Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker • Hacker News Board

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#71

Post by jahewson » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:30 PM UTC

rytis wrote: post #3

A Home Office spokesman said: "We have effective, fair and balanced extradition arrangements with the US [...] People who have committed serious offences such as murder, rape, other sex crimes and fraud [...] Good to know. Running a search engine can be compared to murder, rape, etc...

Of course that's fine until the other country starts repackaging all crimes as "serious", which is arguably what's happening here - copyright after all, is usually civil and not criminal until huge scale is reached (and actually involves handling copyrighted material).

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#72

Post by sp332 » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:33 PM UTC

spitx wrote: post #37

A not-so entirely tangential thought: Would Jimmy Wales have taken up this cause if Richard O'Dwyer wasn't a put-together specimen? You know if he was a socially-awkward, not-sure-of-himself, social-grace-lacking and all around clumsy-looking hacker. If the answer to this was manifestly in the affirmative, the question wouldn't be begging to be asked. This is a no-lose proposition for Jimmy. Whether the guy is actual…

Possibly. After all there was a lot of popular support for Gary McKinnon and he actually has an autism-spectrum disorder and clinical depression.

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#73

Post by icebraining » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:33 PM UTC

spitx wrote: post #67

icebraining wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never meant to assail his intentions in this case. Then what did you meant to do by posting that? As much as personalities like JW want to be associated with Net Neutrality initiatives and the like, they still have their apprehensions when it comes to associating themselves with the geek / hacker types. And on what do you base that assertion? I am not entirely convinced if JW would have come out in his support if h…

It's not a smear campaign. It's the unspoken truth. Unkempt and maladjusted hacker types are still social pariahs. People on HN whine about the necessary evils of hustling but fail to tie into issues like the one at hand the contiguous issues of essential fairness and even-handedness. Or else the Morins, Cashmores, Roses and the Systroms of this world will continue to rake it in while the grungy hacker genius will ro…

Unkempt and maladjusted hacker types are still social pariahs.

Yes, often they (we? ¹) are.

But that doesn't mean it's OK to accuse Wales personally of something that is not only unfounded, but completely impossible to defend oneself against.

Do you want to make that argument? Sure - write a blog post making your case, show examples of people being discriminated against and submit it to HN.

But using people like that to promote your own arguments is not only detestable, as it makes you lose the respect of people who may agree with you otherwise. You certainly lost mine.

¹ I'm certainly a bearded, introvert and definitively unphotogenic geek, although I can't complain about being a pariah, except for the fact that my interests rarely aligned with others'.

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#74

Post by jahewson » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:35 PM UTC

slavak wrote: post #32

The idea that you can be extradited to a country you don't live in for something that isn't even a crime which was committed somewhere else is, as they say, completely fucked .

It has to be a crime in both countries to be extradited.

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#75

Post by jahewson » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:38 PM UTC

epo wrote: post #53

Starting a petition counts as help these days? Lets start a million petitions declaring hunger and poverty to be a bad thing, that'll have the problems cracked in no time.

Politicians sometimes respond to petitions. Starving children never do.

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#76

Post by TruthElixirX » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:41 PM UTC

jahewson wrote: post #69

nicholassmith wrote: post #14

Whether or not what he did was a criminal or civil crime, he's not a US citizen, he didn't commit the crime within US boundaries (unless I've missed a memo), so he should not stand trial in a country that has nothing to do with the situation . The very idea that you can effectively be transported to a country that you have nothing to do with and committed no crime in just purely because the big boys with the big wall…

You missed the memo, but it still sucks. Juristiction depends on which country the "harm" occurred. For example, if I fire a rocket at another country, then I've certainly committed a crime within its boundaries, despite never having set foot there. His website was accessible in the US by design (one could forbid US visitors in the ToS, and by geoip), and the "harm" from his supposed crime occurred, for those US user…

>His website was accessible in the US by design (one could forbid US visitors in the ToS, and by geoip), and the "harm" from his supposed crime occurred, for those US users, in the US, not inside his server.

No one should have to concern themselves with the laws of every nation on Earth when building a website. There is usually not enough time in your life to consider the laws from only your home country.

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#77

Post by J3L2404 » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:44 PM UTC

I have to say I have noticed a trend with these type of articles. They skyrocket to the top at first, but when valid arguments come up, they are flagged into oblivion. I assume this is done by the same people that upvoted it in the first place.

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#78

Post by jahewson » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:45 PM UTC

junto wrote: post #25

CJefferson wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your link doesn't seem to provide whole episodes, so might well fall under fair use. Also, the law understands intent. Google will take down links when requested. This guy purposefully ignored take-down requests, and was clearly purposefully organising his website to pirate copyrighted material. Now, if he should be taken to the US is another question, but in my opinion you shouldn't lower the debate by claiming what…

Google was a cheap shot, but to be honest, fair use is always debatable. I was more interested in the concept of secondary/proxy linking. What if the accused had linked via a bit.ly proxy for example? What if a search engine links to a bittorrent site, that then in turn linked to copyrighted content? E.g. https://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=http%3A%2F%2Fthepirateba... Just to play devil's advocate here (and out of genera…

The DMCA gives you a get-out if you've committed a copyright infringement unknowingly via user-generated content. By serving that content you have already violated copyright under international law. But if you've been following the DMCA, then the US will (indeed they must) let you off.

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#79

Post by Joakal » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:51 PM UTC

jahewson wrote: post #69

nicholassmith wrote: post #14

Whether or not what he did was a criminal or civil crime, he's not a US citizen, he didn't commit the crime within US boundaries (unless I've missed a memo), so he should not stand trial in a country that has nothing to do with the situation . The very idea that you can effectively be transported to a country that you have nothing to do with and committed no crime in just purely because the big boys with the big wall…

You missed the memo, but it still sucks. Juristiction depends on which country the "harm" occurred. For example, if I fire a rocket at another country, then I've certainly committed a crime within its boundaries, despite never having set foot there. His website was accessible in the US by design (one could forbid US visitors in the ToS, and by geoip), and the "harm" from his supposed crime occurred, for those US user…

This is outrageous. I joined the Pirate Party to combat bullshit like this by making such crimes to be prosecuted in the home country. Especially because some countries have batshit insane penalties for IP.

Have you allowed people to upload stuff to your website and didn't stop them enough? Well, it looks like you're liable for conspiracy for copyright infringement of something. A criminal penalty of $150k and 5 years jail per infringement.

Oh, it looks like you did it to several copyrights. That's a jailin'. Who cares if you haven't visited USA before! Like that ever stopped USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths

Re: Wikipedia founder steps in to help UK hacker

#80

Post by jahewson » Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 2:53 PM UTC

yitchelle wrote: post #34

I am not a lawyer nor do I understand the legal aspects, but if this fella's site only offers links to songs, then it strikes me that search companies like Google, Bing etc may be on same murky legal grounds. Do a search for the mp3 from your favourite artist, and some warez sites will pop up offering links to your artists' songs. Is this just a case of a bully picking on someone who has little hope of defending hims…

The difference is that Bing and Google follow the DMCA, so although they may commit the same "crime" under international law they are effectively pardoned by the US.