×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cambodia To Extradite Gottfrid Svartholm

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the it's-because-of-my-name-isn't-it? dept.

Piracy 126

judgecorp writes "The Cambodian authorities have said they will extradite Gottfrid Svartholm who is wanted in Sweden for his part in founding file sharing site The Pirate Bay. As there is no extradition treaty between Sweden and Cambodia, Svartholm is being extradited under immigration law, so it is not yet clear whether he will actually be sent to Sweden."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

126 comments

OH, NOT EXECUTE ?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41222925)

Too bad !!

Extradition Laws (5, Informative)

Quick Reply (688867) | about a year and a half ago | (#41222975)

I think that it is quite clear by now that the laws don't really matter in cases like this. The MAFIAA will get him one way or another.

Re:Extradition Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223039)

Seriously though, Scandanvian "jails" are pretty sweet, all things considered. look it up. I'm pretty sure I'd rather be a "prisoner" in Sweden than an average joe in Cambodia.

 

Re:Extradition Laws (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223101)

Except the moment that anyone who is extradited to Sweden steps off the plane in Sweden, the US-Sweden extradition laws take precedence to whatever local laws may/may not have been broken in Sweden.

They won't even get a trial that bought them to the Sweden in the first place, once the fact of the matter is that they are physically in Sweden, Sweden-US extradition laws take over and they will be on the next plane to United States.

Re:Extradition Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223187)

[citation needed]

Re:Extradition Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223243)

Look it up.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

Rei (128717) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224421)

Sorry, but a bunch of random people saying something on the internet does not a fact make.

Are you referring to the one case eleven years ago where two refugees incorrectly identified as terrorists were kicked out of the country, and using that to say "There you go, see, the whole system is horrible"? The (peer-reviewed) World Justice Project ranks Sweden the best on the planet in terms of fundamental rights. Sweden's lowest ranking is a mere #7, and that's for letting people off the hook too easily.

Re:Extradition Laws (0, Flamebait)

tnk1 (899206) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223279)

That would make sense if Gottfrid Svartholm was wanted for arrest in the US, but he's not. There's no outstanding warrants or indictments for him.

You've been listening to Julian Assange a little too much. Another person who thinks he'll immediately be extradited to the US from Sweden for a crime that no one has indicted him for here. At least in his case, people in the US actually know who Assange is and want him prosecuted, but no one knows who Gottfrid is. Either way, neither of them are at any imminent risk of being turned over to the US.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223343)

That would make sense if Gottfrid Svartholm was wanted for arrest in the US, but he's not. There's no outstanding warrants or indictments for him.

Of course, they don't want to scare him off. They will promptly post them once he sets his foot on Swedish soil.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

tnk1 (899206) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223487)

As far as I know, he hasn't broken any criminal laws in the US, although I'm certain he'd be sued within an inch of his life if he was a US national.

Copyright infringement is not a criminal charge in the US, and no one is going to extradite him for a civil suit. Civil suits are private matters, not ones where you will involve extradition.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

tnk1 (899206) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223639)

I stand corrected. He's fucked.

Actually, I doubt the US will get involved, but reviewing the other examples indicates it's at least possible.

Re:Extradition Laws (4, Informative)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223645)

Of course, they don't want to scare him off. They will promptly post them once he sets his foot on Swedish soil.

I seriously hope that when this doesn't happen you will wake up and realize you are completely out of touch with reality. Do you realize you just completely made that up based on purse speculation? Why would you think he'd be extradited to the US, if none of the other pirate bay people were?

And if it does happen, what will YOU do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224331)

Hmmm?

Re:And if it does happen, what will YOU do? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#41230013)

And if it does happen, what will YOU do? (Score:0) by Anonymous

When the facts change, I change my views to match them. Only an idiot would do otherwise.

Re:Extradition Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224619)

Not extradited. Yet. I'm sure he'll be dipped in fuck if he's gonna actually put that to the test to see what happens.

Re:Extradition Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41225523)

This sounds like some new fangled drug lingo... might explain some of the posts in this thread.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

Uberbah (647458) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224003)

for a crime that no one has indicted him for here

The indictment is sealed. [rollingstone.com]

Either way, neither of them are at any imminent risk of being turned over to the US.

Assange has stated that he will voluntarily return to Sweden if they promise not to hand him over the U.S. Rather than making such an easy promise, TPTB have put Assange's attorney on a terror watch list [indianexpress.com] instead.

Re:Extradition Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224341)

It's not an easy promise at all. In fact, it's a very, very difficult one. It would require changing the constitution to remove all the stuff about the independence of the judiciary. Moron.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

Rei (128717) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224609)

That Indian Express story is recycling of an old story. Saw that same thing a long time ago when it actually happened. Not sure why it suddenly sprung to life again.

Even the leaked conversation of the Aussies, who Assange's followers generally cite as evidence that there was a grand jury, don't believe the indictment claim is what you're making it out to be [sott.net] .

"Commentators have ... suggested that the source may have been referring to a draft indictment used by prosecutors to 'game out' possible charges," the embassy reported in February. "There is no way to confirm the veracity of the information through official sources."

The last real movement on this possible indictment was 2010. *Before* the whole rape thing started.

It gets less and less likely with everything that he will ever be indicted. The simplest way for the US would have been to wait for Assange - famous for jetsetting all over the world - to head to a non-European country which would extradite, thus avoiding EU restrictions on extradition about the death penalty or abuse. Next would have been to get him in a European country with a less restrictive extradition treaty than Sweden (like the UK), without any other complicating charges. The next best would have been to get him in Sweden before the complicating charges, which give rise to questions of prosecutorial priority. The next best would have been to get him after the charges had been announced but before Assange fled to the UK, involving a second nation's court system in the process and complicating any potential extradition further. Next best would have been before the UK court system had ruled completely in favor of re-extradition, putting a new order to send him that the US would have to find a way to get priority over. The absolute worst would be to have Assange back in Swedish custody, with an EAW, an Interpol warrant, and a Swedish arrest warrant, with any appeal from Assange having to be approved by the Swedish judiciary, the Swedish government, the UK judiciary, the UK government, the ECHR, and having guarantees of no abuse or death penalty and that the extradition is not for military or intelligence matters.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223441)

Isn't an international airport considered international land, and thus no jurisdiction has full authority over it? Kinda like the situation in that bad movie 'The Terminal'?

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223493)

No, that is a myth. I dare you to commit a crime while transiting through an international terminal and see what happens.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223511)

nope. The soil on which an international airport sits, hence any aircraft sitting on the tarmac, is under the full legal jurisdiction of the country to which that soil is attached.

Re:Extradition Laws (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | about a year and a half ago | (#41226089)

This guy is wanted by Swedish law, is not wanted by the US. This trope of Sweden being the next repressive police state is absurd.

No way! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223023)

this can't happen. I just loved him in "Problem Child" and still remember him from "USA, Up All Night"

It's tough, kid, but it's life (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223071)

Don't forget to pack a wife.

Re:It's tough, kid, but it's life (1)

LizardKing (5245) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223739)

Play ethnicky jazz
To parade your snazz
That you download from the Pirate Bay
Braggin' that you know
How to skip out on a charge
Where the Swedish law's got no say

Re:It's tough, kid, but it's life (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41226351)

It's time to taste what you most fear
Right Guard will not help you here
Brace yourself my dear
Brace yourself my dear

Deport NOT Extradite (5, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223087)

Deport and Extradite are not the same thing.

Deport - Kick out of the country and we don't care where you go

Extradite - Hand over to the authorities of another country which which you have an extradition treaty.
 
TFA says Deport .. TFS says Extradite. Sheesh .. I'd be embarrassed if I was paying for access to this site.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223121)

TFA says:

“We just know we will deport him. As to which country, that would be up to the Swedish side,” the spokesperson said.

Why would it be up to Sweden?

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223157)

I don't know but I have a feeling they may decide to deport him to the states so he can have the same treatment as Manning.
Manning, Assange, Svartholm, all heros that should be set free.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223667)

Let's get something straight here. Manning, Assange and Svartholm. None of them are heroes.

Manning released content he wasn't authorized to. It wasn't his role/place to do what he did and he did so knowingly. He deserves the book be thrown at him simply because when you agree to the dictates of an oath, you are bound by them. He shouldn't have entered the military if he wasn't going to live up to its requirements upon him.

Assange released content he was not only unauthorized to possess, but continued to do so. There is no respect for these individuals as they've already shown a complete lack of respect for others information. His actions put people's lives in danger, and yes, in this case primarily US citizens which is why the US is going after him.

Svartholm without questions knows what he was doing is quite illegal in most countries of the world and did so knowing full well the possible repercussions. What is respectable about someone that takes a stand but runs when caught?

I'm not saying that the acts exposed by Manning and Assange aren't horrible, or not deserving attention. I'm not saying that Svartholm doesn't have a valid axe to grind based on the MPAA & RIAA's mafia like manners of operations. I'm solely saying that these people stood for what they believe, knowing the possible outcomes should they be caught and now that they are caught/found out/sentenced/etc. they are trying however they can to escape their consequences and heroes don't do that.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

Rakarra (112805) | about a year and a half ago | (#41227687)

Manning released content he wasn't authorized to. It wasn't his role/place to do what he did and he did so knowingly. He deserves the book be thrown at him simply because when you agree to the dictates of an oath, you are bound by them. He shouldn't have entered the military if he wasn't going to live up to its requirements upon him.

So you say there is no role out there for whistleblowers? That only outsiders can attempt to uncover because insiders have some sort of loyalty oath?

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

cavreader (1903280) | about a year and a half ago | (#41229111)

Manning broke more than an oath he broke very specific military laws which are a little different than civilian laws. The US is not going to bother with Assange because they do not have a case. Although they will probably remain vague and non-committal on the issue just to keep Assange nervous. The most he could ever be charged with is receiving stolen property and even that charge would be stretching things. The maelstrom has already subsided concerning the released data and the US is not going after Assange and risk putting the spotlight back on the information release. And the US doesn't need Sweden's assistance in grabbing Assange and if they wanted him they would already have him. All this BS about Assange being extradited to the US to face charges that include the death penalty ridiculous. Sweden, along with a lot of other countries cannot and do not extradite people to a 3rd party if the death penalty is even remotely possible.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223231)

Maybe because they will ask us?

Nice of them.

Personally I don't think Anakata is responsible for millions of other peoples copyright violation or should be punished for it. He's not the one commiting the crime (well, I guess helping make it happen is the reason they use but in my ideology/thoughts/reasoning rather than the law.)

Imho the reason the TPB guys are targetted is that they are few and it's much easier to get acceptance for catching them rather than various people themselves (such as the one million or so Swedes who have likely used TPB in breach of copyright laws.)

I don't think it's right that a few get punished for the act of others.

But imho we've had shitty justice ministers.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (3, Interesting)

tnk1 (899206) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223361)

Probably because the Swedes made the request.

Extradition treaty or not, if the Swedes request him, and there is no bar to complying, the Cambodians can very simply comply with the Swedes' request. If he had not broken immigration law, there would probably be some protections for him, but not necessarily. In this case, the Cambodians want to deport him and the Swedes have asked for his return. There is really no reason for them to not accede to that request.

The interesting thing with a deportation is the deporting country will generally want to place the deportee in a place where they will be able to be taken care of, usually their home country. Sweden is probably very willing to put him up, all expenses paid, in a nice jail cell. Win-win for everyone. Except for Gottfrid Svartholm, of course.

Interesting timing of the arrest (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224227)

According to Cambodia Daily, US top trade representative Ron Kirk met with ASEAN economic ministers in Siem Reap City the day he [Gottfrid] got arrested... Kinda like the decision to raid and prosecute TPB had absolutely nothing to do with the Swedish politicians' visit in the US shortly before..

Re:Interesting timing of the arrest (1)

tnk1 (899206) | about a year and a half ago | (#41225757)

I wouldn't be surprised. Even if he was not extradited to the US, US interests are served by having him in a Swedish jail.

Or it could be a coincidence. Either way, if the US can snare him more easily for breaking Swedish law, that doesn't seem like a particularly nefarious deed. Unless you're suggesting that Sweden should not enforce its own laws to protect him from a legal indictment in the US and possible extradition.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

jrumney (197329) | about a year and a half ago | (#41230339)

Sweden has to agree to take him. You can't deport someone to a country that isn't willing to take the person you are deporting (though if he is a Swedish citizen, I don't think Sweden has any grounds for refusal, so this is probably just a formality).

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41231481)

You can't deport someone to a country that isn't willing to take the person you are deporting

if Mexico doesn't want its people back, we can just shoot them

I like the suggested reads (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223163)

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/08/12/220224/is-sexual-harassment-part-of-hacker-culture?sdsrc=popbyskid [slashdot.org]

"Is sexual harassment part of the hacker culture?"

Well.. Just take a look on the Facebook Wikileaks group and the posts after posts after posts regarding Assange and people who think he should get away from a rape investigation.

Funny.

Re:I like the suggested reads (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223235)

If you are going to accuse someone of some sort of sexual deviance when the entire NSA and black ops establishment is pissed off at them there better be DAMN good proof. If not whoever makes the accusation should be held with the highest suspicion you can muster. If you think the US if puppeteering people everywhere you must be naive.

Re:I like the suggested reads (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223313)

It's just an investigation. He haven't been sentenced. (English isn't my native language but what I mean is that the court haven't decided and judged him for anything.)

I don't know what all you wrote mean but I suppose the suspicion can be pretty low for and an investigation would still be ok. Why should they (the police) ignore an investigation? With total lack of evidence maybe it would be hard to get somewhere and hence one reason.

People blend Swedish police wanting him for questioning in a rape case and possible extradition and whatever court cases and sentences in the US.

Wanting to questioning him in a rape case and giving him a death sentence isn't really the same thing and the same case. The former isn't all that bad. But the words are pretty strong against it.

Re:I like the suggested reads (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223341)

And yeah sorry for possibly using the wrong words. I don't really know how it is and what words I should use. I think it's questioning? So maybe not investigation. The intent isn't to make it seem worse than it is or trash talk Assange.

Re:I like the suggested reads (1)

tsotha (720379) | about a year and a half ago | (#41226977)

The concern is regardless of the outcome of the rape charges, extradition to Sweden will mean eventual extradition from Sweden to the US. If your goal was to get him to Sweden as the first step in getting him to the US, these charges are a great vehicle for the purpose - they're purely based on accusation with no associated physical evidence. Assuming the Swedes are willing to extradite him to the US, it doesn't matter if the rape case falls apart the minute he sets foot on Swedish soil. Eventually he'll be serving a long, long sentence in the US.

Re:I like the suggested reads (1)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223513)

Assange isn't even wanted for sexual assault or any crime for that matter, he is wanted for questioning. He has time and time again said that he would submit to questioning via video chat, but the Swedish Government has said that is not acceptable

Re:I like the suggested reads (0)

Goaway (82658) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223623)

He is wanted for questioning and arrest. You can not arrest him over video chat.

WRONG!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224409)

The European Arrest Warrant was to detain for questioning. If the warrant was for questioning AND ARREST, then Sweden are in breach of international law and are in *serious* trouble. Invasion-of-soverign-state level of trouble.

The EAW allows for "arrest" as the reason for issuing the warrant, so it's not that the arrest part is missing because they aren't allowed to issue an European ARREST Warrant for the reason of arrest. Is it.

Re:I like the suggested reads (0)

digitig (1056110) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223637)

He is wanted for arrest in Sweden, and questioning whilst under arrest. Having a video chat with somebody is hardly a viable substitute for arresting them.

Re:I like the suggested reads (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223601)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223173)

They will deport him to another country where he will be extradited. Easy-peasy.

I must say, I'm rather disappointed by the lack of civil disobedience in these sorts of cases recently. The perps flee jurisdictions to save their own skins, rather than show how corrupt the system is by being unjustly imprisoned. What would Dr. King say? Nelson Mandela didn't flee to Angola to escape an unfair judicial system. A fleeing perp is just another lousy criminal, a martyr is a hero forever.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223385)

If you think we need martyrs, by all means, be one yourself. Do not ask other people to be one for you.

Civil disobedience does not imply in surrendering yourself, it means fighting the system. The act of not complying with government decisions as criminal sentences or arrest warrants is civil disobedience in itself.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

fnj (64210) | about a year and a half ago | (#41229745)

Civil disobedience does not imply in surrendering yourself, it means fighting the system.

Actually, what separates civil disobedience from general resistance against unjust laws is pretty much acceptance of the consequences. Do you think Rosa Parks tried to run away before the arrival of the police who were summoned? The bus driver stood in front of Ms. Parks and told her if she didn't stand up and move, he would "have to" call the police and have her arrested. She replied that she recognized that was his prerogative, and stood her ground.

In Sophocles' play, Antigone decides that there is an imperative higher than human law and defies a cruel regime's prohibition against burying her slain brother. She is unafraid of the consequences, does not run away, and is herself slain.

David Thoreau, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. all were prominently involved in developing the doctrine of civil disobediance or civil resistance where the governmental structure is too resistant to morally imperative reform. They believed that running away was not the most productive strategy for societal good. The Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, decided on a strategy of violent intervention and self preservation to further his aims, which he believed were similar.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (3, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224475)

Dr King wouldn't "say" anything, he'd been in solitary if he was lucky, in Gitmo as a terrorist if not.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year and a half ago | (#41229741)

Is that actually true, or is it just what you want to believe? "Gitmo" is for terrorists captured on the battlefield, although a certain sort of person will not be dissuaded from believing otherwise.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41229753)

For a given value of terrorist and battlefield.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (3, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year and a half ago | (#41230063)

After the president stated (and wasn't stopped or even challenged) that the POTUS has the right to kill Americans without trial? I think all bets are off. We don't even know for certain WHO is being held at Gitmo and the rendition prisons, we know that people from countries we are supposedly allied with like Canada and the UK have been tortured and held without trial, and the simple fact that you have a government that not only admits it tortures but has members of it openly bragging about it means that frankly your rights don't mean jack shit anymore.

I would urge you to watch this video [youtube.com] from start to finish. Just a simple little lecture, the person giving it is not a rabble rouser but an accomplished journalist and self proclaimed "little Jewish girl" who is already feeling the chilling effects like watchlists being aimed at her. Her crime? Talking about constitutional rights and what we need to do to preserve our freedoms. When openly talking about the constitution can get you put on watchlists friend then i think we both agree the shit ain't what it seems and most of those 'rights" that many here talk about are just useless platitudes. Because if you ever get into a position where you actually need those rights the state has already implemented mechanisms where they can take them away.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223181)

read the fucking article, Timothy.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223329)

Deport and Extradite are not the same thing.

Deport - Kick out of the country and we don't care where you go

Extradite - Hand over to the authorities of another country which which you have an extradition treaty.

TFA says Deport .. TFS says Extradite. Sheesh .. I'd be embarrassed if I was paying for access to this site.

I think the confusion over which term applies is warranted. After all, Cambodia might not care what happens to him (they already got their bribe), but American and Swedish forces have probably already surrounded the entire Cambodian border (land and water) to make sure he ends up in a Gitmo-style prison

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

Rei (128717) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224627)

To complicate it further, what's going on with Assange is yet another term altogether, "surrender" - surrendering (under an EAW) being neither deportation nor extradition, but more like what goes on between states in the US with handing a prisoner between jurisdictions.

Re:Deport NOT Extradite (1)

tsotha (720379) | about a year and a half ago | (#41226823)

While that's technically true, there's a difference between leaving a country and being deported. When you leave it's your choice where you go next. When you're deported the government typically decides where you go - almost always to the country on your passport. In this case it would be very unusual for him to end up in any country other than Sweden. Even if it's not technically extradition, you'll be hard pressed to find a practical difference.

Are you better off than 4 years ago? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223103)

I am. My salary has increased by about $10,000, and my net worth is up by about $100,000.
Going forward, to minimize my taxes my best bet might be to vote for Mittster. But I am more interested in maximizing growth as opposed to minimizing taxes, and I'll ride the horse that got me here.
My vote will be for Barack Obama.

Re:Are you better off than 4 years ago? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223259)

Hello TSA pervert. Did you rape any kids today?

Re:Are you better off than 4 years ago? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223311)

When the time comes. You're in the first group going up aginst the wall.

Re:Are you better off than 4 years ago? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223355)

Liberal Schills are out early tonight.

Re:Are you better off than 4 years ago? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223457)

ITT, people who can't figure out the loss in their purchasing power. What you think printing 16 trillion dollars has no effect on the value of your dollar? "How come I make 100k a year and can't afford to go on vacation in europe anymore?" is always a good one.

Re:Are you better off than 4 years ago? (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224561)

Have you actually seen the USD/EUR rates? It's at the same levels as before the crisis/loans.

Related? (1)

leomekenkamp (566309) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223261)

If you google for "gottfrid svartholm cambodia us high trade", the first hit reads:

Latest News - Cambodia Guide
www.camboguide.com > Country
5 days ago - Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm Arrested In Cambodia - Latest
News ... Iran, Cambodia Have High Potentials For Enhancing Ties - Latest News ....
Top U.S. trade official heads to Southeast Asia for talks - Latest News ...

Any change the first and the last item are in any way related?

Re:Related? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224339)

Of course not - just like how the decision to raid and prosecute TPB had absolutely nothing to do with the Swedish politicians' visit in the US shortly before... cogh, cough

What's Cambodia getting out of the deal? (5, Interesting)

uigrad_2000 (398500) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223291)

I visited a friend in Phnom Penh a couple of years ago. They have lots of "DVD shops" in any of their shopping areas. 100% of the DVDs are pirated. If you want a non-pirated DVD, you have to find an airport. I think there's also one high class mall that contains one dvd store with non-pirated DVDs and software.

Cambodia has no taxes. The money the government runs on is half bribes and half foreign aid. To bring in more foreign aid, they know they have to stop piracy, but that's their only incentive. When foreign ambassadors come to visit, they'll send out a signal to all the DVD shops, and they'll all close down. 3 days later, they all come back.

Re:What's Cambodia getting out of the deal? (1)

Hatta (162192) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223949)

The proper question is, what would Cambodia get out of a high profile extradition fight?

Re:What's Cambodia getting out of the deal? (0)

manaway (53637) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224789)

I visited a friend in Phnom Penh a couple of years ago. They have lots of "DVD shops" in any of their shopping areas. 100% of the DVDs are pirated.

The US, when it was parting ways with the British, was the same way; publishing texts with British copyright. All first world countries ignored copyrights and patents of other countries until their local publishers established themselves because there just wasn't all that much original content available. Then the newly-established country, with its now active content-producing businesses, starts making agreements with other first world publishers while harassing poorer countries for ignoring copyrights, patents, trademarks, and such.

What should Cambodia do with Svartholm? That's Cambodia's decision.

Re:What's Cambodia getting out of the deal? (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#41227413)

Look it up, Cambodia has business taxes. Cambodia has corporate income tax, and also additional taxes for companies that deal in natural resources.

Rapists, Murderers, and Bank Robbers thank you (3, Funny)

moniker127 (1290002) | about a year and a half ago | (#41223349)

I stand as chairman for the Society for Advancement of Rapists Murderers and Bank Robbers, and I would like to pledge my most sincere thanks to you, Sweedish government, for prosecuting crimes like this instead of continuing to persecute us.

Re:Rapists, Murderers, and Bank Robbers thank you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223567)

I stand as chairman for the Society for Advancement of Rapists Murderers and Bank Robbers, and I would like to pledge my most sincere thanks to you, Sweedish government, for prosecuting crimes like this instead of continuing to persecute us.

I'll admit, I initially read that as "Society for Advancement of Rapists, Murderers and Bankers"

Re:Rapists, Murderers, and Bank Robbers thank you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223629)

Meh, same difference.

Re:Rapists, Murderers, and Bank Robbers thank you (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224733)

You probably meant "not much difference" or "same concept". If you say "same difference", you would need to have two or more differences to compare.

Re:Rapists, Murderers, and Bank Robbers thank you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224231)

Er, scratch Rapists from that ... heard of Assange I take it?

You're a rapist too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41224489)

Because I bet you didn't ask *every* time, did you. And didn't wait until she *completely woke up before frottaging, right? Then by the definition you're accusing JA of being a rapist, you are one too!

Re:Rapists, Murderers, and Bank Robbers thank you (1)

Rei (128717) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224757)

Hold now, Assange is innocent. We've all heard him say so many, many times. He's not trying to use diplomacy to get the charges dropped - quite to the contrary, he wants to go back to Sweden! He just wants guarantees (regardless of whether or not giving them would be illegal) that he won't be extradited to the US, and then he'll happily go back to Sweden to clear his name. *That's* what he's negotiating for, not to get the case dropped. Come on, Julian, tell them! [google.com] .

During the Telesur television interview, recorded earlier this week inside the embassy, Mr Assange said that he believes the situation "will be solved through diplomacy". He added: "The Swedish government could drop the case. I think this is the most likely scenario. Maybe after a thorough investigation of what happened they could drop the case. I think this will be solved in between six and 12 months. That's what I estimate."

Oh...

They dropped the case before. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41226401)

And the women themselves deny there was any rape.

Re:They dropped the case before. (1)

Rei (128717) | about a year and a half ago | (#41228325)

Right, that's why they have an attorney who's pressing forward with the charges, right? Clearly they just don't know they have an attorney, poor ignorant damsels!

Send him to the US (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41223877)

He committed crimes in the US jurisdiction against US intellectual property laws, so the US has a case. And the far harsher penalties a US court would hand down will serve to make an example of him, which given that he tried to run, will be a welcome deterrent to other pirates.

Kill the Pirates!! (1)

sdinfoserv (1793266) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224117)

I feel much safer sleeping at night know that people who share movies and songs are perused with the same tenacity as Nazi war criminals. The world is much safer knowing this vermin is almost apprehended. God save the queen!!

WSJ (1)

lexidation (1825996) | about a year and a half ago | (#41224603)

The Wall Street Journal referred to him yesterday as the "mastermind" behind the "notorious" Pirate Bay, which was an amusing use of language. Or alarming.

YOU FDAIL IT!? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41225095)

'I have to kill become an unwant3d been The best, the goodwill

The truth is extradion just like Assange Wikileaks (1)

NSN A392-99-964-5927 (1559367) | about a year and a half ago | (#41225099)

I could have broken this story; before it was issued and I do not need to read the article as the person gets deported to Sweden and then onto the USA.

Russia Today was first out of the blocks with this! Danke Timothy and others this story is informative and some people might hate the truth but the story is exactly what it is!

Svartholm is not wanted for file-sharing (1)

nickovs (115935) | about a year and a half ago | (#41227417)

It's important the appreciate that the Swedish arrest warrant for Svartholm isn't for file-sharing, it's for skipping bail and fleeing after his last round of appeals failed. Irrespective of the soundness of the original trail, the guy is a fugitive with a current conviction who's sentence has not been served. The charges he will face if he is caught now are far more serious than the ones he faced with Pirate Bay.

Except (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41228349)

You technically don't need a treaty. They can say "we don't want him, we're deporting him to his home country" and stick him on a plane with a law enforcement officer, and away he goes.

Extradition route (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41229365)

Methinks he's taking the Guantanamo Special, with a long and all expenses paid stay in the corner of the island where Castro don't visit.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...