Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 98 posts

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#81

Post by TylerE »

nkassis wrote: post #78
TylerE wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, ads. It's a difference of attitude. I found a snapshot of their site, here are a few bits from their FAQ: " Also, please keep in mind that you're watching videos for free as opposed to spending over 20 dollars at the movie theater or purchasing a show. This should help you put things in perspective (keep in mind that prices change but this is a normal, typical price). " ... snipped price list ... "So, as you see…

"As for the issue of linking, it's a red herring here. This was not some neutral site linking to random, user submitted comment. This was a curated collection. They knew _exactly_ what they were doing." I get that this probably falls into the guilty mind(Mens rea) concept but I still don't find it correct that the act of linking to copyrighted material or not(well to be accurate, it's all copyrighted anyway) can be i…

What if you put it in more physical terms.

If someone went around passing out a list of people in your community who leave their back door unlocked, would you have a problem with that? After all, they're only "linking" to potential robbery victims, not actually robbing them.

Edit: From their About page: "TV Shack™ was launched December 2007 by a handful of Swedish university students as a place to watch movies & television online by way of linking to video hosting sites across the web. ... 2009 is set to be a massive sea of change in online video viewing. TV Shack™ has set itself a target of being in the top 1,000 visited websites globally by the end of the year 2009, this will leave it perfectly placed to become an essential stop for the ever growing online video user base."

Under the English interpretation of mens rea, this would seem to fall under the strictest level:

"Direct intention: the actor has a clear foresight of the consequences of his actions, and desires those consequences to occur. It's his aim or purpose to achieve this consequence"

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#82

Post by gaius »

rickmb wrote: post #19

The current political and legal sell-out to the US makes me, and I believe many fellow-Europeans, increasingly angry in a way that is fundamentally different from any anti-American feelings for instance during the Bush-years. Disagreeing with US foreign policy is one thing, but being on the receiving end of US meddling through political and legal corruption in a way that undermines our civil rights cuts way deeper.

The extradition treaty between the US and UK is massively unbalanced - the UK needs proof to extradite an American, the US only needs suspicion to extradite a Brit.

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#83

Post by dsthysd »

TylerE wrote: post #81
nkassis wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As for the issue of linking, it's a red herring here. This was not some neutral site linking to random, user submitted comment. This was a curated collection. They knew _exactly_ what they were doing." I get that this probably falls into the guilty mind(Mens rea) concept but I still don't find it correct that the act of linking to copyrighted material or not(well to be accurate, it's all copyrighted anyway) can be i…

What if you put it in more physical terms. If someone went around passing out a list of people in your community who leave their back door unlocked, would you have a problem with that? After all, they're only "linking" to potential robbery victims, not actually robbing them. Edit: From their About page: "TV Shack™ was launched December 2007 by a handful of Swedish university students as a place to watch movies & tele…

I would not have a problem with that (or don't think it should be illegal at least). Get rid of the source, not the messenger. In my opinion something such as that should fall under free speech.

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#84

Post by [deleted] »

TylerE wrote: post #81
nkassis wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As for the issue of linking, it's a red herring here. This was not some neutral site linking to random, user submitted comment. This was a curated collection. They knew _exactly_ what they were doing." I get that this probably falls into the guilty mind(Mens rea) concept but I still don't find it correct that the act of linking to copyrighted material or not(well to be accurate, it's all copyrighted anyway) can be i…

What if you put it in more physical terms. If someone went around passing out a list of people in your community who leave their back door unlocked, would you have a problem with that? After all, they're only "linking" to potential robbery victims, not actually robbing them. Edit: From their About page: "TV Shack™ was launched December 2007 by a handful of Swedish university students as a place to watch movies & tele…

[deleted]

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#85

Post by TylerE »

dsthysd wrote: post #83
TylerE wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you put it in more physical terms. If someone went around passing out a list of people in your community who leave their back door unlocked, would you have a problem with that? After all, they're only "linking" to potential robbery victims, not actually robbing them. Edit: From their About page: "TV Shack™ was launched December 2007 by a handful of Swedish university students as a place to watch movies & tele…

I would not have a problem with that (or don't think it should be illegal at least). Get rid of the source, not the messenger. In my opinion something such as that should fall under free speech.

Lots of things that are free speech are not legal. The very concept of Free Speech only refers to government infringement of your rights.

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#86

Post by henrikschroder »

bh42222 wrote: post #80
ryanhuff wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attacking these policies by boycotting US companies seems much to indirect to result in much progress. Instead, petition your (their) own elected governments to bring change. If people are sufficiently outraged, then change should come. If not, then its up to you to educate your fellow citizens.

If people are sufficiently outraged, then change should come. If not, then its up to you to educate your fellow citizens. This is an utterly useless truism. How do you fire up a significant portion of you fellow citizens over copyright issues is the question. Stating, and I'm paraphrasing here, "Just do it." does not help in any way.

> How do you fire up a significant portion of you fellow citizens over copyright issues is the question.

Talk to your local pirate party. Join them. Vote for them.

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#87

Post by J3L2404 »

This kid may well have listened to PG to his peril.

Normally there is no advice he gives that is bad, but his "KILL HOLLYWOOD" and convoluted stance on copyright might make you think that reality is on your side. It is not.

This fantasy that all movies should be free on the internet is beyond retarded, it is actually hazardous to your freedom, if you try to profit from it.

Did he really think he was going to make a quarter million with no consequences?

Time to put away childish things.

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#88

Post by andylei »

alextgordon wrote: post #75
andylei wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a person that did not break UK law the judge believes he broke UK law. from the telegraph article: > The defence believed its strongest argument against extradition was that Mr O'Dwyer had not committed an offence under British law, because TVShack did not itself host copyright material. European law says no crime is committed if a website acts as a “mere conduit”. > However, Judge Purdy rejected the argument from…

So that's it? If a judge believes it, then it must be true! He's not even a proper judge!

> So that's it?

not really. he gets to appeal.

> If a judge believes it, then it must be true!

who else do you expect to enforce laws? the better question is, do you know anything about british law? why do you think your interpretation of british copyright law is better than the judge's?

> He's not even a proper judge!

i'm not sure what you mean by this.

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#89

Post by rwmj »

mike-cardwell wrote: post #64
rwmj wrote: post #49

This could be very serious for UK programmers. Are you sure that no code you've written infringes on US patents? Or is used on a website that encourages the wrong type of copyright infringement?

"Are you sure that no code you've written infringes on US patents? Or is used on a website that encourages the wrong type of copyright infringement?" You seem to be implying that if a UK programmer writes some code, and then somebody goes and uses that code for copyright or patent infringement, they are at risk of being extradited to the US... Nothing like that has ever happened and it bares no resemblance to the art…

I'm implying both that, or that I distribute some software that infringes a US patent. How do we know that the overreaching arm of US corporations won't try to sue some little guy in the UK over this?

Re: Copyright wars heat up: US wins extradition of college kid from England

#90

Post by noonespecial »

travisp wrote: post #18
methoddk wrote: post #12

This is completely out of hand now. The US is now a country where you are guilty until proven innocent. It is disgusting to see domain seizures with no concrete basis of doing so. This kid is being extradited to the US because his website provided links to TV shows? "Copyright infringers" are treated with less dignity and respect than mass murderers and rapists.

>This is completely out of hand now. The US is now a country where you are guilty until proven innocent. Am I missing something? Has he been found guilty? Why is an extradition the same thing as being "guilty until proven innocent"? By definition, extradition is before a trial has occurred. After he has been extradited is when the trial will occur.

In many ways, the extradition itself is already the sentence.
Post reply on HN