DrinkOrDie Warez Trader to be Extradited to U.S.

femto writes "Hew Raymond Griffiths, alleged to be one of the leaders of the warez group DrinkOrDie, is to be extradited to the United States after losing an appeal. The case is of interest as the appeal was based on the fact that during the offences, alleged to have been committed in the US, the accused did not leave Australia."

Comments

DrinkOrDie Link

[The Amazing Fish Boy]

In a legal dispute between a DrinkOrDie member and the United States Government, why link to a United States Government document on the group? It's a little biased.

Wikipedia, perhaps a more neutral source, has an article on DrinkOrDie

Re:DrinkOrDie Link

[Anonymous Coward]

And the US Government doesn't even know what they're talking about:

"Beginning in the early 1990s, groups of computer hackers began organizing into competitive gangs that stole software, "cracked" or removed its protections, then posted it on the Internet for distribution by others."

I guess they were too busy dealing with the communists in the 1980's so they missed the "pirates" by a decade. I remember cracking groups existed in the early 1980's. They weren't called "Warez community", they didn't use internet and the PC's, but they were very active in the Sinclair, Commodore 64 and later Amiga games scene. But they weren't hurting M$'s profits, so they must have been innocent at that time...

Re:To those in Australia

[Jacques Chester]

Actually I think you'll find that John Howard is popular because during his tenure:

1. Interest rates fell. A lot. For a long time. He's 9 years in and only now are they rising.
2. Unemployment fell. A lot. It's still falling, to the point where Australia is seeing serious skills shortages.
3. Real Household Wealth rose. A lot.

On the downside:

1. Household debt is way up. A lot of this is easy peasy consumer credit and borrowing for investment property ("Negative Gearing"). When this bubble bursts, the Liberals' time in office will end.
2. Government spending is way up. Particularly through the GST. Americans: heed the lesson that consumption taxes don't replace income tax; they just get spent together.
3. Blossoming trade deficits. For those who care, though we've run deficits essentially uninterrupted for over a hundred years and we're doing OK so far.

For most Australians, the defence of Australia against Indonesia is far from their minds. In truth, we'll do more for our security by being honest with Indonesia (rather than sucking up), and by trading with them. Both of these are pretty much stock standard Howard policy.

Re:Someone explain...

[mlyle]

You are confused.

Copyright infringement isn't a criminal act in Australia

(2) A person shall not, at a time when copyright subsists in a work, distribute:
(a) for the purpose of trade; or
(b) for any other purpose to an extent that affects prejudicially the owner of the copyright;
an article that the person knows, or ought reasonably to know, to be an infringing copy of the work.
...

(6AA) If:
(a) a person contravenes subsection (1), (2) or (2A); and
(b) the article to which the contravention relates is an infringing copy because it was made by converting
a work or other subject-matter from hardcopy or analog form into a digital or other electronic
machine-readable form;
the person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction by a fine of not more than 850 penalty
units and/or imprisonment for not more than 5 years.

Additional sections exist for nondigital distribution, other modes of violation, etc. Source: Australian Copyright Act of 1968, as amended.

Re:Weird.

[TDRighteo]

It's always amusing to watch somebody not from Australia pull out the "settled by convicts" line, with the expectation that it will make Australians uncomfortable. It hasn't for about 30 years or more.

Seriously, which sorts of people do you think got transported to Australia?
a) murderers and rapists
b) political prisoners
c) small-time theives and vandals
d) bankrupts

If you answered a), and you are an American, you have a most astoundingly interesting view of the British justice system at the turn of the 19th century - especially in light of the fact that such people could be executed today if they were US citizens.

Seeing as b), c) and d) were all transportable offences, which practically anybody's point of view - let alone an Australian's - is a little on the harsh side, why should anybody give a damn?

Today, it's considered a small matter of pride if you can prove that one of your ancestors was transported to Australia because of their part in an Irish rebellion, their theft of a loaf of bread, or their fall on hard times. Most of those offences practically scream "underdog" - a status that Australian politicians and sporting coaches scramble after to this day. ;-)

Semantics

[abulafia]

I said potentially, so don't bother playing semantics.

So... what are you arguing against, if you don't like semantic games? Let's look...(from parent):

You have to love how they demonize everyone by using labels like "gang of internet pirates"

"Gang" and "pirate" both have specific, rather loaded meanings. Teh intarnet just makes it sound current, edgy and like consumer-consumer communication is new and stuff, and must be suppressed for the good of buggy-whip makers everywhere.

If you want to defend attacks on copyright infringers, a great place to start would be comparing them to other white-collar crime (because that's what this is), and explain how defrauding thousands for millions is less bad than copying music. Really, go compare punishments (and by this I mean civil settlements as well as penalties - compare the reparations with the putative deprivation from interested parties). After all, we have a rational legal system, right?

I realize that is a digression, but I don't think it is a herring, red or otherwise. Liquidating the company's retirement plan to prop up quarterly profit wins you a slap, and distributing music should bankrupt you instead?

Oh, wait - bankruptcy is now only for the rich.