Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
Summary: UK-US extradition policy is under scrutiny, after a UK student with a pirate link-only website could face trial in the U.S., even though his alleged crimes were not committed there.
Let's take a wild hypothetical for a minute or two.
If I were here to publish a post -- or tweet a link -- which points to copyrighted material based on popular torrenting website The Pirate Bay, as a British citizen living on British soil, should I be extradited to the United States to face copyright infringement charges?
The answer of course is: yes. At least, in the eyes of the U.S. government, it is.
(Though tempting as it was, the lawyers kindly asked me not to).
Enter the case of a British computer science student, will find out in January whether he will be extradited to the United States to face trial for a website he owned, which purportedly offered links to other external pages where content could be streamed or downloaded.
The criminal charges against 23-year-old student Richard O'Dwyer relate to TV-Shack, a website which offered links -- not content itself -- to unlicensed streams of television programmes and Hollywood films elsewhere on the web.
But questions loom over whether a UK citizen should be tried in the United States, with its server and offices thought to be in Sweden, and its domain name belonging to the Keeling Islands in Australian territory, with no direct connection to the United States in any way, shape or form.
So, why is the U.S. government trying to extradite him?
(Source: CrunchBase)
During a hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court in Central London last week, his barrister told the court that U.S. authorities are attempting to "create an unlevel playing field at trial", and that because the alleged offenses took place in the Britain, the student should face a criminal or civil trial in the UK.
John Jones, QC, on behalf of the U.S. government, argued that the victims in this case, the film and televisions studios, are in the United States and that "access to the website took place in the U.S.".
On the former, that makes a arguably fair case. On the latter, however, should the extradition go ahead, there would be almost no jurisdictions left where the student could not be tried in, seeing as TV-Shack was one of the most popular destinations on the web for videos and television-linked content.
Visiting the site now will reveal a domain seizure seal by the U.S. Department for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Shortly after it moved to the .cc domain of Australian territory, the top-level domain was again seized, as the .cc domain was managed by U.S.-based Verisign
But under British law, the site is not illegal. Last year, a court dismissed a case in which a similar linking site known as TV-Links was ruled to not have committed any offence, as the website was 'no different to Google or Yahoo' in its linking capabilities.
Similarities have been drawn between this case and that of Gary McKinnon's, who could be extradited to face computer hacking charges in the United States. McKinnon, although within the UK at the time of the hacking offences, to which he admits to have carried out, U.S. government computers were the targets.
The only viable connection here, however, is that the 'victims' of McKinnon's alleged crimes were under U.S. jurisdiction, as arguably the victims in O'Dwyer's are, thought to be the television and Hollywood film studios.
But in the hope that UK legislation could assist the 23-year-old student facing extradition, may be in for a disappointment.
The UK's attorney general Dominic Grieve MP told the House of Commons last week that while recommendations made in the recent review of the UK's extradition arrangements by Lord Justice Baker were "guidelines", the government was not compelled to follow them.
The UK's current extradition laws state that UK citizens could be prevented from facing extradition if the defence can show: "...a significant part of the conduct alleged to constitute the extradition offence is conduct in the United Kingdom, and in view of that and all the other circumstances, it would not be in the interests of justice for the person to be tried for the offence in the requesting territory".
But these so-called "forum bars", measures to block the extradition of UK citizens whose alleged crimes are committed under UK jurisdiction, were rejected.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
There's a 99% chance that he'll claim Asperger's, but that defense is somewhat overused.
Of course he should be extradited;
1. It's the world wide web - he (allegedly) committed world wide crimes.
2. He (allegedly) did the damage in the US, he should stand trial in the US
Isn't it time we stopped weeping for hackers? We know they ain't stupid, so why do we try to use stupidity as an excuse?
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
He's not a hacker. He's a search giant for tv/movies...no different than Google, should we put them on trial as well? Yes, it's "wrong" but at the same time, it's a double standard.
Not the same as Google at all
On the other hand, it sounds like this particular service was specifically disigned for searching pirated movies and nothing else.
Torrent services have the ability to shield themselves with the fact that you can get LEGAL stuff using torrents. But this guy was designed the service to be in the not-so-legal side of the search and that is were he failed to be "just like Google".
There's no such law
"it sounds like this particular service was specifically designed for searching pirated movies and nothing else"
That's no law that determines a good search engine from a bad one, at least currently, although they are trying with that SOPA.
----
CLGC, a Republican lobbyist wrote the American Bankers association offering to construct a 'negative narritive' to discredit the Occupy Wallstreet protests, and warned that if Democrats got into power then Wallstreet Banks may face regulation, advising they secretly fund Republican campaigns. Memo written by two former aids to John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Search [john boehner american bankers association] before the Republicans have that link declared illegal and extradite someone over it.
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
yes, he's no different than google, i call it another form of SEO
partman1969: Politics makes strange bedfellows
For the Democratic Party, copyright defense is all about the Benjamins...
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
1. It may be the World Wide Web but what he did is not considered a crime in all sovereign nations so he did not commit "world crimes".
2. He allegedly damaged US companies but he did not commit the crime in the US but in the UK.
Therefore he should not be extradited without a trial in the UK. And that is provided the extradition treaty even covers this sort of crime - AFAIK the treaty covers crimes like murder and treason not copyright or patent infringement which is at the heart of this.
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
I, and I suspect pretty much everyone else here, don't know enough about the actually laws to make a educated call on this but I had to respond to your comment. Long story short a number of years ago somebody ordered $1,500 worth of merchandise on my debit card from a company in CA to be delivered to my house. I received the items before they were able to get them from my front step and tried to get the local police involved. Their response was no crime had been committed in their jurisdiction, that the crime had happened in CA since that is where the items were ordered from. I don't buy that excuse but it does play here if in deed is the case.
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
Of course he SHOULD NOT be extradited. He is a British citizen in Britain doing something that may or may not be legal IN BRITAIN. This is nuts to even think about it. Just because our stupid JOD thinks it has the moral athority to rule the world or that it is a new world order does not make it so. I certainly would not want the US to extradite me to a Muslim country just because I drew a picture of Allah. The DOJ should, if they want this person prosecuted, seek a diplomatic solution through the British government and judicial system.
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
Is he a terrorist?
It was argued the delay of judicial challenges to the extradition, might cost lives.
What an embarrassing joke it's become, extraditing a website owner for linking to copyright infringements.
The treaty has to be terminated, the law says you cannot punish people without a trial, extraditing him is clearly a punishment, he should have the right to challenge the evidence and charges against him before an extradition. That treaty does not permit that.
"'accidentally' creamed off about 100,000"
Then sue him, see if you win. The idea that we let an anti-terrorist extradition treaty be used to intimidate someone for linking to claim copyright infringements, is a joke no?
A heinous misuse of a badly written treaty? An abuse of process? A disgusting attempt that threatens the core freedoms enjoyed in the UK, like due process? No?
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
I agree. This looks more like a case for a [b]civil trial[/b] in the UK than a [b]criminal trial[/b] in the US.
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
How far can you Brits bend over ?
The U.S. Justice Department is out of control. Since 9-11 Americans think anything and everything they do is acceptable, and think any ends justifies the means. Truly sad for a country that started out with such lofty ideals.
And BTW, to be extraditable to the U.S. the offense also has to be an offense in the U.K.
"ARTICLE 2
Extraditable Offenses
1. An offense shall be an extraditable offense if the conduct on which the offense is based is punishable under the laws in both States by deprivation of liberty for a period of one year or more or by a more severe penalty."
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
I believe that "both States" refers to two individual States of the U.S. e.g., Florida and Montana.
RE: Student faces U.S. extradition over 'pirate-TV link' website
"@Goldie07
I believe that "both States" refers to two individual States of the U.S. e.g., Florida and Montana. "
Wow, that's what you think? LOL. No that is not what it means. "Both States" means both signatories to the treaty i.e. U.S.A. and the U.K. This was a quotation of the wording of the US-UK extradition treaty.
You don't happen to work for the Justice Dept. do you ??