly why the law(s) were set up.

By Lacrobat on 13 Jan 2012

Totally agree with SwissMac and Lacrobat. If this chap has broken the law while in the UK then he should be prosecuted in the UK and not sent elsewhere.

This obscene and blatantly one-way extradition treaty we have with the USA (unratified by them and useless to us) should be an affront to every single person in the UK.

Introduced by the last 'US-subservient' Labour government, our current Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government have had approaching two years to deal with this issue - and we've had nothing but the odd sound-bite when yet another story breaks on TV.

Who the hell are we supposed to vote for to put the interests of OUR citizens first?

By Mr_John_T on 13 Jan 2012

Vote for the SNP!

Well, if I could vote for Alex Salmond I would, he seems to run rings around Westminster worthies with little effort.

Of the three main British parties though, the one with a reputation for protecting civil liberties for over two centuries is the Liberals. They can't do what they want in a coalition where they are outnumbered 4 to 1 but they do make a difference. Just not the one they wanted to make as Cameron has stiffed them at every turn. As for Ed Milliband, I really can't see him doing much except pontificating, he's seriously wet.

By SwissMac on 14 Jan 2012

Globalization of Justice

I reference previous blogs and implication of what the globalization of law begins to imply.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2011/07/22/how-phone-
hacking-feds-have-been-fooled-by-the-cloud/#more-4
0132
-----------------
Gary McKinnon
-----------------
Julian Assange
-----------------

In extradition, one of the first things that flies out the door is Justice. The person charged has not been found guilty nor innocent, yet is expected to travel the globe to face a trial that may be biased due to the publicity of a defendant.

I also note that many US Companies try to soften legal proceedings by issuing disclaimers saying "Users hereby agree that any lawsuits against our company may only be made and applicable in the state of Xxxxxxx"

By wording and manner, it appears many companies are trying to rule the world by financial ethics, rather than a justice system to rule by law.

Thus we have the situation where commercial enterprises have become a law unto themselves, dictating what ought to be done even if it is above Judicial Law.
======================
As if proof were needed of illregularities, there is an applicable Justice problem in the pipe-line at this very moment.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfam
ily/9013830/Duchess-of-York-evades-extradition-ove
r-TV-row.html
Quote:
Duchess of York evades extradition over TV row
The Home Office has refused a request from Turkey to extradite Sarah, Duchess of York after she was charged with criminal offences...
(Unquote)
If we are talking about Justice and Law, one can only hope/trust that ethics are all of a similar flavour. If ethics are not all of a similar flavour, what is justice in one country may not be justice in another.

Until law, ethics and justice become universally equal, true justice can not be served.

--------------------
I usually attempt to be unbiased. In the case of The Duchess of York.. good on you dear.
Rather than keep quiet and clear up the mess, overzealous Turkey has pulled out a gun and shot themselves in the foot.
That is not unlucky... that is criminal!

By lenmontieth on 14 Jan 2012

Spineless UK authorties

Its time those in charge grew a backbone and told the US where to get off. The lickspittle politicians of all flavours have sucked up to the US for too long (and for whose benefit? - for instance its clear Obama is incredibly anti-UK). It appears that any request from the US to extradite any UK citizen is granted. If the lads website purely indexed illegal content and didn't host it, how is that different to Google? I can find plent of illegal content searching there...

By russell_g on 14 Jan 2012

What a load of rubbish.

If an individual infringes the laws of another country that country should rightly have the ability to take action against the individual and individuals should be aware that not being resident / in that country is no barrier to facing justice. Nor should people expect that if justice is sought that they can expect to face trial or evade trial in this country.

He appears to have infringed US copyright, and he should therefore appear before a US court to face those charges. If he has not infringed copyright laws he should have nothing to worry about with facing trial in the US.

The publicity sought by him in this case is a cynical attempt to garner public opinion against the extradition action.

By csmith on 14 Jan 2012

Why bother with the law.Just use rendition.Get MI6 to send a couple of agents around to his house in the dead of night.Kick the door down and drag him kicking and screaming direct to the US on a secret flight to gunatanamo bay where he will be water boarded by copyright lawyers until he confesses all.

By Jaberwocky on 14 Jan 2012

why can't the US lawyers come over here to do the trail ?

By curiousclive on 14 Jan 2012

@csmith

One of the many problems is that the US has the highest level of incarceration of any country in the world. 1% of their population is in prison. And as Stephen Fry pointed out, you go to prison and are put to work. It is simply a reinvention of slavery.

The amount of time that Richard O'Dwyer would spend behind bars in the US compared to the UK for a similar crime (not that the acts he is alleged to have perpetrated are a crime in the UK) would be dramatically longer.

Look at this case of a mother with a first conviction for selling $31 of marijuana banged up for 12 years: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjec
tid=11&articleid=20111226_11_A1_CUTLIN819265

By revsorg on 14 Jan 2012

I prefer this...

to the likes of SOPA, PIPA and the Open Act, which the US are trying to push through at the moment.

The US *should* be going after those that break the law, they shouldn't be trying to destroy the infrastructure of the internet.

For take down notices, they should use the local court of instance, where the offending site is registered / run.

If the site is being run from a country with lax rules, then they have no real option but to extradite the culprit.

The guy knew what he was doing was wrong, so I don't see why he should get special treatment.

By big_D on 15 Jan 2012

@big_D

So are you saying that people who link to copyrighted material should go to prison in the UK? For a first offence?

By revsorg on 15 Jan 2012

@revsorg

If it was one link and they didn't realise, no.

If they set up a site, whose sole purpose is to link to copyrighted material, yes.

By big_D on 15 Jan 2012

@big_D

What do you think about this recent Swiss study? http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2397173,00.as
p

By revsorg on 16 Jan 2012

@revsorg

I sit somewhere in the middle, I don't think chasing down private piraters does anybody any favours, but sites like this and Pirate Bay are obviously there to make money off the backs of other people's hard work.

For the latter, like counterfit goods, I think the law should stamp them out.

But, at the end of the day, it is the copyright holder's decision, whether they want to pursue lost revenue through pirating or not. As long as somebody is illegally distributing or aiding illegal distribution of their goods, they should have a way to stop them and seek damages.

I also don't agree that the State should be getting involved in basic copyright cases (individuals copying CDs/DVDs or downloading torrents), but I do think they should put a stop to mass pirating businesses - and this site is one such mass pirating promoted.

I think the studios and music business should take a more relaxed attitude to IP theft and look at it as additional advertising, but until they do and there are laws in place, where the IP owner sits, they should have the right to prosecute.

By big_D on 16 Jan 2012

I never Thought I would say this!

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH SwissMac!

By sandman652001 on 16 Jan 2012