Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Government Seeks Extradition of UK Student For File-Sharing

Posted by Soulskill on from the if-you-can't-stand-the-heat-don't-link-to-the-kitchen dept.

Gimble writes "The BBC reports that UK student Richard O'Dwyer has lost a legal battle to block his extradition to the U.S., where he faces copyright infringement charges for running a file sharing site (ruling). O'Dwyer operated the site 'TV-Shack' from 2007 until 2010, which didn't offer any files itself, but posted links to streams and files hosted elsewhere. O'Dwyer was first arrested in June last year by British police acting on information from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The domestic investigation was subsequently dropped, but Mr. O'Dwyer was re-arrested in May on an extradition warrant to face charges in America."

18 of 409 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Well. this will be a first... by alphatel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Next up: Extradition because you violated a website's policies.

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
  2. They're just goddamned TV shows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Boycott. Stop watching, stop buying, stop feeding these asshole media publishers. If you must buy, buy used.

  3. that will tieup the courts and jury trials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Next up: Extradition because you violated a website's policies.

    that will tieup the courts and jury trials.

    Good luck getting a jury to under stand the policies and in court it will take a lot of time to read out a 50 page policies any ways.

    1. Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Doesn't the US just send a team of navy seals to pick up people they are after? I know that this case came up BEFORE Obama had that power (legally), but he does now, so this story is no longer relevant.

      Far too much hassle. Why send soldiers when a predator drone can put a stop to his filesharing permanently?

    2. Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials by Pi1grim · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The problem now is even if everyone stops watching movies and listening to music RIAA and MPAA wil simply claim that it is because of the piracy and we need a media tax. Say 20% of your total income. Or 50%. That sounds fair. And if you don't like it, there is nowhere you can go, as US is expanding their policies bought by RIAA and MPAA and paid for by your money to other countries as well.

    3. Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials by jamstar7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well then, getting your name on the watch list is a good thing. Heck, if they have more than a half of population on the watch list, then what do they do, employ the other half to watch those, who are on the list?

      Getting as many people on the watchlist creates the fine-grained control the government appears to want. Seems that the powers-that-wanna-be took lessions from Lavrentiy Beria.

      Comrade Beria was 'Uncle Joe' Stalin's hatchetman in the NKVD, precourser to the KGB. He came up through the Party ranks in the original 'Cheka' by reputedly setting up his superiors in some kind of scandal, usually coming up with evidence of sexual scandals, either real or manufactured. When his boss resigned in disgrace, Comrade Beria was standing there ready to go to work in his new job, usually purging possibly disloyal 'coworkers' in the process.

      When 'Uncle Joe' died, Beria was the frontrunner to become the 'big boss' of the Soviet Union, until Nikita Khrushchev, Gregori Malenkov, and Vyacheslav Molotov (of 'Molotov Cocktail' fame) had him arrested on over 150 counts of rape, sodomy, child molestation, and abuse of office. In the 'investigation' that followed, he was tried for high treason and reputedly executed in December 1953, although apocryphal evidence claims he was actually shot and killed during his arrest in July '53.

      Whether Beria did what they say he did is immaterial. The lession we garner from the events is, it just don't matter what you do, at the end of the day, if the powers-that-wanna-be want you bad enough, they'll find a way.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    4. Re:that will tieup the courts and jury trials by jamstar7 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Don't copy their crap. Do something else. Make your own crap. Download Creative Commons crap. Support artists who aren't down with the RIAA.

      They don't have any power if enough people stop don't buying their shit. Stop liking their shit more than you like justice. Get involved with other people online who create stuff outside of this greedy octopus.

      Great ideas. Here's what's wrong with them, worst case scenario.

      There are only a finite combination of notes playable on a scale, only so many ways they can be combined. Case in point, Vanilla Ice ripping off Queen, but I digress. There are also only so many stories to be told. Ever notice how all the 'high school kid' movies are all alike? It's the same story told over and over.

      Disney has looted everybody's childhood all over the globe and made cartoons of their favorite legends and bedtime stories, all in the public domain. They then proceded to copyright everything they could to 'secure' what they considered to be 'their' intellectual property. They tend to have fairly litigious and agressive attorneys. How long until every concept, every plot idea, every characterisation is is locked away in a Disney vault guarded by rabid lawyers? And even if you come up with what you think is an original idea, can you afford an attorney to prove it against what Disney et al can field against you?

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  4. Re:Well. this will be a first... by Magada · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's funny you should mention that.

    The entire framework of diplomacy and international relations is predicated on the principle of sovereignty, which is being joyously trampled here.

    It just means that the UK is not a real country, but rather a protectorate or colony of the US. Here's to hoping the Scots wake up and head for the exit this time around.

    --
    Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
  5. Just heard this reported on BBC Radio 4 by AccUser · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The item stated that in order for extradition to be considered, O'Dwyer had to have been accused of committing a crime that was illegal in both the UK and the USA. As far as I am aware, no crime was committed in the UK, which is why the criminal investigation was originally dropped.

    --

    Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.

  6. Google Search is not vetted by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Google doesn't choose which links appear in Google Search. The provider of an unvetted service such as Google Search or YouTube can keep its safe harbor status by following the OCILLA takedown procedure (17 USC 512) or foreign counterparts. As I understand this comment, TV-Shack may have been too vetted to qualify for the OCILLA safe harbor.

  7. Re:How is this legal? by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I really really like Russian extradition law. It's VERY simple:

    "Russian citizens can not be extradited for any offences"

    If a Russian citizen commits a crime in a foreign jurisdiction then it will be prosecuted in Russia. With some special provisions for evidence and witness testimonials.

  8. Re:How is this legal? by houghi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Extra fun part is that it is a one way street. Try getting some US military who has committed a crime in another country (while actually being there) extradited to said country.

    And that is when the crime is committed in that country with death as a result.

    Some animals are more equal then others.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  9. Re:Except this isn't an extraditable offence. by Grumbleduke · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nope - same goes for about 20 other countries, and then an even lower standard applies for EU countries. The theory is that the US authorities need to have sufficient evidence back in the US to get their arrest warrant (i.e. satisfying probable cause) that asking them to prove the same in the UK is redundant.

    It's kind of like when flying, and taking a connection, not having to go through security twice; if the second flight trusts the first flight, they can assume that you've already been sufficiently checked.

  10. Re:This was a Magistrates' Court by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The UK has fairly similar copyright laws to the US. Running a torrent site probably isn't illegal in either country as it's only a link, not the actual file. But if it *IS* illegal in one then it's quite probably illegal in the other.

    Morally it's all a bit of a mess. The movie and music industries are morally vaccuous, but that doesn't make this kid a good guy. If the accusation is right that he's made "over $230,000 in advertising revenue" from enabling other people to avoid paying for consuming the results of artistic creativity, then he's in the wrong too. However extraditing from a friendly nation with similar copyright laws seems to be vastly overstepping the mark.

  11. BBC Audio interview by sapgau · · Score: 3, Interesting

    An earlier interview with him on BBC
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16546471

  12. Re:His extradition has been granted by NSN+A392-99-964-5927 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The DPP Director of Public Prosecution authorized this. Granted your comment is quite valid and there was a Parliamentary debate over cutting ties with the UK USA extradition treaty signed up by Bush and Blair.

    The last I heard CI5 arrested this chap and he is now in custody without charge.

    Nonetheless he is still being held in detention against his will. I sincerely hope that clarifies some questions of some people and is enlightening.

    Love
    nsn

     

    --
    All cows eat grass!
  13. Re:ehhhhh by unity100 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    lets keep it concise :

    - you said u.s. hasnt been capitalist for over a century.

    that implies, u.s. was capitalist, a century ago. based on the proposition.

    and so we look at what was there 100 years ago (actually 120), and see that entire country being owned by 12 people. not even 'monopolies'. these people directly own these aspects of economy, in person.

    and none of what you speak of - ie the intricate concepts like 'barriers to entry', 'demand', 'supply' etc does not mean shit, since these people OWN the economic activity. they can kill you in the market in any way they want, or buy you out, or squeeze you out. and come up as the hero for doing that - and which was what they did, in actuality.

    and no, noone 'voted with their vallet'. that is the ultimate end of capitalism - eventually one group gets bigger than everyone else and owns everything. there is no choice in anything. NO - there is no 'make believe' in this - there is no 'invisible hand' somehow 'making intelligent choices' through citizenry and whatnot. that citizenry made their choice in 19th century, and you ended up with rockefeller et al. identically, the same citizenry is making their choices, and elected w. bush 2 times. along with those who brought acta, sopa, pipa, popa, schmogga et al.

    therefore, all you are giving me is assumptions and make believe, saying 'this will happen if that happens'. what im giving to you, is what HAPPENED.

    12 people owned entire economy of u.s. when it was, supposedly 'capitalist' as you have proposed in your statement.

    and yes, the illusion of a participatory economy and choice, is better than there being no illusion. at least, for the masses in your country. for me, they are both the same.

    but, that does not justify the stupidity of proposing to go back to 12 people owning the economy, based on the HOPE and BELIEF that 'things will just work out, "because"'.

    --
    Read radical news here
  14. Re:"WTF happened to the concept of jurisdiction?" by pjabardo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Before the end of the Soviet Union, when people criticized Communism it was common for left wingers to argue that no communist country had real socialism (I made this observation more than once...). There were several replies, one of them was what is real socialism if it doesn't exist and until it does it is only a theoretical construct. Another reply was that the existing communist regimes were probably the only outcome possible from trying to implement "real socialism".

    Today I believe that both replies have merit and here you come making the same observations for the other side so I will give you the same reply:

    (1) How do you what "real capitalism" is if it doesn't exist? For me it is only a theoretical construct that doesn't hold water in the real world.
    (2) Why do you think what is happening today in the US (and the whole world actually) isn't the logical outcome of attempting to implement "real capitalism"? "Real capitalism" has had several powerful proponents for more than 2 centuries and often in government and here we are...