BVC
Member
+325|6705
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/ … 40855.html
Australia hands over man to US courts
Kenneth Nguyen
May 7, 2007

Hew Raymond Griffiths has been extradited to the US following copyright infringement piracy and consiracy charges.

BEFORE he was extradited to the United States, Hew Griffiths, from Berkeley Vale in NSW, had never even set foot in America. But he had pirated software produced by American companies.

Now, having been given up to the US by former justice minister Chris Ellison, Griffiths, 44, is in a Virginia cell, facing up to 10 years in an American prison after a guilty plea late last month.

Griffiths' case — involving one of the first extraditions for intellectual property crime — has been a triumph for US authorities, demonstrating their ability to enforce US laws protecting US companies against Australians in Australia, with the co-operation of the Australian Government.

"Our agents and prosecutors are working tirelessly to nab intellectual property thieves, even where their crimes transcend international borders," US Attorney Chuck Rosenberg said.

In some corners of the Australian legal community, however, there is concern about Griffiths' case. In a recent article for the Australian Law Journal, NSW Chief Judge in Equity, Peter Young, wrote: "International copyright violations are a great problem. However, there is also the consideration that a country must protect its nationals from being removed from their homeland to a foreign country merely because the commercial interests of that foreign country are claimed to have been affected by the person's behaviour in Australia and the foreign country can exercise influence over Australia."

Griffiths, a Briton, has lived in Australia since the age of seven. From his home base on the central coast of NSW, he served as the leader of a group named Drink Or Die, which "cracked" copy-protected software and media products and distributed them free of cost. Often seen with long hair and bare feet, Griffiths did not make money from his activities, and lived with his father in a modest house.

But Drink or Die's activities did cost American companies money — an estimated $US50 million ($A60 million), if legal sales were substituted for illegal downloads undertaken through Drink or Die. It also raised the ire of US authorities.

In 2003, the US Department of Justice charged Griffiths with violating the copyright laws of the US, and requested his extradition from Australia. Senator Ellison signed a notice for Griffiths' arrest and Australian Federal Police arrested him at his home.

Griffiths fought the prospect of extradition through the courts for three years, in which time he was denied bail and detained in prison. He indicated that he would be willing to plead guilty to a breach of Australian copyright law, which meant he could serve time in Australia.
This is not cool.  The guy has NEVER been to the US, yet has been sent over there to face charges of breaking US laws, and will spend time in a US prison?!?!!?  If he was breaking Australian laws he should be tried in an Australian court and face Australian penalties, to send him over there is nothing short of disgusting.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6771

"But he had pirated software produced by American companies." "But Drink or Die's activities did cost American companies money — an estimated $US50 million"

That would be American law also.

Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-05-06 17:07:30)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6415|North Carolina
He did break our laws and cost us money, but by the same token, I'm surprised the Australian government would just hand him over like that.

Oh well, there are plenty of piraters out there that are better at hiding their tracks. 
BVC
Member
+325|6705
Turquoise, I believe Australia-US free trade negotiations may have something to do with it.

My point is, the offences occurred on Australian soil and were covered by Australian laws with penalties which I imagine are similar to those in the US.  US law has nothing to do with it.  The affected US companies could have pursued the matter locally (as many have done in the past), and a request shouldn't have even been made let alone accepted.

When Americans drive to work they're violating Australian law; they're driving on the other side of the road.  But they won't be deported to face charges in Australian courts because Australian law does not apply in the US and vice versa.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6415|North Carolina
Good points...  agreed....
TrollmeaT
Aspiring Objectivist
+492|6682|Colorado
Its about time this serious problem was dealt with, stealing is not kool not to mention un-american, much like hugo chavez stealing american companys.

Last edited by TrollmeaT (2007-05-06 17:59:55)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6415|North Carolina

TrollmeaT wrote:

Its about time this serious problem was dealt with, stealing is not kool not to mention un-american, much like hugo chavez stealing american companys.
LOL...  Unamerican?...  Oh c'mon...  Who in this forum has NEVER pirated something?

It's like how pot is illegal here.  Almost everyone I know has smoked at LEAST one joint in their life.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6782|PNW

Betrayed by his own government. Hats off.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6571

usmarine2005 wrote:

"But he had pirated software produced by American companies." "But Drink or Die's activities did cost American companies money — an estimated $US50 million"

That would be American law also.
You're missing the point:

How can an Australian in Australia be prosecuted for something which is against American law?
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6771

Bubbalo wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

"But he had pirated software produced by American companies." "But Drink or Die's activities did cost American companies money — an estimated $US50 million"

That would be American law also.
You're missing the point:

How can an Australian in Australia be prosecuted for something which is against American law?
I understand.  But when it comes to the Internet and pirating, the law is still very fluid.  If someone stole 60 mil form my company, I would want them prosecuted here.  Wouldn't you?
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6571

usmarine2005 wrote:

I understand.  But when it comes to the Internet and pirating, the law is still very fluid.  If someone stole 60 mil form my company, I would want them prosecuted here.  Wouldn't you?
I also want a million dollars, but the law doesn't let me rob a bank.  And yes, internal law on the internet is very fluid, but that doesn't change the fact that it is internal law.  How would you feel if you were extradited to Iran for breaking Iranian law?
Cheez
Herman is a warmaphrodite
+1,027|6449|King Of The Islands

Joke's on them.
You know how much it costs to keep someone in prison over there?
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6415|North Carolina
LOL...  Very true....
krazed
Admiral of the Bathtub
+619|6790|Great Brown North
wow, 550 mil. busy guy huh
logitech487
Member
+16|6413|From The State Of Taxes
Australia saved about $200.000 by sending him to the U.S. for his jail time and they will get him back in about ten years.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6771

Bubbalo wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

I understand.  But when it comes to the Internet and pirating, the law is still very fluid.  If someone stole 60 mil form my company, I would want them prosecuted here.  Wouldn't you?
I also want a million dollars, but the law doesn't let me rob a bank.  And yes, internal law on the internet is very fluid, but that doesn't change the fact that it is internal law.  How would you feel if you were extradited to Iran for breaking Iranian law?
If I stole 60 mil from Iran........no matter how I feel we can all agree I would deserve it.
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|6776|UK
He even agreed to admit to breaking Aussie law... wtf. How can they not accept that evidence and try him in Australia.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6771

Why are we defending a criminal?  Who gives a fuck where he is?  Fuck em.
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6716
While he should be severly punished, I think that it should be done by his own government.  The fact that someone could be deported out of their own country to face a trial in another country is horrifying to me.  Especially since he has never set foot in America.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6771

Here is a simple solution.....

DO NOT STEAL.

Problem solved.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6415|North Carolina

usmarine2005 wrote:

Why are we defending a criminal?  Who gives a fuck where he is?  Fuck em.
Because he committed a crime that I've committed, but he did it on a much larger scale.

I can sympathize with piraters -- especially people who pirate Windows.  You don't have much of a choice but to upgrade whenever something new comes out, and with the amount that they charge for each new installment, I can't blame someone for finding a way around the charge.

It's not like Microsoft has much competition when Bill Gates owns a large share of Apple.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6771

Turquoise wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

Why are we defending a criminal?  Who gives a fuck where he is?  Fuck em.
Because he committed a crime that I've committed, but he did it on a much larger scale.

I can sympathize with piraters -- especially people who pirate Windows.  You don't have much of a choice but to upgrade whenever something new comes out, and with the amount that they charge for each new installment, I can't blame someone for finding a way around the charge.

It's not like Microsoft has much competition when Bill Gates owns a large share of Apple.
Buy Apple products then.

Don't justify someone stealing millions of dollars.
redhawk454
Member
+50|6558|Divided States of America

Pubic wrote:

Turquoise, I believe Australia-US free trade negotiations may have something to do with it.

My point is, the offences occurred on Australian soil and were covered by Australian laws with penalties which I imagine are similar to those in the US.  US law has nothing to do with it.  The affected US companies could have pursued the matter locally (as many have done in the past), and a request shouldn't have even been made let alone accepted.

When Americans drive to work they're violating Australian law; they're driving on the other side of the road.  But they won't be deported to face charges in Australian courts because Australian law does not apply in the US and vice versa.
Okay.... I break Australia's law every day by driving on the right side of "our" roads. To that same point the Aussie's break our laws every day. Then again I'm not stealing money from any Australian bank accounts. I guess there is no difference between driving on the right on "our" roads and stealing from another countries citizens?
redhawk454
Member
+50|6558|Divided States of America

Bubbalo wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

I understand.  But when it comes to the Internet and pirating, the law is still very fluid.  If someone stole 60 mil form my company, I would want them prosecuted here.  Wouldn't you?
I also want a million dollars, but the law doesn't let me rob a bank.  And yes, internal law on the internet is very fluid, but that doesn't change the fact that it is internal law.  How would you feel if you were extradited to Iran for breaking Iranian law?
Go ahead and find out. I for one will not miss you on this forum.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6415|North Carolina

usmarine2005 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

Why are we defending a criminal?  Who gives a fuck where he is?  Fuck em.
Because he committed a crime that I've committed, but he did it on a much larger scale.

I can sympathize with piraters -- especially people who pirate Windows.  You don't have much of a choice but to upgrade whenever something new comes out, and with the amount that they charge for each new installment, I can't blame someone for finding a way around the charge.

It's not like Microsoft has much competition when Bill Gates owns a large share of Apple.
Buy Apple products then.

Don't justify someone stealing millions of dollars.
Here's a counterargument...

Why would such a high demand for pirated products exist in the first place?  Could it be that the prices set for the products tend to be higher than is reasonably justified or marketed?

Groups like the RIAA and the MPAA make a big deal out of piracy, but if the average CD wasn't $20 and the average ticket $10, then more people would buy material than pirate it.

Some people are going to download music, software, and movies regardless of the prices set, but streaming services and Netflix prove that people are still willing to buy things like entertainment even if they have the tools necessary for pirating (high speed internet and a decent computer).  These industries succeed because of their affordability.

High prices don't justify pirating, but they do provide a rationale for the act itself.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard