4 ms·
I think you have confused the grounds for extradition. It can generally happen when the act is a crime both where extradited from and where extradited to. Blas
by ptaipale 11y ago
I think you have confused the grounds for extradition. It can generally happen when the act is a crime both where extradited from and where extradited to.
Blasphemy is not criminal in the US, so let's not worry about that until you travel to Turkey or EU countries where "hate laws" apply.
Money laundering, fraud etc. on the other hand are illegal both in New Zealand and the US, so extradition grounds are there.
The fact that Kim Schmitz has never been to US does not mean that what he's done wouldn't be relevant to US and US laws wouldn't apply.
As an example, had Hideki Tojo ever set foot in the US? Not that I know - he might have, but it's not relevant. His actions were clearly seen on the US soil, and Americans did execute him by hanging.
- revelation 11y agoIt's illegal in both, but most importantly, the crime happened in both. So why should US laws take precedence?
- ptaipale 11y agoBecause a vast majority of copyright holders whose rights were infringed are based in US?
- bbarn 11y agoComparing a war general to a con artist? Not only that, Tojo was tried before an international panel, not just the US, and largely used as a figurehead to take blame and avoid execution of the royal family. BIG difference between world war and stealing movies.
- ptaipale 11y agoWell, Tojo was just one example; Japan very clearly wasn't part of the international panel that condemned him. Perhaps Kim Schmitz is also a sort of figurehead here. I have not doubt that the amount of losses that copyright holders claim were lost due to his actions are vastly exaggerated. On the other hand I have no doubt that Schmitz has been making considerable profit out of a copyright infringement racket.