Slashdot Mirror
Home Office To Ignore Wikipedia Founder's Petition Against O'Dwyer Extradition
An anonymous reader writes "The Home Office has confirmed home secretary Theresa May will not block TVShack founder Richard O'Dwyer's U.S. extradition, despite widespread calls for her to do so."
It would appear the fate of the tvshack founder is now sealed.
Interestingly, there have been test cases to this effect in Commonwealth countries. There was a famous test case to this effect in Australia, where someone fired a gun on one side of a state border (much of the decision was to decide precisely where the border was) and killed a person who was on the other side.
The murder, it was ruled, happened in the state where the victim was shot.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Absolutely. The UK sent people to Libya while Gaddafi was still in power in exchange for lucrative business opportunities.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
1) O'Dwyer never went to the US whilst running the site. He visited as a small child, but I don't think he has a stronger connection to the US than this.
2) The servers on which his service were being run were not in the US.
Most sensible people would therefore argue that he hasn't comitted a crime on US soil.
But it gets worse. The existing case law in the UK suggests very strongly that the UK does not consider what O'Dwyer did to be a crime. A similar site (TV links) was accused in similar circumstances and let off the hook, because it was deemed to be a 'mere conduit' (Like a safe harbour defense, rather than that deciding that *linking to things is not a crime*, for example).
Now a UK judge has said that O'Dwyer probably was criminal in this case, because he exerted considerable control over the site, and therefore cannot use the same defense.
But that's smoke and mirrors, frankly. The way we figure out if that is a crime or not is to try him in court, not to push him off to some corrupt nation where it definitely is a crime.
Nobody in our government gives a shit. They are a bunch of cunts.
Jonathanjk.com
It was the last lot that signed the extradition agreement in the first place. Why we are extraditing someone for "copyright" offences, which should really be a civil matter, is beyond me. I would have thought that the correct course of action would be for the copyright holders to bring a case for damages in the UK courts and take their chances. This lot, the last lot? They're all cunts by definition. An honest politician is all too rare a commodity these days - the web of intertwined lobbying interests seems to strangle truth at birth.
Theresa May has not said "NO" and indeed has not responded at all. The report quotes a press release that was issued before my petition was even launched. There has been no response to me at all so far.
Every signature counts as they are clearly feeling the pressure.
Jimmy Wales
Wikia