×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

677 comments

NILES! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174160)

NILES GOT FIRST POST!!!

OMFG (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174163)

THE BEENIE WEENIES!

asgf asgi pegp ag [e agoig ii e83nf sf

BLUGGYBLUGGYBLUGGY (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174167)

That is all.

(Offtopic) LOTS of Slashdot articles today (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174169)

It looks like /. is taking full advantage of the Labor Day holiday (U.S.). There are at least twice as many articles on the front page as normal. Way to waste your holiday... chumps!

the joys of a wired world (1, Insightful)

thexdane (148152) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174171)

isn't nice all this technology brings us closer

tho i say for international stuff they should be tried at the hauge

Re:the joys of a wired world (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174228)

tried at the hauge

Under what laws? U.S. Laws? EU laws? Does the hague have to follow U.S. precedents? Do U.S. courts then in turn have to follow hague precedents that interpret U.S. laws? Are judges in the hague then subject to the same oversight as U.S. judges if their rulings on U.S. laws are abusive/incorrect, etc? Or at the least, can the U.S. congress pass a law to overturn a hague ruling? Or what if the hague ruling interprets U.S. Constitutional law? Are U.S. courts then bound by the hague-based interpretation of their constitution?

I'm not trying to flame ya. I'm just trying to imagine the unbelievable super-jumbo supreme sized can of worms you just described in one line....

Re:the joys of a wired world (4, Informative)

benna (614220) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174422)

I'm not advocating trying this kind of crime at the hauge but if one was to do that I don't see why US law has anything to do with it. It would be international law that people would be tried under. I don't much like that idea though because it international law is farther from the people than national law. Its really quite simple. No extradition for crimes commited on Australian soil to the US. The example always given of somebody shooting a bullet across the boarder and killing someone does't work. Murder is in all likelyhood illegal on both sides of the boarder. If its not then there should be no extradition. If it is then the country that the person is in can try them because they pulled the trigger in that country. This same thing can apply to the internet.

Hello NWO (4, Insightful)

Izago909 (637084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174173)

Does everyone remember the large protests over the last couple decades against what people perceived as the formation of a one world government? They are usually based in the U.S. and targeted at the WTO, World Bank, and U.N. I guess the Christian bible has a couple verses people interpret to mean "no one world government". Who would have thought it would be the U.S. that became the world government? I say all of us should go out tomorrow and protest our government. Also, before I get a whole bunch of conservatives calling me a troll and arguing that patriotism is defined as agreeing with the government, Let's not forget that one can hate his government, but love his country.

Re:Hello NWO (5, Interesting)

over_exposed (623791) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174203)

Well said... I agree completely with your statements, but add this into the pot. Why should someone who commits crimes against someone in another country not be held liable for those crimes simply because of geographic boundaires? Now you can argue about the defenition of crime in relation to warez until you're blue in the face, but I'm not going to tread there...

Re:Hello NWO (-1, Troll)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174223)

Why should someone who commits crimes against someone in another country not be held liable for those crimes simply because of geographic boundaires? Now you can argue about the defenition of crime in relation to warez until you're blue in the face, but I'm not going to tread there...

If you're not going to listen to his answer, why in the fuck did you ask the question?

LK

Re:Hello NWO (1)

over_exposed (623791) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174242)

When quoting a post, it's useful to pick out the relevant part of the post you're referring to. It's also helpful to point out which "answer" you're referring to in the original post. Fill me in on the details and I can do my best to respond appropriately.

Re:Hello NWO (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174289)

When quoting a post, it's useful to pick out the relevant part of the post you're referring to. It's also helpful to point out which "answer" you're referring to in the original post. Fill me in on the details and I can do my best to respond appropriately.

I did. I quoted your question and in the next sentence you made it clear that you weren't interested in listening to the answer.

LK

Re:Hello NWO (5, Insightful)

Veridium (752431) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174231)

Why should someone who commits crimes against someone in another country not be held liable for those crimes simply because of geographic boundaires?

I'm not going to touch the definition of crime bit with regards to warez, but I think if you commit a crime, you should be tried by the laws of the country you were in at the time you commited it.

Re:Hello NWO (2, Insightful)

stubear (130454) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174263)

Where did the crime occur though? He was moving bits around and some of these bits were moved within the US, not just within Austrailia. Drug kingpins in Columbia found themselves being hunted by the US military and Law Enforcement even though they never stepped foot in the US, they merely ran criminal organizations which sold drugs within US borders. This is a very similar type of crime and he should be happy we didn't send in Delta like we did for Pablo Escobar.

Re:Hello NWO (4, Insightful)

Veridium (752431) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174313)

Where did the crime occur though?

This really isn't as tricky as lawyers make it out to be. In fact, it's because of BSing lawyers that this is even complex. Who comittted the crime? The person, or the bits? Now, where was the person when he comitted the crime?

Yeah, I know fscking lawyers and politicians will argue otherwise, but really, this is truly the most logical way of looking at it.

Re:Hello NWO (3, Insightful)

mlyle (148697) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174381)

By this logic, arguably the US wouldn't be able to try Osama Bin Laden if he was captured, despite the fact that he allegedly facilitated and conspired in the murder of 3000 people in the US. And the country whose laws he was under at the time wasn't particularly interested in trying him either.

Likewise, if someone committed bank fraud from Australia against the US, it would hardly be the Australian authorities investigating it, nor would anyone in Australia be damaged-- so it wouldn't exactly be very interesting to Australian prosecutors. Hence we have extradition treaties for this type of thing.

I agree being extradited for being a indiscriminate warez kiddie is a bit extreme.

Re:Hello NWO (0)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174418)

If we capture UBL than who is going to stop us? He will be treated as a war criminal and no one will be able to stop the US Military from removing him from that country and bringing him back to the USA.

Re:Hello NWO (1)

zors (665805) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174279)

But, the internet makes that definition a little sticky. you can physically do something in one nation, but the affect is on the other nation, directly.

Re:Hello NWO (5, Interesting)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174373)

Why should someone who commits crimes against someone in another country not be held liable for those crimes simply because of geographic boundaires?

Probably the most-quoted phrase in this thread... a true troll if ever I saw one. That said, I'm biting...

Let's say you have a nice, WWII bomb shell. It might still be active, it might not. But, it's decorated your grand-uncle's porch for 30-some-odd years. Grand uncle dies, and you get it.

You sell it on EBay. Now, it's not illegal to own this shell in the US.

Suddenly, somebody from France extradites you for attempting to sell "military munitions to civil personnel". But wait a minute... it's not illegal to own that in the US! But, it is/was being sold to people IN FRANCE!

The "Intarweb thingar" had made a mess of the legal system in many respects - with courts and jurisdictions the world over scrambling to remain relevant.

In the above cases, many courts have chosen to construe the act of selling happening whereever the sale "took place" - in other words, where the customer is.

So, are you ready to defend yourself in a French court?

Re:Hello NWO (5, Insightful)

myowntrueself (607117) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174276)

"Why should someone who commits crimes against someone in another country not be held liable for those crimes simply because of geographic boundaires?"

Sure. So an Brit who offends Robert Mugabe, apparently an offence in Zimbabwe, should be extradited to stand trial in Harare.

Right.

Under the UN charter, a person cannot be tried for an act which was not illegal at the time and place it was committed.

But then we are talking about the USA (in the article) and we all know how important respect for UN conventions and international treaties are for America...

Re:Hello NWO (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174393)

Hell, the UN doesn't follow its own rules/laws so why should anyone else? Google for UN Sex for Food

Re:Hello NWO (4, Insightful)

Loadmaster (720754) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174405)

Sure. So an Brit who offends Robert Mugabe, apparently an offence in Zimbabwe, should be extradited to stand trial in Harare.

Mugabe can try, but Britain would never allow it. Just like France refuses to extradite the Unicorn Killer. In this case, the U.S. asked Australia to extradite him. They complied. An Australian court said send him to America. Seems like the U.S. respected their laws pretty well.

Re:Hello NWO (2, Informative)

Izago909 (637084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174277)

You should read the first thread of the original artice.

http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=100421&cid =8561985 [slashdot.org]

You'd better believe that people would protest the extradition of a U.S. citizen to the Saudi's for criticizing Islam.

Re:Hello NWO (1)

over_exposed (623791) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174310)

If he criticized Islam in the U.S. and they extradite him, yes I see a problem with that. If he/she is in Saudi Arabia and criticizes Islam, it's his/her damned fault and should have read up on the country and it's laws before visiting. Using the Internet, many actions initiated in your own country can have influence and effects in other countries. Does your physical location govern the enforceable law or does the sphere of influence of your action?

Re:Hello NWO (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174281)

i would agre unless there is no existing laws in the country that makes it ilegal. I mean, If the law said the speed limit is 50 mph and the other countries speed limit is 30 mph then they shouldn't be able to be prosecuted.

I know people are going to say thats a stupid analogy but it totaly relates. If no law in my country makes what i do ilegal then i should never have to worry about a law in another country that does makes it ilegal. One example might be sppeding as above, you might also think of backing up cd's or video games in denmark or somewere if it is legal and not have to worry about the DMCA when some american goes to a web server in my country and finds the tools i used/developed.

Re:Hello NWO (1)

over_exposed (623791) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174324)

Unless you're going 50 m.p.h. in the country where the speed limit is 30... It all depends on where you are or where your actions take place and what laws are applicable there.

Re:Hello NWO (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174205)

Who would have thought it would be the U.S. that became the world government?

Erm, probably just about everyone *outside* the U.S?

Re:Hello NWO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174240)

And actually quite a few of us in the states. But we we've been called Waco's for the last decade. Of course, it didn't help that alot of the NWO decriers were wacos, talking about alien conspiracies and the like. Because of them, many people won't listen to anything serious or legitimate about the NWO.

Re:Hello NWO (5, Funny)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174340)

Who would have thought it would be the U.S. that became the world government?

Been a bit out of touch for the last hundred-odd years, have you ?

Re:Hello NWO (1)

krymsin01 (700838) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174342)

The bible refers to a world gov't. It's not saying that you can't do it, only that if you do you are most likely the antichrist.

Re:Hello NWO (1)

cuz teahan (811048) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174392)

Yes, there are two presuppositions that you mention that travel within right-wing christianity. First comes from an interpretion of the Book of the Revelaton to St. John (commonly mis-called Revelations). There are several major schools of interpretation of this book, and one of the most popular (and definately the loudest) is that this book describes events of the literal end of the world, or at least an end to the world system that is not directly directed by God. Authors throughout the last two millenia have taken this approach, and then tried to tie the book's events to current events. The Jehovah Witnesses proclaimed the end of the world around a half dozen times last century. The Worldwide Church of God magazine (the name escapes me) used to feature commentary on current events in such end of the world schemes. Hal Lindsey's also made such attempts at tying Biblical prophecies to current events in his early '70's best seller 'The Late Great Planet Earth,' and subsquent books. You would think that after so many times in history so many authors made false predictions, authors would have a sense of caution about creating such works, but no, Hal wrote that the Ten Horsemen of the Apocolypse are the ten nations of the European Commoan Market. Of course, the ECM is now the EU and numbers many more than ten. I'm still waiting for Hal to issue a retraction. But the basic idea is that the Ten Horseman are national leaders or nation states, and that they unite behind the AntiChrist, which in this school of interpretation is always considered to be a single individual, often of demonic origen. Writers of this school often embellish the scriptures to suggest that this antichrist is a polician who comes to sudden absolute power while posing as a reformer, a la Adolf Hitler. (Hitler was widely speculated at the time by some to be the AntiChrist). So any wide international body can be seen as a platform for the AntiChrist to grab world political dominance and begin a reign of terror. Again, within the group of scholars who accept the notion that this revelation really did come to St John of Patmos who recorded it faithfully, there is great variety of ideas concerning how to interpret it. Most accept that chapters 1-3 concerned contemporary 1st century events. The rest of the chapters garner great controversy. The second notion you mention is often referred to as Leadership. This is an idea that, first the US is the most Christian nation on the globe, and therefore, strengthening the US's global position is important to promote Christian values. This arose largely during the Cold War, since it pitted the largely church going United States versus the officially Athiest Soviet Union. A victory against the Soviet Union meant to some a victory against atheism, so for those folks the end began to justify the means. But this idea has outlasted the Cold War, and leads many Christian thinkers, including those who influence our current president, to condone polocies that are very hard to justify when compared with the teachings of Jesus Christ.

One World Government Much? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174178)

This shit really sickens me.

Re:One World Government Much? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174315)

Why?

...doesnt look good (5, Informative)

crazyray (776321) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174183)

Unfortunately, he will probably be convicted, since the Department of Justiucs has already made agreements with his fellow DrinkOrDie members to shorten their sentences if they testify against him. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,109806,0 0.asp [pcworld.com]

Re:...doesnt look good (0, Offtopic)

belmolis (702863) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174270)

Why is it unfortunate that he will probably be convicted? If he did what he is accused of doing, why shouldn't he be convicted? Unauthorized distribution of copyrighted music and software is indeed illegal, and its hard to believe he didn't know it. While many of us, including myself, favor free software, that doesn't make it right to violate current law, on which many people's business models and livelihoods are based. Indeed, licenses such as the GPL are based on the very same copyright law. As far as I can see, this guy and people like him are common criminals, not visionaries, rebels,or heroes.

Re:...doesnt look good (1)

crazyray (776321) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174316)

I meant "unfortunately" in the sense that it's not a very good precendent to have extradition law applied to imprison members of other nations for up to fifteen years outside of their home country. My use of that word did not mean to imply that he was a hero or rebel.

Re:...doesnt look good (4, Insightful)

Izago909 (637084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174322)

Yes, how dare a foreign citizen break U.S. law while never stepping foot inside the U.S. What was he thinking? After this precedent has been set, I hope you don't violate another country's laws on the internet, because it means you could be extradited.

I hate weekends on /. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174186)

Michael the jerkoff posting stupid shit stories.

Re:I hate weekends on /. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174288)

Timmy and Michael both suck. Michael and his 'Hey everyone look at Australia!' stories and Tim with his 'Hey everyone look at the UK!' stories.

Welcome . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174190)

. . . to Guantanamo?

Nigerians (4, Funny)

TibbonZero (571809) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174194)

Now if we could only figure out a way to extradite the Nigerian Spammers...

Re:Nigerians (4, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174400)

Attention,

My name is Mr Momartin, I am the operational manager in spam prosecution section in charge of extradition and foreign relation of Nigerian Government. I am writing in respect of a Nigerian spammer who was caught on 25TH JULY,2004. There is an account opened in a bank here in Nigeria where he has stashed all of his ill-gotten funds and we need the cash to buy him a plane ticket to USA. Unfortunately, the account has no other beneficiary and until we caught the spammer he was the manager of a vast fraud scheme. The total amount involved is $26,000,000.00 USD.[Twenty Six million United States Dollar ]. We wish to start the first transfer with $6,000,000.00[Six million] and open successful transaction without any disappointment from your side,we shall re-apply for the transfer of the remaining balance to your account. Please help us fight email fraud and help us to extradite said criminal to the USA!

Yours truly, Mr Momartin.

Hey--if we can extradite people . . . (4, Interesting)

base3 (539820) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174198)

. . . for copyright "crimes," surely we can force China and Korea to turn over their spam-supporting admins, right? I'd even settle for them being tried at the Hague, so long as the death penalty were on the table.

Re:Hey--if we can extradite people . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174354)

Funny, considering most spam comes from the US [infoworld.com] .

Re:Hey--if we can extradite people . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174380)

Those figures must come from someone who doesn't see the headers of hundreds of spams. China and Korea are spam-havens; those saying otherwise are either disingenuous or in active denial.

~~~

Operation Buccaneer (5, Informative)

crazyray (776321) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174200)

Here is the DOJ memo announcing this arrest, quite possibly the only document the DoJ has released with both Ashcorft's name on it and the spelling of warez with a "Z" http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2001/December/01_crm_6 43.htm [usdoj.gov]

DOJ website has spelled "warez" right before (1)

akratic (770961) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174351)

There's quite a lot of information about Operation Buccaneer [cybercrime.gov] at the DOJ web site. It includes an overview of the investigation, a chart listing defendants' conviction dates, and past press releases.

I don't see Ashcroft's name on these webpages, but they do all spell "warez" with a "z".

so let me get this straight.... (5, Insightful)

John_Allen_Mohammed (811050) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174201)

U.S. law now supersedes the written laws of all sovereign nations? Why should I bother voting at all, if the ultimate authority lays in the hands of arrogant foreigners that do not represent me....

Re:so let me get this straight.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174212)

I hear you brother!

Re:so let me get this straight.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174213)

Pretty much. As the provinces once answered to Rome, today they answer to Washington.

~~~

Re:so let me get this straight.... (4, Informative)

damiangerous (218679) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174224)

U.S. law now supersedes the written laws of all sovereign nations?

Umm, no. The US had to go to Australia and make their case in an Australian court before an Australian magistrate (and then an Australian appeals court) who ruled based on Australian law.

Re:so let me get this straight.... (5, Informative)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174360)

Umm, no. The US had to go to Australia and make their case in an Australian court before an Australian magistrate (and then an Australian appeals court) who ruled based on Australian law.

And it's relevant to note that AUstralian copyright laws are _extremely_ strict, albeit rarely (fully) enforced. We can't even make backup copies of software we own, mix CDs of music we've bought, or record (most) things off TV without breaking copyright law.

For example, I'm amazed Apple are even able to sell the iPod here in Australia, since there's practically no way it could be used without (technically) breaking the law.

Re:so let me get this straight.... (1)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174226)

Well, if you became an arrogant foreigner you could help keep the rest of us from fucking things up.

Re:so let me get this straight.... (-1, Flamebait)

malcolmnthemid (697922) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174292)

If you break American copywright and patent laws for American products then you should accept that you can and will be punished based on our laws. If your governement will allow your extradition to stand trial, then your only quarrel should be with your government not the US. You should assume these risks when you engage in this activity. We work hard to create movies, music, and software for the world to enjoy and deserve to be paid what we deserve. If you feel we don't deserve what we charge then you have the write to not use our products (good luck).

Scary ... to say the least! (5, Insightful)

Hektor_Troy (262592) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174207)

What next? Will I be extradited for having had sex with a 16-year-old (illegal in the US)? How about drinking alcohol in public, which is illegal in many countries (Saudi Arabia for instance), or hell - buying alcohol at the tender age of 15 (illegal in the US)? How about having had sex before I was 18 (also illegal in the US)? Having had sex outside of marriage (probably illegal in Iran)? Having had anal sex while there was a third party in the sexual congress (illegal in the UK).

I'm sure I've done SOMETHING that is perfectly legal where I live, that would be sentenced very harshly in other countries. Of course the things I just mentioned are things that "hurt" other people as opposed to the almighty profit of US coorporations, so I suppose that I won't be extradited anytime soon.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (1)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174245)

I'm not trying to detract from your point, but about having sex with a 16 year old or having sex before you were 18 being illegal in the United States, neither of those are really true. The age of consent in most states is 16. There are a few in which it is 18 (and a few where it's lower) but 16 is the average. Furthermore, in the majority of states the law is smart enough to add an exception for people in close age, i.e. in many states the age of consent is 16, or two years younger than you are, so if you turn 16 and your willing girlfriend is still only 15, you're alright.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174300)

Furthermore, in the majority of states the law is smart enough to add an exception for people in close age, i.e. in many states the age of consent is 16, or two years younger than you are, so if you turn 16 and your willing girlfriend is still only 15, you're alright.

Which is kind of silly, isn't it, if the age of consent laws are in place so that people who may not have the maturity to make their decisions have those decisions made for them. In other words, little Johnny (15) isn't mature enough to decide to have sex, so Sally (older than he is by 4 years) has to be the mature one and not have sex sith him. Being within 2 years of the person's age doesn't make the younger one more able to make the decsion.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174334)

While the age of consent is 16 in most states, the way they can "get you" if they want is by charging you with corruption of a minor or exposure to a minor or other variations on that theme.

So the age of consent isn't the only thing that applies -- usually the age of consent is just the borderline between "a minor" and "a child", which of course can make a big difference but it's not a get out of jail free card to know that the person is over 16.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (2, Informative)

medelliadegray (705137) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174254)

dont be silly.

multibillion dollar corporations dont care about those crimes. therefore, the government does not care.

corrupt form the top down.

government, big business, media (which is sort of BBusiness). their having a wild Menage a Trois, and the people are oblivious to it or just no longer care.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (1)

Izago909 (637084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174262)

Perhaps you've ben asleep lately. It's a trend for first world nations to give more rights to corporations than individuals.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled reprogramming.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (5, Insightful)

terrymaster69 (792830) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174267)

Will I be extradited for having had sex with a 16-year-old (illegal in the US)?

You can be if you did in the US then left the country - depends on the situation and the extradition treaty of the country you fled to.

The idea is that he was committing crimes inside the United States - the fact that he resides in Australia means he needs to be extradited.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174421)

I'm sorry. The internet does not belong to America.

What I want to know . . . (1)

base3 (539820) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174269)

. . . as do many others here, I am certain, is whether you did any number greater than one of those things at the same time, and if so, which ones.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (5, Funny)

myowntrueself (607117) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174290)

"Will I be extradited for having had sex with a 16-year-old (illegal in the US)? How about drinking alcohol in public, which is illegal in many countries (Saudi Arabia for instance), or hell - buying alcohol at the tender age of 15 (illegal in the US)? How about having had sex before I was 18 (also illegal in the US)? Having had sex outside of marriage (probably illegal in Iran)? Having had anal sex while there was a third party in the sexual congress (illegal in the UK)."

I don't know about extradition, but theres *definitely* room for a great reality TV show in there!

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174332)

umm, i believe there has to be a law being violated in the "other country". Whats really at stake here is jurisdiction and penalties.

I don't see how any sovern nation in thier right mind would allow a foreighn government to impose thier will upon thier people. I'm sure there would be exceptions to this like if you used services or somethign from the other country like hosting a warez site on US servers to get around some sort of block or maybe using the postal system to commit mail fraud or somthign.

Jurisdiction (5, Funny)

raisedbyrobots (808710) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174388)

Age of consent is determined by state law, not federal law, so you'll have to wait for the individual states to start extradicting foreigners.

On the otherhand, if you were just trying to point out how you've had sex, then point taken.

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (1)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174394)

Umm go live in the US a bit and find out what the laws really are. It isn't illegal to have sex if your under 18, especially if both are under 18 and close in age. Hell, there are many organizations trying to teach 12 year olds to *stop* having sex. Regardless, sex/marriage/and many other related things are covered under state law, not federal, so Washington has nothing to say about it. For example, in certain states its okay to marry a relative, while in many other states it is against the law. That is also why this whole gay issue varies greatly throughout the country. Bush is trying to ban gay marriage in the nation, but really is powerless against it because its the State's job. Many more powers lay in the hands of the State then most people realize, although typically most states have generally the same legislation.
Regards,
Steve

Re:Scary ... to say the least! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174411)

You are clearly not the typical slashdotter... so neither will you get any reasonable responses NOR any pity.

Arrrr, they be hunting the pirates (5, Funny)

ryg0r (699756) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174238)

Arrrg....

Tis a sad day when ye fellow pirate BanDiDo, now has t' be keel-hauled by these land lubbers, arrrg. And so close to the day too arrgg. Avast ye!

http://www.talklikeapirate.com/ [talklikeapirate.com]

Extradite Bush! (1)

grunties (806316) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174246)

Maybe the new government of the sovereign nation of Iraq could extradite George W and charge him (along with Saddam) with mass murder.

If the tables were turned . . . (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174252)

. . . this would probably been settled by a booting.

~~~

Wasn't Drink Or Die was busted in 2001? (1)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174258)

The article alleges that Griffiths was the ringleader of an internet group called DrinkorDie, but according to the Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] , the group was busted in 2001. Also covered by Slashdot [slashdot.org] in 2002.

When will this saga end?

Extradition (2, Interesting)

weapon (783054) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174264)

One wonders wheather this has anything to do with David Hicks, a australian citizen who is being tried in the us (in guntanimo bay) for receving terrorist training, our government, until a couble of days ago (like sunday or monday) refused to lift a finger, but now they are making a effort to get him back, to be tried in australia in a propper courtroom not an ammerican miltarty tribunal (it only started on the weekend IIRC. Maybe our governments acction is because we have a election comming up in october. but anyway maybe the australian government it trying to "Bribe" the US gov to get him back.

I fear the fall of the Empire. (5, Insightful)

Dzimas (547818) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174272)

Sooner or later, the backlash against the USA will be enormous. And it will be unplesant to behold. After all, most of the world's manufacturing ain't done there... I certainly can't think of one DVD player, TV set, MP3 player (iPod included) that is made in the US. Their cars aren't the best (Dodge Neon, anyone). All that's left is a few billion dollars of entertainment industry (I'm ignoring their incredibly advanced arms industry for a sec...), and if that falls... whew. No Britney, no Ben Stiller, no ER, and no money to fund the next round of incredibly dangerous Plutonium Nyborg-tipped missiles. And, what do you know, the Chinese ones will be 10x more accurate, 100x cheaper, and available in a variety of pastels.

Re:I fear the fall of the Empire. (0, Flamebait)

d2_m_viant (811261) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174333)

The US is the major innovator and inventor in the world. Hundreds of countries livelihood is entirely dependent on the ongoing success of our economy. Our illness-fighting drugs are the lifeblood of many developing nations. Our military inventions save the lives of thousands of lives everytime our soldiers go into the field. The list is too long to do justice to in a single commented paragraph such as this, but suffice it to say...

...Our economic base is slowly deteriorating from the "producer" of worldwide products, and is moving more towards "services" based offerings. A sad reality, but a fact we must become accustomed to nonetheless.

Re:I fear the fall of the Empire. (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174353)

And, what do you know, the Chinese ones will be 10x more accurate, 100x cheaper, and available in a variety of pastels.

Except they won't be 100x cheaper. If they're the only sellers on the block, you can bet they'll command top Yuan. Greed gets to everyone. Even communists.

Typical kiwi nonesense (-1, Flamebait)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174274)

The maximum penalty is jail for at least a year.
Stupid Kiwi's and their at least maximum penalties. Either their law is really harsh or they need a dictionary ;)

(If your not a New Zealander and your thinking of modding me down, don't. If your a kiwi thinking of modding me down, I've got some hot XXX sheep if you don't :D)

Sad pirate. (4, Funny)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174284)

Yarrr... 'tis sad to be seein one o' me own kind be taken in. But that's one o' the hazards of the swashbucklin' life. This swig o' rum be for you, lad!

Very nasty precedent (4, Interesting)

dbIII (701233) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174293)

Extradition on copyright law, by the nation that keeps changing their copyright law to protect profits from Mickey Mouse! This leaves things open for ludicrous actions like prosecuting people in the project Gutenberg project outside the USA for putting things online which are decades out of copyright in their own countries.

Some time ago in Australia there was a spectacular fraudster that went to Spain to escape justice - a decade of extradition attempts got nowhere.

In my opinion, the members of the MPAA and other copyright lobbyists in the USA should have the decency to pay tax since they are consuming so much of the governments resources on this. All those big movies barely break even on paper - the IRS is expected to beleive that all of Hollywood is run as some sort of charity to the moviegoing public.

Criminals are stupid (5, Interesting)

Neo-Rio-101 (700494) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174303)

I would have thought that these pirates encrypt their fileservers, so that even if their hardware gets confiscated.... the hard disks all appear to be blank.

I mean, they're so busy breaking other people's protections..... sheesh, you would have thought that they'd employ some themselves.

I guess criminals really are stupid.

Re:Criminals are stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174382)

Encrypted hard disks appear blank? Is that your FINAL answer?

Re:Criminals are stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174409)

Yah. That's great. Until one of them tells the govt all of their passwords... think before you post next time.

Google-osity (5, Interesting)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174338)

Search Google for " wares [google.com] ". It comes up saying "Did you mean: warez".

Hehe, my brother pointed that one out to me.

Do the crime... do the time... (0, Redundant)

MSFanBoi (695480) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174345)

He broke the LAW. Like it or not, it is the LAW. It wasn't just passed under Bush, these laws stated under Clinton and the RIAA and other such organizations with TONNES of money that make butt loads of donations to both Political Parties in the US. Quite frankly, the guy deserves what he got. He prirated software, which is stealing, and now he is going to go to jail. Have fun buddy, hope you like it rough and from behind.

American law != International law (3, Insightful)

chrispyman (710460) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174350)

Since it's quite likely that this guy was violating Australian copyright laws, though probably more leanant than any US ones, why does the US feel the need to punish him HERE??? Perhaps the more disturbing issue is will this case define the internet's legal jurisdiction to be that of the United States thus ignoring the world wide scope of the internet's audience?

What about Austrailia??? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174389)

Why are most of the posts here negatively directed at the US? After all, it was Austrailia that agreed to extradite this guy. Shouln't the negativity be directed there instead?

Oh no (3, Funny)

CrypticSpawn (719164) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174390)

now I am going to be extradited to Singapore to be caned because I spit out my gum on U.S. soil!!! I am glad they don't know about my grafitti back in the day, I just might be double canned...

Make an EXAMPLE of the kiwi !! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174398)

Off-shoring, outsourcing, warez pirates -- all bad for the industry. First, we kill that bad stuff off, then we get on with things. How can we get on with things if we don't first kill of the bad stuff?

Astonishing! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174407)

Australia is giving up its own citizen for extradition by the US for an act committed on Australian soil? That's outright astonishing! And rather frightening. (Of course, we've got nothing to fear. The US would never remand over anybody for some hard questioning in a rogue state like Syria or anything like that!)

US v Griffiths (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174410)

I've just read the item about the extradition proceedings involving the above. The item is incorrect. All that has happened so far is that a single Judge of the Federal Court of Australia has held that it is POSSIBLE for the Australian Government to extradite Griffiths to the US, if it chooses. If that decision is not reversed on any appeal, then the Australian Government (in the person of the Attorney-General) will decide whether to extradite Griffiths. If the Attorney-General decides to extradite (and sometimes A-Gs haven't, even though they had the power to do so) then Griffiths can challenge the lawfulness of that decision.

Behold the power of "Free Trade" (2, Insightful)

JohnA (131062) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174420)

I think if we Americans realized the power held by our non-elected, non-accountable "trade representatives", we would be absolutely appalled.

America's Free Trade representatives require so many concessions from foreign governments for the pleasure of a "free trade" agreement with the United States.

These government employees have a mandate to spread U.S. style laws across the world. The cost is, of course, the loss of any individuality possessed by participating states.

Regardless of your feelings about the current administration, you should closely scrutinize the actions of some of the most powerful people in the administrative branch... people who have no accountability or oversight.

A Worst Case Scenario (2, Insightful)

Starji (578920) | more than 9 years ago | (#10174425)

The real problem with this is that while he may have criminally infringed on copyrights in the US, he also did so everywhere there is internet access. Like it's been said, he's never been to the US, yet he is being tried under US law. What's to keep other countries across the world with similar copyright laws from trying him for his crimes. It's not like double-jeopordy exists everywhere, let alone US double-jeopordy. Worst case this could set a precedent that if you commit a crime on the internet, every country on earth could get a piece of you. So he goes to jail for a few years in the US, then say the UK wants to try him, then maybe Germany, or France, or Canada, or whoever. That's what I'm worried about.

what countries DON'T care about western copyright? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10174431)

The reason this guy is under so much fire is simple: He violated copyright in a massive way ("US$50 million" worth) and corporations want to send a message that this is not okay. They're right: Australia respects US copyright law, and has extradiction treaties that can theoretically, and in this case demonstrably, be brought to bear on an offender.
So my question is, what country does not? Surely there is a country which simply doesn't care about western copyright, and does not have a system of laws and treaties under which the copyright of another country can cause extradition.
Now, here is the key to satiating my relentless craving for bits and bytes: the violation of copyright exists in the REPRODUCTION or DISTRIBUTION of material protected against such acts except where authorized. It says nothing about owning copyright materials.

Have you noticed that it doesn't matter how many pirate DVD's or videos you have, it is the houses with a thousand BURNERS churning out the pirate goods that get raided? THIS IS THE LAW.

So, I figure I can go to a government in which 100% of American bits and bytes are in the public domain, pay the government-owned publishing house a modest fee, and return with 100,000 pages of everything I'd ever want to read, for example, for pennies on the gram-square-meter.

This is the same as when I buy a jazz CD from 1942 sources that in France is in the public domain. (As I understand it.)

The consumer is NOT LIABLE.

Okay, comments?
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...