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

Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

change.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#41

Post by cadab »

citricsquid wrote: post #36
cadab wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also just to add, If he did start providing evidence as to why he didnt break the laws (UK/US), it would show that he has a reason to extradited. (in order to defend the claims against him) "His extradition hearings are based solely on proving he has a case to answer in the US" - [1] "O'Dwyer cannot present an in-depth response to the allegations he faces during his extradition cases, as these need only prove he has…

So it could be argued that it's possible that the ICE intentionally made misleading claims (eg: he earned $230k) in the hope that it would force him to address the claims and then cause justification for the extradition?

Maybe, although i'm sure he has said he did receive this money, but was spent on hosting bills etc, so he wasnt really earning anywhere near that amount.

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#42

Post by mryan »

Zenst wrote: post #37
okamiueru wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google is just as guilty by this precedence being set. I beg to differ. Google might be guilty of this, since google has business in the US. However, as far as I understand, this wasn't illegal in the UK, and as a UK citizen, running a server in the UK, you have to be able to feel safe from prosecution, as long as you follow the laws in your country. So, I'd say, if anything, google might be guilty, this guy isn't.…

beg all you like but I see no difference between Google offer a search engine that points to content, same as this chap did with torrent links. That is the comparision.

There is a difference, even if you are unable see it. Consider this:

Is linking to copyrighted material Google's sole purpose?

Was linking to copyrighted material the sole purpose of TVShack?

The intent of the person behind the site is clearly important here. Intent is definitely taken in to consideration in cases such as this.

Just for the record, I don't think he should be extradited to the US over this. But I do think his intention was to make money from adverts that were posted next to copyrighted material. Is that a crime in the UK? I don't know, but it is a question that should be answered by the UK courts.

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#44

Post by raverbashing »

nuaccnt wrote: post #21
gouranga wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This people gained too much power. I am really frightened for our future. Agreed entirely. Unfortunately, as history likes to remind us, the only way to resolve these issues is legitimate bloody and violent rebellion. Unfortunately there are too many morons staggering in the dark and too many weapons in the hands of the powerful for this to work any more. However as the balance of power changes, people have nothing…

Yes! / to crush the tyranny / let's find ourself a new Robespierre / a Lenin / a Mao / I mean / what could possibly go wrong?

Yes, what beats bullies are usually bigger bullies

It's a complicated gamble

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#45

Post by planetguy »

smutticus wrote: post #24

If I host content in the United States that is illegal in Iran does that mean I can be extradited to Iran to face charges? I hope this kid fights this tooth and nail with good lawyers. He needs good representation as this case has potential to set very important precedents surrounding basic issues of sovereignty and jurisdictional precedence. Is the US government going to argue that physical location is irrelevant on…

No, because there's no extradition treaty between the US and Iran. Extradition treaties only get set up between countries with a reasonable sort of trust in the fairness of each others' legal systems.

Extradition between the UK and US is usually pretty easy, except in cases where the defendant is likely to face the death penalty in the US; the UK currently has an issue with this.

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#46

Post by sp332 »

rplnt wrote: post #40
vladd wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has a registered DMCA agent, includes a DMCA dashboard ( https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/dmca-dashboard?hl=en ) and replies to take-down requests. I imagine good faith applies in Google's case and they are protected by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_harbor_%28law%29 .

Why should UK citizen comply with DMCA?

The point is that the DMCA provides a safe harbor for the masses of copyright infringement on YouTube. The UK doesn't have the DMCA, so no safe harbor.

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#48

Post by okamiueru »

Zenst wrote: post #37
okamiueru wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google is just as guilty by this precedence being set. I beg to differ. Google might be guilty of this, since google has business in the US. However, as far as I understand, this wasn't illegal in the UK, and as a UK citizen, running a server in the UK, you have to be able to feel safe from prosecution, as long as you follow the laws in your country. So, I'd say, if anything, google might be guilty, this guy isn't.…

beg all you like but I see no difference between Google offer a search engine that points to content, same as this chap did with torrent links. That is the comparision.

My point is that "guilt" should be determined by the laws of the country you reside in. Even if google is guilty of it (I'm not saying they are), it doesn't mean this guy is. Why? Because they abide by different laws, since they are governed by different laws.

To me, this is as preposterous as if Norway had strong ties with some Muslim country, and extradited me because of caricatures of Muhammad.

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#49

Post by lifeisstillgood »

smutticus wrote: post #24

If I host content in the United States that is illegal in Iran does that mean I can be extradited to Iran to face charges? I hope this kid fights this tooth and nail with good lawyers. He needs good representation as this case has potential to set very important precedents surrounding basic issues of sovereignty and jurisdictional precedence. Is the US government going to argue that physical location is irrelevant on…

That depends if the USA was foolish enough to sign such and agreement with Iran. Extraditions are basically quid pro quo contracts between nations. We signed a doozy.

The UK signed an extradition agreement a few years back, basically saying we (UK) will allow the US to extradite for crimes that are only crimes in the USA. And we get no reciprocity. Oh, and we need to prove your murders committed crimes to a much higher standard of proof than the other way round.

It is a controversial measure - to be honest more controverisal for the 'just what photos of the prime minster and cabinet did the CIA really have?' as opposed to any shock that the UK government failed once again to stand up for itself.

No, not bitter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition_Act_2003

Re: Petition to stop extradition of UK hacker

#50

Post by joeblau »

rcgs wrote: post #33
citricsquid wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a news story: > The case was brought by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which claims that the TVShack.net website earned more than $230,000 (£147,000) in advertising revenue before US authorities obtained a warrant and seized the domain name in June 2010. I have been unable to find any evidence that he has denied this claim, so I am assuming that what the ICE claimed is accurate. TVShack.net (…

Earning money via advertising is not a crime. Google does this. Annoyingly, O'Dwyer's wikipedia article is scant for information on UK charges & the reasons for extradition - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_ODwyer . If anything, it is quite unclear which UK laws he has broken.

Yeah, that's true, but Google also complies with DMCA.
Post reply on HN