9 ms·

Seems like the US want to abuse extradition here. If he's guilty of copyright infringement, then they should be able to get him in NZ. Extradition should only b

by jeza 14y ago

Seems like the US want to abuse extradition here. If he's guilty of copyright infringement, then they should be able to get him in NZ. Extradition should only be for cases where someone is physically present in a country where they commit a crime then later skip the country to avoid being caught.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
tokenizer 14y ago
As a Canadian, this really grinded some of our gears. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extradition_proceedings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extr...
- Joakal 14y ago
  As an Australian, this really grinded some of our gears. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths (This is actually altruistic copyright infringement)
  - cjrp 14y ago
    As a Brit, this really grinded some of our gears. http://goo.gl/6aqeb http://goo.gl/6aqeb (Redirect to Wiki, since apostrophes in URLs don't work).
3pt14159 14y ago
It shouldn't be for moving ones and zeros, but imagine this: I figure out a way to shield a bomb from scanners and then mail a bomb to a hospital in the states. I kill hundreds. Would it not be reasonable for treaties to come in here?
- spindritf 14y ago
  I cannot think of a situation in which extradition of own national or citizen is justifiable. If a Ruritarian citizen sends a bomb from Ruritania to Poronia, Ruritarian authorities should jail him in a Ruritarian prison after a trial in Ruritarian court. Poronian authorities should at most assist the Ruritarian prosecutor. When it comes to citizens of other countries just temporary residing in Ruritania, it may be more appropriate (cheaper, "not our problem") to just send them back, guilty or not, to be decided by a justice system in their own country. Preferably, after evaluating if there is a reasonable expectation of a fair trial. Releasing them to some third party (in this case, a German citizen to US authorities) sounds absolutely awful to me. Barbaric from the perspective of the person being sent away, and servile from the perspective of sovereign people.
  - muyuu 14y ago
    I agree, but in American culture the sentiment is different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism#Double_standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism#Double...
    - powertower 14y ago
      That's not "American" sentiment as much as it is a "Top Player" sentiment... You're blaming a state for doing something you're own state would gladly do itself if it were able to (if it had the same platform). If America lost the war of independence, then that wiki article would be called "British exceptionalism". And in another history, "Russian exceptionalism", or "Chineese exceptionalism", etc. The country level game has always been about competition rather than sharing... Where the benefits are imported, and pain is exported. It all comes down to human nature.
      - muyuu 14y ago
        The people don't need to buy into it though. I definitely don't and wouldn't. I expect fairness and don't abuse others in weaker positions than mine, not so hard on the individual scale. So basically "it's all right because they'd do the same" simply doesn't cut it.
powertower 14y ago
> Extradition should only be for cases where someone is physically present in a country where they commit a crime then later skip the country to avoid being caught. Not talking about MU or anyone/anything else in particular, but... If you run a criminal enterprise that does the majority of its business in the US, and you live overseas you can (and should be) subjugated to US laws. Even for non-criminal enterprises, you don't get to play around with another country, breaking its laws. Why should a criminal enterprise be treated differently?
- GuiA 14y ago
  >If you run a criminal enterprise that does the majority of its business in the US, and you live overseas you can (and should be) subjugated to US laws. >Even for non-criminal enterprises, you don't get to play around with another country, breaking its laws. Why should a criminal enterprise be treated differently? Yes, I'm sure a lot of Iraqis would love to see American soldiers who killed/tortured their civilians judged in their own country. I have a feeling that you might change your tune on this one though... ;)
- grecy 14y ago
  So millions of American women can be extradited to certain Arab nations because they've posted photos online of themselves without their heads covered, contrary to the local law. By doing it on the internet, they are "exposing" themselves to millions of people where that is illegal, and therefore should be extradited for it. Even the passport photo of millions of American women is illegal in certain countries... seeings that's an international document, surely they've broken the law in those countries, no?
  - powertower 14y ago
    I don't see the similarity of a person posting pictures of self on facebook, and a criminal enterprise knowingly and willfully generating revenue through copyright crimes. Really, I don't. Even if you ignore that some countries have extradition treaties which spell out exactly at what level this can happen (btw, US and Iran don't). But if you love analogies, I'm sure I can come up with one even more ridiculous, that would show my case.

by jeza 14y ago

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

tokenizer 14y ago

As a Canadian, this really grinded some of our gears. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extradition_proceedings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Emery#2005_arrest_and_extr...

Joakal 14y ago
As an Australian, this really grinded some of our gears. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths (This is actually altruistic copyright infringement)
- cjrp 14y ago
  As a Brit, this really grinded some of our gears. http://goo.gl/6aqeb http://goo.gl/6aqeb (Redirect to Wiki, since apostrophes in URLs don't work).

3pt14159 14y ago

It shouldn't be for moving ones and zeros, but imagine this: I figure out a way to shield a bomb from scanners and then mail a bomb to a hospital in the states. I kill hundreds. Would it not be reasonable for treaties to come in here?

spindritf 14y ago
I cannot think of a situation in which extradition of own national or citizen is justifiable. If a Ruritarian citizen sends a bomb from Ruritania to Poronia, Ruritarian authorities should jail him in a Ruritarian prison after a trial in Ruritarian court. Poronian authorities should at most assist the Ruritarian prosecutor. When it comes to citizens of other countries just temporary residing in Ruritania, it may be more appropriate (cheaper, "not our problem") to just send them back, guilty or not, to be decided by a justice system in their own country. Preferably, after evaluating if there is a reasonable expectation of a fair trial. Releasing them to some third party (in this case, a German citizen to US authorities) sounds absolutely awful to me. Barbaric from the perspective of the person being sent away, and servile from the perspective of sovereign people.
- muyuu 14y ago
  I agree, but in American culture the sentiment is different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism#Double_standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism#Double...
  - powertower 14y ago
    That's not "American" sentiment as much as it is a "Top Player" sentiment... You're blaming a state for doing something you're own state would gladly do itself if it were able to (if it had the same platform). If America lost the war of independence, then that wiki article would be called "British exceptionalism". And in another history, "Russian exceptionalism", or "Chineese exceptionalism", etc. The country level game has always been about competition rather than sharing... Where the benefits are imported, and pain is exported. It all comes down to human nature.
    - muyuu 14y ago
      The people don't need to buy into it though. I definitely don't and wouldn't. I expect fairness and don't abuse others in weaker positions than mine, not so hard on the individual scale. So basically "it's all right because they'd do the same" simply doesn't cut it.

powertower 14y ago

> Extradition should only be for cases where someone is physically present in a country where they commit a crime then later skip the country to avoid being caught. Not talking about MU or anyone/anything else in particular, but... If you run a criminal enterprise that does the majority of its business in the US, and you live overseas you can (and should be) subjugated to US laws. Even for non-criminal enterprises, you don't get to play around with another country, breaking its laws. Why should a criminal enterprise be treated differently?

GuiA 14y ago
>If you run a criminal enterprise that does the majority of its business in the US, and you live overseas you can (and should be) subjugated to US laws. >Even for non-criminal enterprises, you don't get to play around with another country, breaking its laws. Why should a criminal enterprise be treated differently? Yes, I'm sure a lot of Iraqis would love to see American soldiers who killed/tortured their civilians judged in their own country. I have a feeling that you might change your tune on this one though... ;)
grecy 14y ago
So millions of American women can be extradited to certain Arab nations because they've posted photos online of themselves without their heads covered, contrary to the local law. By doing it on the internet, they are "exposing" themselves to millions of people where that is illegal, and therefore should be extradited for it. Even the passport photo of millions of American women is illegal in certain countries... seeings that's an international document, surely they've broken the law in those countries, no?
- powertower 14y ago
  I don't see the similarity of a person posting pictures of self on facebook, and a criminal enterprise knowingly and willfully generating revenue through copyright crimes. Really, I don't. Even if you ignore that some countries have extradition treaties which spell out exactly at what level this can happen (btw, US and Iran don't). But if you love analogies, I'm sure I can come up with one even more ridiculous, that would show my case.