Slashdot Mirror
Warez Suspect To Be Extradited, After All
usefool writes "After the U.S.'s first extradition request against an Australian man was denied, the U.S. appealed that decision and has now won the right to try Hew Raymond Griffiths in the U.S."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
isn't nice all this technology brings us closer
tho i say for international stuff they should be tried at the hauge
Does everyone remember the large protests over the last couple decades against what people perceived as the formation of a one world government? They are usually based in the U.S. and targeted at the WTO, World Bank, and U.N. I guess the Christian bible has a couple verses people interpret to mean "no one world government". Who would have thought it would be the U.S. that became the world government? I say all of us should go out tomorrow and protest our government. Also, before I get a whole bunch of conservatives calling me a troll and arguing that patriotism is defined as agreeing with the government, Let's not forget that one can hate his government, but love his country.
Unfortunately, he will probably be convicted, since the Department of Justiucs has already made agreements with his fellow DrinkOrDie members to shorten their sentences if they testify against him. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,109806,0 0.asp
. . . to Guantanamo?
Now if we could only figure out a way to extradite the Nigerian Spammers...
Tibbon
tibbon.com
. . . for copyright "crimes," surely we can force China and Korea to turn over their spam-supporting admins, right? I'd even settle for them being tried at the Hague, so long as the death penalty were on the table.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
Here is the DOJ memo announcing this arrest, quite possibly the only document the DoJ has released with both Ashcorft's name on it and the spelling of warez with a "Z" http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2001/December/01_crm_6 43.htm
U.S. law now supersedes the written laws of all sovereign nations? Why should I bother voting at all, if the ultimate authority lays in the hands of arrogant foreigners that do not represent me....
Skype Me! username: john_allen_mohammed
What next? Will I be extradited for having had sex with a 16-year-old (illegal in the US)? How about drinking alcohol in public, which is illegal in many countries (Saudi Arabia for instance), or hell - buying alcohol at the tender age of 15 (illegal in the US)? How about having had sex before I was 18 (also illegal in the US)? Having had sex outside of marriage (probably illegal in Iran)? Having had anal sex while there was a third party in the sexual congress (illegal in the UK).
I'm sure I've done SOMETHING that is perfectly legal where I live, that would be sentenced very harshly in other countries. Of course the things I just mentioned are things that "hurt" other people as opposed to the almighty profit of US coorporations, so I suppose that I won't be extradited anytime soon.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
Um, Timothy posted this story.
NTITE
-You can cry, but you'll still die. There'll be no tears in the end.
Tis a sad day when ye fellow pirate BanDiDo, now has t' be keel-hauled by these land lubbers, arrrg. And so close to the day too arrgg. Avast ye!
http://www.talklikeapirate.com/
Karma whoring
~~~
Comment removed based on user account deletion
One wonders wheather this has anything to do with David Hicks, a australian citizen who is being tried in the us (in guntanimo bay) for receving terrorist training, our government, until a couble of days ago (like sunday or monday) refused to lift a finger, but now they are making a effort to get him back, to be tried in australia in a propper courtroom not an ammerican miltarty tribunal (it only started on the weekend IIRC. Maybe our governments acction is because we have a election comming up in october. but anyway maybe the australian government it trying to "Bribe" the US gov to get him back.
yes, and twice as many times people check on slashdot during the day....
. . . as do many others here, I am certain, is whether you did any number greater than one of those things at the same time, and if so, which ones.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
Sooner or later, the backlash against the USA will be enormous. And it will be unplesant to behold. After all, most of the world's manufacturing ain't done there... I certainly can't think of one DVD player, TV set, MP3 player (iPod included) that is made in the US. Their cars aren't the best (Dodge Neon, anyone). All that's left is a few billion dollars of entertainment industry (I'm ignoring their incredibly advanced arms industry for a sec...), and if that falls... whew. No Britney, no Ben Stiller, no ER, and no money to fund the next round of incredibly dangerous Plutonium Nyborg-tipped missiles. And, what do you know, the Chinese ones will be 10x more accurate, 100x cheaper, and available in a variety of pastels.
Yarrr... 'tis sad to be seein one o' me own kind be taken in. But that's one o' the hazards of the swashbucklin' life. This swig o' rum be for you, lad!
Some time ago in Australia there was a spectacular fraudster that went to Spain to escape justice - a decade of extradition attempts got nowhere.
In my opinion, the members of the MPAA and other copyright lobbyists in the USA should have the decency to pay tax since they are consuming so much of the governments resources on this. All those big movies barely break even on paper - the IRS is expected to beleive that all of Hollywood is run as some sort of charity to the moviegoing public.
Er, what now?
America acting like it owns the place?
This is news?
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
I would have thought that these pirates encrypt their fileservers, so that even if their hardware gets confiscated.... the hard disks all appear to be blank.
I mean, they're so busy breaking other people's protections..... sheesh, you would have thought that they'd employ some themselves.
I guess criminals really are stupid.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Here is the answer I made in a previous article.
7 5234
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=115376&cid=97
It's not exactly extradition but it is effective.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Search Google for " wares". It comes up saying "Did you mean: warez".
Hehe, my brother pointed that one out to me.
Since it's quite likely that this guy was violating Australian copyright laws, though probably more leanant than any US ones, why does the US feel the need to punish him HERE??? Perhaps the more disturbing issue is will this case define the internet's legal jurisdiction to be that of the United States thus ignoring the world wide scope of the internet's audience?
There's quite a lot of information about Operation Buccaneer at the DOJ web site. It includes an overview of the investigation, a chart listing defendants' conviction dates, and past press releases.
I don't see Ashcroft's name on these webpages, but they do all spell "warez" with a "z".
On the otherhand, if you were just trying to point out how you've had sex, then point taken.
Why are most of the posts here negatively directed at the US? After all, it was Austrailia that agreed to extradite this guy. Shouln't the negativity be directed there instead?
now I am going to be extradited to Singapore to be caned because I spit out my gum on U.S. soil!!! I am glad they don't know about my grafitti back in the day, I just might be double canned...
Off-shoring, outsourcing, warez pirates -- all bad for the industry. First, we kill that bad stuff off, then we get on with things. How can we get on with things if we don't first kill of the bad stuff?
Australia is giving up its own citizen for extradition by the US for an act committed on Australian soil? That's outright astonishing! And rather frightening. (Of course, we've got nothing to fear. The US would never remand over anybody for some hard questioning in a rogue state like Syria or anything like that!)
I've just read the item about the extradition proceedings involving the above. The item is incorrect. All that has happened so far is that a single Judge of the Federal Court of Australia has held that it is POSSIBLE for the Australian Government to extradite Griffiths to the US, if it chooses. If that decision is not reversed on any appeal, then the Australian Government (in the person of the Attorney-General) will decide whether to extradite Griffiths. If the Attorney-General decides to extradite (and sometimes A-Gs haven't, even though they had the power to do so) then Griffiths can challenge the lawfulness of that decision.
I think if we Americans realized the power held by our non-elected, non-accountable "trade representatives", we would be absolutely appalled.
America's Free Trade representatives require so many concessions from foreign governments for the pleasure of a "free trade" agreement with the United States.
These government employees have a mandate to spread U.S. style laws across the world. The cost is, of course, the loss of any individuality possessed by participating states.
Regardless of your feelings about the current administration, you should closely scrutinize the actions of some of the most powerful people in the administrative branch... people who have no accountability or oversight.
The real problem with this is that while he may have criminally infringed on copyrights in the US, he also did so everywhere there is internet access. Like it's been said, he's never been to the US, yet he is being tried under US law. What's to keep other countries across the world with similar copyright laws from trying him for his crimes. It's not like double-jeopordy exists everywhere, let alone US double-jeopordy. Worst case this could set a precedent that if you commit a crime on the internet, every country on earth could get a piece of you. So he goes to jail for a few years in the US, then say the UK wants to try him, then maybe Germany, or France, or Canada, or whoever. That's what I'm worried about.
The reason this guy is under so much fire is simple: He violated copyright in a massive way ("US$50 million" worth) and corporations want to send a message that this is not okay. They're right: Australia respects US copyright law, and has extradiction treaties that can theoretically, and in this case demonstrably, be brought to bear on an offender.
So my question is, what country does not? Surely there is a country which simply doesn't care about western copyright, and does not have a system of laws and treaties under which the copyright of another country can cause extradition.
Now, here is the key to satiating my relentless craving for bits and bytes: the violation of copyright exists in the REPRODUCTION or DISTRIBUTION of material protected against such acts except where authorized. It says nothing about owning copyright materials.
Have you noticed that it doesn't matter how many pirate DVD's or videos you have, it is the houses with a thousand BURNERS churning out the pirate goods that get raided? THIS IS THE LAW.
So, I figure I can go to a government in which 100% of American bits and bytes are in the public domain, pay the government-owned publishing house a modest fee, and return with 100,000 pages of everything I'd ever want to read, for example, for pennies on the gram-square-meter.
This is the same as when I buy a jazz CD from 1942 sources that in France is in the public domain. (As I understand it.)
The consumer is NOT LIABLE.
Okay, comments?
Given the dangerous conditions in US Prisons, it's surprising that civilized countries are still willing to extradite people here.
Poor bastard.
I mean, he was a pathetic warez hacker, but I wouldn't want anyone to have to face the US 'justice' system.
I've had several friends who had utterly insane things happen to them in America, it's made me paranoid enough that I wouldn't even want to stop over there. I know there's plenty of places, people, and festivals I'd like to visit in America, so it can't be that bad - but it seems like foreigners, even english speaking, western world, acceptably 'caucasian' foreigners, often get treated like shit, especially by the authorities. Or maybe that's normal. I don't know.
I don't want to find out.
---- I've fallen, and I can't get up.
I'll be extradited from the US to China for violating their censorship laws.
I hope he's acquitted. I hope they are disallowed from using laden terminology (like, pirate) in the trial. I hope the jury understands that the unreasonable stance taken is grounds in itself for refusal to convict.
mefus
In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
as RMS succinctly put it at a presentation i attended several months ago: in the US, you can now be sent to prison to be raped for sharing software.
this fact short-circuits any rational discussion one might have about jurisdiction, extradition, etc.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Well I'm 50/50 aussie/kiwi, and I entirely agree with you.
(Now where's those sheep? Nights are still a bit cold over here right now....)
Can someone mod you down for not knowing the difference between "your" and "you're"?
So, things take on a whole new meaning because they are done "on the Internet"?
/., I can be extradited?
So if I say Islamics are doofuses on
oh oh.
mefus
In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
Can someone mod down 95% of Slashdot users for making typos, regardless of the usefulness / entertainment value of their posts?
Astonishing that a sovereign nation would give up one of its own citizens for extradition to another country, for an act committed on home soil. This does not bode well for national--or personal--sovereignty.
Of course the US would never do anything like that. I cannot imagine our government, say, remanding any persons to rogue nations like Syria for "hard questioning".
The answer to your questions is no. Here's why:
First off, for any of this to happen, there needs to be an extradition treaty between the countries. This means that they mutually agree on the things for which a person can and cannot be extradited to stand trial. Most of the nations you are talking about the US (and likely whatever nation you reside in) does NOT have an extradition treaty with. Even so, most of these aren't offences allowed for extradition under treaties.
So, even in the event that the offence you are talking about is one for which you can be extradited, it needs to be commited against their citizens, in their country. What you do to other citizens of your country is your bussiness. Other countries can't extradite you for that.
So, what the US is claiming here was that the warezing was done to US citizens (or corperations rather, but same basic thing when it comes to extradition law) in the US. How you might ask? Well take a similar situation:
Suppose some asshat in the US decides to start scamming Aussies out of their money. They run a scam like the 419 scams where they just grab the money and go. So the AU PD manages to track down said Asshat in the US, and collect a good amount of evidence proving he's doing it. They then file for extradition. Why? Well even though the asshat is in the US, his crimes are against Australian citizens, in Australia. He's guilty under AU law, and thus should be tried there.
Now cases of software copying are a little tricker, given the nature of the Internet. Did it really happen to US citizens (or coperations) in the US? Well, that is a matter for the Australian courts to decide, and that's what happened. The lower court decided no, it wasn't and thus no extradition. The US appealed, and the higher court has decided that yes, in fact the crime was against a US entity in the US so the extradition will be permitted.
With the Internet, things get a little unclear where jurisdication line lie, and I imagine in 5-10 years we may see some new treaties around this. However as a general rule when you are dealing with matter in your own country, no other country has any jursidiction over them. When you do something in another country, even if by proxy, you can potentially be held liable under that country's law.
I'm Nigerian you insensitive clod!
Let's all hope that Australian Labor Party wins the coming election and kicks out this lap-dog Howard government.
Shouldn't the bigger picture here center around freedom?
Why should anyone be prohibited from copying and distributing any information that comes into his possession? Is it not more important to live in a free society than it is to uphold the IP rights of a few.
IMHO, sharing information should be a basic right of human existence.
A truly free people should be able to parse, manipulate, duplicate, and disseminate any information that comes into their possession, except, of course where it concerns public safety of national security.
Remember, artists are under no obligation to write of produce anything. And when information is truly free the world will change in ways we can not possibly imagine.
Click here to practice non violent civil disobedience today.
the situation does make him an 3l1t3 w4r3z d00d - how many others can claim to be worth extraditing from Oz to the U.S.?
--- Asking inconvenient questions for over 30 years...
After all, we (meaning our government) has no real choice but to do as the USA says. We're not strong enough to be able to stare down America.
You think things are gonna get better under Labor??? You are fooling yourself. Labor sold out to corporate money long ago. If you want real change vote for a minor party - greens, socialist alliance, one nation even.
In Sweden, it is not required to mark or register work you have done to make it valid under the swedish copyright law. It would thus be interesting to see if we could extradict americans to Sweden if they have copied something they think is not copyrighted. Probably not.
"Your Rights Online" should be "Your Rights On the Line"
mefus
In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
I'm risking bedevilment, I know, but I must say, I'm losing faith in this moderation system:
Moderation -1
30% Troll
40% Flamebait
30% Insightful
in re: parent post.
mefus
In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
In Germany the prohibition of extraditing German citizens to a foreign country is part of the civic rights catalogue in the constitution (GG Art. 16 (2)).
Can anyone else find another source? Ideally a link to austlii with the judgement, but any other report would do.
This happened in July. Here's the link and here too.
Why?... lets try a scenario and see how you feel about it.
Your 18 year old daughter (or sister) has been priating software amongst his friends in college to make spare cash.
Some of the software he's pirating it produced in the UK, and the UK want to extradite him to stand trial there.
How do you feel about it now?
All states (countries) are at least nominally sovereign. That means they have the ultimate power in their jurisdiction, and no other country has any say in what they do.
:D
This is the starting point in how international stuff works. Everything from there on is up to agreements and influence.
upside, BA International Relations
I'm sorry if I haven't offended anyone
You can be sure that the current Australian government will do anything the current US government wants.
Arse lickers
President ISES
(International Society for Elimination of Sigs)
In response to your question about what countries dont have extraditions treaties with the US:
[background:] Recently Japan has gotten some of their citizens back from North Korea, who had been kidnapped and taken there decades ago. One was married to a Robert Jenkins, who defected to the North during the Korean war.
As a deserter, he was subject to extradition if he went to Japan. So the Japanese government arranged for his family to meet with him in Indonesia. The other two possibilities they considered were China and Cambodia.
So that gives you four countries in Asia at least, that do not extradite American deserters...
What am I saying? Does Canada have a treaty to extradite draft dodgers now?? Anybody know?
It seems somewhat ironic that the US is so keen to extradite this fellow for what we hope is a fair trial, but are not prepared to return David Hicks or Mamdouh Habib to Autralia or to try them in a civilian court.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
I guess what I'm concerned about with this story is the new "Free" Trade Agreement between the US and Australia. It locks us into US style draconian laws that are not out to protect copyright creators, but to protect monopolies. These laws basically just hand over a large anti-competitive hammer to the companies who already have a stranglehold on the software and entertainment industries.
:) countries like Australia have little chance to negotiate in their populations' best favour. Again look at the cases of Hicks and Habib. It comes down to US corporate monsters having more and more power.
Anyway, for starters under these news laws consumers _do_ in fact become liable. It will soon be illegal to _use_ a multi-zone DVD player in Aus, and the biggest problem is that in Australia we don't have the fair use laws that typically temper the craziness of the DMCA in the US. What would happen if some of our favourite Australian developers/projects were threatened, and then extradited to the US for anti-circumvention or patents cases, both of which are extremely broken issues in the FTA. (Google for FTA australia software)
Given that China is one of the only countries that has a chance at countering any threat from the US (the US owe more money to China than anyone else owes anyone
Fear...
Why are most of the posts here negatively directed at the US? After all, it was Austrailia that agreed to extradite this guy. Shouln't the negativity be directed there instead?
When the last superpower and your largest military ally requests that you do something, it's not just a matter of saying "piss off".
I agree that people should only be liable for crimes if their actions are crimes on their soil, though. To do otherwise is madness -- it's still vaguely doable with basic client-server systems, but start building P2P systems with transactions and operations that might easily span twenty countries, and you stand on the brink of a legal system breakdown. If I run a porn server and someone in China or Iran downloads some of my porn, am I subject to Chinese or Iranian law? After all, I did supply them with content in an illegal manner, just as this guy did. The United States should consider exactly what kind of floodgates it might be opening before it starts a precedent of remote accountability for crimes.
Granted, as a US citizen, if I were in such a situation, I probably would not be extradited to China, as the US would tell China to piss off if China asked for an extradition, just ignoring international law. That's not a really great state of affairs either, though.
May we never see th
See Microsoft causing shit again... It's totally lame any software company goes after anyone like this - when the company pushing has such large market share (microsoft)...
Piracy is a natural part of software.. Had it not been for pirated warez years ago, many folks I know wouldn't be using Microsoft anything, but would have been using Linux.
Had it not been for the adoption through piracy of MS Windows and MS Office, many decision makers who run enough IT departments wouldn't be running Microsoft anything today.
Had many design firms not have had Adobe Photoshop available via warez, they would be using GIMP or something else and taking legions of other folks with them to open source solutions...
Software use to be fun and the people behind it use to be a little more down to earth... I guess when your company becomes mega corp and you are worth billions, you need to get an occassional case like this to scare those bad countries like China and Japan into buying real software instead of downloading them as warez.
Everyone knows Oracle didn't sell a single license in Russia years ago even though the country boasted the largest user group.
Warez go a long way... I'd say a majority of folks using software illegally if challenged would never use that software or anything else made by the software company. If people were pushed, the market would change even more and even faster...
Prosecute and terrorize folks and watch more market share and interest move to open source.
Greedy pricks.
Do bad things, be brought to account.
Seriously, why is this in YRO? An Australian citizen broke international law in a way that affected US businesses, the US applies for extradition, Australia complies. Seems simple enough to me - or is it bad because it's white-collar crime, which some of us might get caught for one day?
It's official. Most of you are morons.
No we can finallay extradite all those US-based spammers and sue them to sh*t from europe, africa and asia!!!!
Fascists.
The USA does not own people in Australia(not directly yet anyway). Which ever people let this happened should be ashamed to be Australian.
It is over information as well. Something that can be duplicated infinitely for no cost to the original.
At least they are giving this Australian a trial. Unlike other Australians they are holding without even a charge.
I don't know if the question was directed to me, but I'll take the liberty of answering it anyway. The case is United States v Griffiths [2004] FCA 879 (Jacobson J; 7 July 2004). Why it took so long for the decision to become the subject of comment here, I can't say. You can find the decision at www.austlii.edu.au.
We're essentially feeding China. But as for a backlash, so what? The important people (the rich) are Global now. The fall of one country is meaningless to them. In fact they profit, since the continual shift of misery means perpetually low wages for all but ruling class.
On the other hand, a really nasty war over increasingly scarce metals is brewing. God help us when the rest of China/India decides to industrialize.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The [PREVIEW] button is your friend !
Let's send that W4R3Z H4X0R to US jail then ...
... for "grasing some palms" to get that big power plant / communications / oil contract - let the CEO come and face a chinese court or Shari'ah (Islamic Law)
I would expect some not so nice consequences in international relations
- having to send all Guantanamo staff and the US military commanders to Afghanistan, GB, Iran or Iraq for kidnapping, torture, illegal imprisonment etc. to stand trial according to local laws
- extradition request from china, russia, saudi arabia
You can't expect the world to respect YOUR laws, but constantly ignore THEIRS - can you ?
Why not extradite and imprison the entire city of Amsterdam? Remember to pay attention to coffee houses.
Slackware user since 1997.
If you can imagine these people ever being motivated by a concept like "decency", you're suffering from terminal naivety.
The laws against extradition to another country from your home country are sometimes a good thing. For example, insults against Islam deserve death penalty in many world countries. You can make such an offensive remark on the Internet, or say something on CNN. Would you like extradition to Iran ? In China there is a law that can put you in prison for running a porn webpage. So in Iran, Woud Larry Flynt like to be extradited to China ? Or Iran ? Being gay is a crime in Egypt. Will the gay activists like to be extradited to Egypt for they webpage? In North Korea, insulting Kim Yong-Il is a crime....
I live in the UK (which has fairly liberal copyright regs/enforcement by US standards) and carried out research last year into doing reproduction and distribution of old materials (like, decades old, but still not PD in the UK) in an African country which did not have particularly strong or long lasting IP laws.
Turns out it is also illegal to *import* these materials into the UK - whether for personal use or not, they will be confiscated at the airport/port, or if you sneak them in, you can be prosecuted.
It is clear: australia has given up one of the basic pillar of its sovereignity: the ultimate right of judgment on its territory. That was the basic right of kings and the basic of right of any form of state afterwards. Obviously, US tries to wash away a very important thing: the borders of the countries and thus the territories of sovereignity by referring to the Internet. It might look as a small thing, but you must consider that territory of sovereignity holds a very special importace and it is a very sensitive area. The ultimate power over a territory is the basic of all rules and laws (even back in the nature) Unfortunately it is obvious that US is doing this not for making the world a better place and making a sci-fi dream true, but for extending its power (and its companies' power) to other countries. I am not that suprised, rather sorrowful. A dream of the XX. century indepedent, soveriegn and equal nations has died. The UN failed. The history continues as it used to be for millenia. It is a bit ironic to see how unprepared your "western world" was to the simple fact that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the only remaining superpower will behave exactly as superpowers tend to behave: they have the tendency to rule as much of the world as possible and claim as much of others' sovereignty as possible. Here in eastern europe we have seen the soviet (russian) arrogance and how our governments behaved like pet dogs of the soviet communist party (and their secretery general). And you might think it was a terrible dictatorship here. Not as bad as you might think. Just as you might expect from a "colony" of a big empire. You are not allowed to question the empire: that's all. US didn't behave like that at that time, because of PR reasons. At that time the western world had to show that they system is inherently better than the soviet communist crap. And it was at that time. How much we admired the freedom of the western world. And the idea of the _really_ free nations. Now the communists have gone. There is no real danger of (lucrative) communist ideology to conquer the world. Now your western system and the western superpower can start to show its real color. The saddest thing is that it is not necessary evil: it it just the logic of empires. It seems that - unfortunately - the democratic-capitalist western system is not inherently protected against bad governments and arrogant empires. It's just suprising to see how surprised you are that there is nothing new in history. Arrogant, militant governments and empires turn up from time to time to annouce "pax romana" (and "lex romana" obviously) of the new age. By the way, I am sure this decision was completely "legal". Legal systems are always enforced in a way how the current political systems want them to be used. Formally, they are always perfect.
I mean, who wants to be a sovereign nation when you can be the Fifty-first state instead?
I suspect this might have something to do with it--
Griffiths has been charged in the US with conspiracy to infringe copyright and copyright infringement, for reproducing without authority and distributing software protected by copyright on the internet. The US alleges that Griffiths was the ringleader of an internet group called DrinkorDie which allegedly worked from a computer network at Boston's Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Griffiths helped to control access to the network, though it is not alleged that he made money from his activities."
You're right. The bullet analogy doesn't work. We're talking more along the lines of Guerillas from Kazookiestan crossing the boarder, hijacking a US vehical, commiting a crime against US property on US soil then running back to their HQ. The fact that it was all virtual doesn't make the analogy any less valid. Every single element of the crime- save the originating computer -was commited by hijacking US property to illegally obtain US goods or commit crimes on US ground.
Personally, I'm seeing a very strong case for the US. In the end though, it really doesn't matter who gets him to me. Hackers aren't exactly in short supply. i'm sure they'll find another one.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
cool - so can the iraqi population expect a handful of american gi's be extradited for trial in bagdad for crimes against humanity ???
or maybe torture is just not a big enough crime, compared to leeching music over the internet...
...or Den Haag if you're Dutch.
What is the 'hauge' you speak of?
"Who would have thought it would be the U.S. that became the world government? I say all of us should go out tomorrow and protest our government"
Oh for cryin out loud, he's just a hacker. Think about it; Do you really think this fool is so special as to go around strong-arming the nations of the world for an exterdition? Here's how it went--
USA: "Yeah, he kinda commited crimes by hacking a United States college network and used it as a clearing house for warez'd US software. Can we try him here?"
Australia: "He hacked your computers?"
USA: "Yep."
Australia: "And your software???"
USA: "That's right."
Austrailia: "Texas, you say..."
USA: "Howdy-Doody, Partner."
Australia: "Sure, why not. Saves us some trouble anyway."
USA: "Cool beans."
Your NWO is a crock of shit when it comes to this case. Something tells me you're getting a little too self-absorbed in your own self-importance in the digital world to think that the US has backhanded Australia for something like this...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
And you wonder why some people hate you.
Not that I have much sympathy with the guy in question, he should be punished for what he did.
I don't hate America, but I don't want to live there nor do I want them to rule the world. I could not live with your version of freedom.
What if say Microsoft is charged with violating the copyright laws of say Iran. Would Gates and Balmer be extradited to Iran for possible beheading? I guess we would be forced to take the good with the bad eh?
" The US is the major innovator and inventor in the world."
You're American, aren't you?
"Hundreds of countries livelihood is entirely dependent on the ongoing success of our economy."
Mainly Columbia and some sections of Mexico, but mostly where the world has resisted the economic bullying of the US they're getting along fine. Go check out your balance of trade and let us know if it's an import or export deficit.
"Our illness-fighting drugs are the lifeblood of many developing nations."
But a lot more expensive than the unlicensed copies you'll find _actually_ being used in the developing nations.
"Our military inventions save the lives of thousands of lives everytime our soldiers go into the field."
As long as you're American and on that battlefield, then you might be okay, but don't assume that a dearth of statistics on friendly fire and civilian casualties means that there weren't any. You should check out the International Red Cross for some pertinent statistics that suggest that the US has actually caused more collateral damage than is entirely acceptable under the Geneva Convention.
"The list is too long"
List? I thought this was a vague cheerlead.
"Our economic base is slowly deteriorating from the "producer" of worldwide products"
Do give over. You economic base is crippling itself through the balkanisation of intellectual property, the pending threat of doing *something* about the global warming problem now that the administration has come clean, the constant clamouring for cheap goods for a decadent society and the rapidly aging society that will probably kill the US through demands for cheap, available medicare and a consistent quality of life. Democracy has both upsides and downsides; one of the downsides is the people are soft, fat and lazy. After a while a five metre killzone is going to do you no good if you can't afford to buy them.
Now generally you might consider this 'anti-american'. It's actually 'anti-jingoist' because the one thing I cannot stand is someone that tries to promote a view of something that is so far from the truth as to require a backing soundtrack and some inspirational graphics. There's a planet out there that is hungry and starving, and to be frank we don't want America to come in and save us. We want America to sort out your own mess and leave us all alone.
The trouble is that would mean the US couldn't manipulate markets, and that's fundamentally the reason for invading developing countries.
Oddly Draconis
Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
Unless I miss my guess, warezing (sp) is a crime in Australia as well, and this guy can be extradited.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Fuck australia
You're right. And he should be tried IN AUSTRALIA. Because Australia respects the western copyright. Not extradited to the US.
well i call you a hypocrite, or did you mistype arse.
Essentially its about money. I would assume it comes down to the fact that proported 'losses' (never mind if the software would have been purchased legally anyway) are mostly from US owned / based companies.
Thus, Australia, ever so ready to co-operate with said world superpower for strategic and financial incentives may extradite him for an 'appropriate trial' ie. another instance (RIAAesque) of big business run America making examples of pirates.
The thing that gets me is that this attempt at extradition is a direct comment on either inability to appropriately deal with this in our own legal system, or the fact that the US will benefit more from prosecution on their own shores, with their own media.
It's kind-of Ironic that Britain used to send their criminals to Australia... now the United States is taking the criminals for themselves...
CONGRUTELAYSHUNZ!
We're actually going to have to start paying for all those Adobe programs we illegally downloaded and installed but never bothered to use?!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
www.allofmp3.com
Not the same legal situation that you're talking about, but the same effect.
"He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."
they brought out his middle name. He's really in for it now!
-Judges form other countries would be impartial, unless all the judges are Palestinian. To say other wise is a patronizing view, but not untypical of US people.
-I would like to remind you that although 9/11 was the most egregious crime allegedly commited by bin Laden, it is not the only one, we have many in many parts all around the world, that makes an International court the most fitting place for a prospective trial. Places like Kenia and Tanzania suffered as much, but of course they don't have 300 billion dollars in "defense" budget to impose their will and obtain justice.
-Extradition treaties have nothing to do with victims. Get a clue.
-Both the victims and the alleged culprits of any crime have rights. Something your goverment has patently forgotten.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
On the flipside, it would be interesting to see Americans extradited to another country for crimes committed (e.g. sex tourists, stealing, ...). My impression is that the DOJ will use every trick in the book to make sure Americans are not extradited. People of other countries committing crimes in the US aren't always so lucky.
"I have come to the view that ... Mr Griffiths ought not be deterred from defending the application by the risk of a potential costs order against him.
Actual judgement here : http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/ 2004/879.html
This is in itself an important precedent that will be of benefit to any future Mr Griffith's.
On a different point, why is this considered news ? Justice Jacobson handed down his descion two months ago on July 7th !
This is a classic case of law not keeping up with technology. More importantly, this is just a specific case (crimes on the internet having badly-defined translations into a law system that is entirely geographically-based), and there are many other things that can go wrong (too many to list here) when you make old laws govern things they were never intended to! Any patent-lawyer will tell you that patent law is archaic in many ways because tech has changed so quickly; another example, my personal favourite, is an entire nation (Britain) who has a bed-time (oops I mean last-call) of 11pm, because the laws haven't bothered to keep up with the technology of a good transportation system that can get people home in decent time. And so on. What we need to do is start being able to put trust in our politicians. I'm Canadian, and this is just becoming possible now (Liberals in charge; yes they're a bit dodgy, but not nearly as bad as some). I shudder to think how Americans are going to do this (not even Americans seem to have faith in their politicians right now?), but it's going to have to happen. Once we can trust the lawmakers again, surely we'll have laws that help govern the internet in a healthy way, not the big-brother style of the DMCA/Patriot Act/etc ? Admittedley at no point will *everyone* trust our law-makers, but at least in America things could be a lot better than they are now. Anyways - yes, I agree that something should be done to claim damages against this individual who has ripped off many corporations by stealing their software (a lot of them American I guess, affecting Joe Blows like me in soft.eng), but it must be done in a framework that has already been established! Simply forcing non-geographical issues like internet piracy to conform to a geographical law system does NOT WORK, and is entirely unfair to defendant.
Australians: Welcome to colony status. Remember this in your present federal election.
The USA's 'IP' law-universe is so off-kilter and broken, I cant imagine why any nation would want to provide it credibility.
Sad. Sad. Sad. The MPAA/RIAA shill WIPO needs to go...
They are railroading this nonsense. Remember, laws are just rules... their needs to be political will to enforce them.. or *NOT* change them.
What about the idea that some European countries have about trying someone for crimes commited in another country? Seems like the same principle.
The Tao that can be spoken is not the one eternal Tao
Will the Austrailian government be so kind as to foot the bill when (not if) this guy is convicted? Or will our tax dollars go to work for keeping him in jail for ten years?
They commit crimes around the world not just in the US. And no they are not always targetted at US Interests. Look at the recent Russian school killings. They are believed to have been funded and supported by al-Queda.
Bin Laden is the leader of it and oversees all operations. Yes, he is guilty of crimes against humanity 10x over as is his organization. To focus your military operation against civilians is not a proper way to conduct war.
Sorry I know it's off-topic but I have to call a spade a spade.
> But what would the US have done if they had not extradited him? [...]
> Economic sanctions ? Not really.
Why not? It worked with Canada.
http://www.chokedout.org/SPT--FullRecord.php?Resou rceId=261
The Reg has a story up also.
Thanks, Ashcroft. This is another reason I'll never set foot in the US again. I used to vacation there annually. Not under the current regime however. I'm not trying to troll - but since Bush came to power I've refused to cross the border. Of course, with moves like this I don't need to go to America - seems like America (or at least its laws) is coming to me.
Morally this guy is just fine with me.
-I am an elective eunuch.
What the hell.. I got Karma to burn.
The shear amount of hours and labor that goes into alot of these enterprise applications that get traded on mIRC like candy is unbelievable. Companies are paying millions to keep armies of programmers employed to churn out software like this. When a company charges money for software, it (usually) corresponds with the value that person who uses it will receive, and also reflects the labor given by the programmers who wrote it. How can you say, with a straight face, that the people who are distributing this software illegaly, without paying are not hurting the programmer at the end of the day?.
you can now be sent to prison to be raped for sharing software.
I love how tactical the word "shared" is in this sentence. These warez traders are bastards, with not a moral leg to stand on. If you can't afford it, then find (or write?) an alternative. That's the way the system works. That's also alot of the reason open source is so succesful today. People want to use enterprise software, but not have to pay an arm and a leg for it. When you find constructive, creative ways to beat your competition, the market rewards you for it. These guys get what's coming to 'em. The fact that they get raped in jail is an unfortunate side effect.. hopefully it teaches them a lesson.
arcane for life
EOM
I'm not sure how much sympathy I have for this particular individual, but as for the bigger picture:
Does the phrase "No taxation without representation." ring any bells?
For the empty-slogan crowd I will spell it out - it means "you don't tell me what to do unless I get a say in the process". A couple of hundred years ago a bunch of people decided that the use of force was the only way to take control of their lives away from a foreign government in whose selection they had no say.
American idealists (as opposed to ideologues) were once heroes in the struggle for freedom and democracy. Now? "Four legs good, two legs better."
Having probably violated some provision or other of the "Patriot" Act by communicating unapproved thoughts to American citizens, please come visit me in Guantanamo.
The reaction on the board is the typical hypocrite response.
Your post ignores how some people (cough, the Left, cough) was all excited about the Netherlands Universal Jurisdiction idea. The ICC is another example. When these people get to weild power and try/harass US personnel, Universal Jurisdiction is the best idea, Hell it is even a Human Right.
Now, the US does something equivalent to Universal Jurisdiction (not identical but comparable). Now, when Europe (cough, the Left, cough) isn't in power the idea is horrible.
I would have expected our "enlightened" supporters of Universal Jurisdiction to be thrilled that the US has come around to their way of thinking. But the way people are reacting I am left with the assumption that they don't really care about universal justice (despite their claims) but about bitching about the US, and that they'll change the rules to make sure they can always bitch.
Feel whatever way you want, just be consistent about it. Otherwise you are a hypocrite.
Is this a new form of colonialism? Do we all 6.3 billion have to abide to the law of a mere 300 million?
Yes, soon the Pretorian Guard, a highly devoted team of the best US lawyers will becomming for you. You will submit to Pax Americana, or you will be crushed by the might of the US's Legionares.
Ok, in all seriousness, this sillyness will probably go on for quite a while, but at the rate the US is going it's going to follow the same path Rome took. It will be the top dog for a while, but internal corruption and decay of society will eventually lead to its collapse. I just hope I am alive long enough to see it; maybe then this country can get back on track.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
So if i manage to insult the Chinese government on a web site based in China i can be extradited there as well ? U.S. copyright laws and the punishment for breaking them are insane to most of the civilised world. I see no difference in the NZ extradition and the example above.
One more example of how the rules of the WTO undermines the sovereignty of the nations that belong to it..
Everyone will be forced to the lowest common denominator..
If you don't believe this, then you aren't paying attention... and its going to get really silly soon as you start seeing things that are blatantly 'ok' to do in one country but the 2nd country complains its against their laws, so they demand ( and get ) judgments..
damned EU/UN wanted a 'one world government' , this is how they will achieve it, in effect.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I just wrote a letter to The Honorable Mr Philip Ruddock. I suggest everyone else do the same. Enough political pressure and hopefully he wont be extrodited.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
I am dutch and can smoke whatever I want. Does this mean the subpoena's will start showing up at my doorstep?
No a subpeana will not show up at your doorstep unless you send the grass to the US. Before entering the US you would be searched for illegal items, right. If they found pot on you at O'Hare International Airport you would be in trouble with US law. Now let's say that you don't even come to the US. You have never been here but you send the pot via Fed Ex to the United States. You would still be in violation of US law.
This last example is exactly what happened. Packets of data where sent to MIT from Australia. If the data had stayed within Australia there would be no case for extradition.
Is this a new form of colonialism?
This story is talking about one person. If you want true colonialism perhaps you should recall this:
http://www.worldwariihistory.info/in/Holland.html
I couldn't stand that and (at least) I wrote asking the australian gov at their site www.gov.au for comments:
**
Hello,
I have just read a rumour that Australian Goverment agreed to extradite the Australian citizen to the US because he virtually "committed a crime" in the US, while never being there! Is this true?!! Are Australian citizens no longer protected by its own country and its own law??
Is that true?!!
The rumour I read is available under:
**
May MANY such question to the "Aussies" still save the case? Don't know. But I just couldn't stand...
Now, mod me down freely. My karma can't get any worse...
So what we have here is precedence in a very very bad way..
If somebody breaks a law(copyright? for fucks sake?!) in any country, the country with the harshest laws gets to extradite the accused? Even though they broke no law in their own country.
This will not work. I am breaking the law right now in China for saying,"Communist's can suck my Ballz!". Is the US gonna give my ass up to them because they now wanna incarcerate me for life?
This is flatly wrong. I think it's time to extradite the DOJ for crimes against sovereign nations and their citizens.
Maybe we can try him for going against his agreements made with the United Nations?
Question: Should we be worrying just a little bit when a large powerful country states that the international treaties and laws as laid down by the United Nations are ignorable? Maybe some Americans sitting in their comfy chair and watching the next round of lies heading their way from their elected representatives should think about their children rather than themselves...You are sowing the seeds of your destruction, and you will pay the ultimate price...
People want freedom, not American freedom. There is a HUGE difference.
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
Sounds like a pretty good deal to me (for Australia, that is)...
Since the TV judges don't have to stick to the law, you would probably get sent back home and she would wack the prosicutor's peepee on national television for being an idiot.
Were you to get a Real(tm) American Justice(tm) then you would likely be judged on the color of your skin and his or her religious convictions (it is a matter of "community standards" after all) all in the privacy of a sealed (because of the publicity) trial...
'Cause we have justice* here.
(*) your milage may vary, "justice" may only be available in the presence of a large amount of liquid assets...
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
OK, so how will this guy get a jury of his peers? Will they send out for a pool of Ausies to sit on his jury for 5 dollars a day (you pay your own transport costs to reach the court house each day too in most municipalities... 8-)
/sigh
Seriously, what are his due process rights? We royally reamed the Gitmo Guys(tm) for being foriegn and having "never quite made it to US Soil even though they were in US Custody."
By the current administrative doctrine, there is no reason to beleive that John "Screw Public Intrest" Ashcroft *wouldn't* declare him a forign terrorist for defacing our Most Holy IP and send him off to cuba for a short examination.
Oh? We would never do a thing like that? You keep telling yourself that, and don't forget to plug your ears if the Jack-Boot noise gets too loud to sleep.
ASIDE: I'm "an American" [appoligies to all the other residents of North, Central, and South America for the way we appropriated and abuse that term] and the first duty of an actually patriotic American is to CRY FOUL when our government fscks everything up. Shame that isn't working very well of late.
Whiners never Vote, or so it seems...
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
"And how many people judged Saddam Hussein guilty of having WMD?" ...I find it curious that the entire world has forgotten that not olny did Saddam have WMD in the past, but that he has USED them on the sunni's and the Kurds in his own country. Hello, if I am Saddam and I kick the weapons inspectors out of my country, (which were there for one reason only), what do you think I am going to do?
--Those who forget history are bound to repeat it.--
Not to mention MS-Office, Photoshop, games, etc.
Then let's see what this does for the alternatives.
"And how would an international court, made up of say, France, Libya, China, Germany, Turkey, Spain, Canada and Greece, be necessarily so much more impartial?"
/ hist ory.html
D =13055
4 94257 ,00.html
s /12/18/an thrax.investigation/
a x/e .html
y /0,12239, 905936,00.html
Obviously you don't have a clue of an international court works. The member are NOT appointed by the executive branch or presidents of each country. There's a fairly good selection process, among the world's top members of the judiciary branch and top law professors. There's no chance that a "mr nobody" would be finger-appointed by a country's ruler.
I suggest you visit the ICC web site at
http://www.icc-cpi.int/ataglance/whatistheicc
and learn something in the process.
quote:
"The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998, when 120 States participating in the "United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court" adopted the Statute. This is the first ever permanent, treaty based, international criminal court established to promote the rule of law and ensure that the gravest international crimes do not go unpunished."
Here's more:
http://www.icc-cpi.int/presidency.html
"The Presidency is one of the four Organs of the Court and is composed of the President and First and Second Vice-Presidents, all of whom are elected by an absolute majority of the 18 Judges of the Court for a three year renewable term."
But of course, when the hawkish Bush admin took power in the USA, the first thing he did was reverse the right steps that former president Clinton took:
Bush "unsigns" War Crimes treaty
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryI
Of course the most right-wing organizations rejoiced, knowing the US military would be safe from any prosecution:
"Bush Should Act Immediately to Protect Americans From The ICC World Court"
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=158
On August 2, 2002, President Bush signed the "American Servicemembers' Protection Act" (ASPA) into law, codifying US opposition to the ICC.
Not only that, the Bush administration pressured governments throughtout Latin America to grant US troops on military excercises "immunity" from ICC prosecution. Argentina didn't bow to the US embassy pressure, for instance, and joint military excercises were cancelled, to the dismay of US embassies which were used to telling governments what to do and how they should do things.
But G.W. Bush didn't just state his position that the US is above any international or joint courts, he also did the following:
BUSH SPURNS BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS BAN
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,
" 1972 treaty banning biological weapons has
been added to the list of international protocols Bush has decided to ignore"
It seems that Anthrax is bad when in the hands of "evil doers" but good when in the hands of the US Army:
---
"Anthrax sent to U.S. senate matches Army strain"
http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/condition
CNN: Army confirms anthrax production in Utah
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/12/12/army.anthr
------
Yahoo news: U.S. accused of trying to derail anti-torture pact
http://www.photius.com/rogue_nations/tortur
"The United States on Tuesday was accused of trying to derail a new draft international treaty against torture that has taken a decade to
negotiate."
"The treaty, which is to be debated in the U.N. Economic and Social Council beginning on Wednesday, would set up an international system
of inspections for all sites where prisoners were held, to insure that torture was not taking place."
and this:
Document details American plan to bug phones and emails of key U.N. Security Council members
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/stor
The stupid mass-media magazines publish cover stories like "Why do they hate us?". When the answer is: Exactly for the reasons outlined in this message, for the last 40+ years of international U.S. foreign policy... and the disregard for the rest of the world.
Banks charge you for their services like most companies. It costs something to provide their branches, tellers, accounts, statements, autotellers, online banking, etc.. Most banks also provide fee free accounts to students, pensioners, and other concession card holders. As much as I would also love to have a free bank account, most offer flat fee accounts for between 3 and 5 dollars, and I'd bet most customers don't even pay that much. What's the big deal?