May I draw everyones attention to the plight of Sheffield Halam student Richard O'Dwyer?

Hi everyone, yeah sorry if this seems a bit spammy,

anyway Jimmy Wales leads the call to stop his extradition.


Interesting times we're living in.

Thanks for looking and maybe signing too!


sort by: active | newest | oldest
1-10 of 21Next »
bosherston (author) 4 years ago
lemonie5 years ago
It's a bit "ranty", but the message is that the internet is still rather vague in legal terms. To the best of my knowledge the Data Protection Act 1998 was the last major IT act (in the UK). I'd like to be better informed.

bosherston (author)  lemonie5 years ago
I wouldn't say "ranty" ( but then I would say that wouldn't I? ). However definately calling out to the Instructables Community to go and have a look and hopefully sign the petition :)

>I'd like to be better informed<

What would you like to know? Start here for O'Dwyers take on his initial questioning.

Video Interview.

We often hear it's the case that police dissuade interviewees from their right to a solicitor, something he seems to regret.

UK law enforcement dropped any charges in order to enable US law enforcement with the connivence of the Home Secretary Theresa May to whisk him away to stand trial in the US.

Apparently no crime had been committed under UK law in the first place.

So we have extraordinary rendition-light right?
According ti the email from the Home Office, what O'Dwyer [allegedly] did is a crime under UK law.

The real issue is that the [alleged] offense was committed entirely within the bounds of of the United Kingdom (British citizen, in Britain, using a British website based on a British-owned server on British soil), yet the corts have ruled that the US has jurisdiction over the [alleged] offense.

If I vandalised a US embassy car on British soil, I woud not be extradited. If I burned the US flag, I would not be extradited. If I shouted racist comments at a passing US Marine, I might get beaten up, but I would not be extradited.

So why does breaking a US copyright on British soil warrant extradition? Because, as far as I can see, the British government and law-courts are more afraid of American corporations than they are of the wrath of their own citizens, and that's just wrong.
Just curious... has anyone actually confirmed where his website was hosted? I know he's a British citizen, but that doesn't mean he used a UK company. As far as I can tell, before the FBI seized his site, it was being hosted on a server in North Carolina (i.e. The USA). If that's the case, then the U.S. does have grounds to extradite him because the offense would have been committed on U.S. soil.

AFAIR, the same held true for MegaUpload owners. They had 'most' of their servers off shore, but since they had at least one in the U.S., it gave the U.S. cause to have the owners arrested in New Zealand in anticipation of extradition to the U.S.
The first reports I saw said the site was hosted on a UK server. Bosherton indicates otherwise.

If Bosherton is correct, then the court's ruling that the US has jurisdiction is even less legitimate, since they are making rulings regarding activities in other nations.
Just did some reading.... TVShack's about page indicated that the website was run and hosted by Swedish students in Sweden. The U.K. court papers say that the website was hosted in the Netherlands. The U.S. argument appears not to have anything to do with the hosting location, but the profits that O'Dwyer (who admitted ownership of gained from U.S. Advertising companies, and through the link sharing sites that their website pointed to of illegal copyrighted content. The U.S. further argued that a day after they seized control of, O'Dwyer secured the domain and posted an image to the home page which said "F*uck the Police".

I guess that got their goat up...
bosherston (author)  canucksgirl5 years ago
Interesting, could you throw in some links? Ok hand's up I'm still reading (when I can) on this so could have missed it, but sometimes there's a marked divergance in reporting depending on which side of the pond you sit.
Well call me Switzerland... I haven't taken any sides (just trying to understand the facts), so here's the sources:

TVShack's archived about page

The U.K. Court Ruling
bosherston (author)  canucksgirl5 years ago
> I haven't taken any sides <

No of course, I meant geographically, having made the assumption you are in Canada.
Thanks for the links.
Are you considering signing the petition at all?

I was bemused as to why City of London Police were sent to pick him up. Perhaps part of the reason is BlinkX listed on the London Stock exchange, but is HQ'd in San Fran.
1-10 of 21Next »