Yes there are. If the servers were in the US and the content was illegal they could have wiped them, and they could have arrested those connected who were in the US, but deporting an Australian citizen from Australia to a country they have never set foot in is unnacceptable. There's no question that he broke US law but the US only has jurisdiction of people on US soil.dubbs wrote:
I think the article maybe leaving some information out. For example, were some of the servers he using in the US? If so then those servers are subject to US laws. That would mean that if there were pirated material on those severs, then he did break American laws.
I could read deep into the story and say that the person that wrote it maybe trying to bash America, or the RIAA, or the US entertainment/software companies in general.
There are not enough facts here to say it is was correct or if it was incorrect to have him departed.
Still holds true after 2 pages.usmarine2005 wrote:
Here is a simple solution.....
DO NOT STEAL.
Problem solved.
So, if you were extradited to Australia and charged with possessing illegal firearms you wouldn't complain?usmarine2005 wrote:
Still holds true after 2 pages.usmarine2005 wrote:
Here is a simple solution.....
DO NOT STEAL.
Problem solved.
Besides which, he didn't steal anything. He allowed others to steal.
Last edited by Bubbalo (2007-05-07 07:55:56)
Indeed Pubic - Yet another example of the Australian Govt abandoning Aussie citizens - FOR SHAME MR HOWARD AND CO.Pubic wrote:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/australia-hands-over-man-to-us-courts/2007/05/06/1178390140855.htmlThis 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.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.
Would I complain...yes. Should I complain...no.Bubbalo wrote:
So, if you were extradited to Australia and charged with possessing illegal firearms you wouldn't complain?usmarine2005 wrote:
Still holds true after 2 pages.usmarine2005 wrote:
Here is a simple solution.....
DO NOT STEAL.
Problem solved.
Besides which, he didn't steal anything. He allowed others to steal.
Who gives a fuck where and what and how he did it. He broke the law, allowed millions to be stolen, so I say fuck him. Maybe he should be sent to a Mexican prison, then I would feel some compassion.
Yes, but we aren't arguing over that. We all know theft is a crime.usmarine2005 wrote:
Still holds true after 2 pages.usmarine2005 wrote:
Here is a simple solution.....
DO NOT STEAL.
Problem solved.
The deportation for trial is the issue. Why the fuck wasn't the matter handed to the AFP/State police to investigate. He could have done the time here, in the nation he committed the crime in. I don't care that "cyberspace has no borders"... HIS ARSE WAS IN AUSTRALIA, THE US HAD NO JURISDICTION, END OF DISCUSSION.
Ffs, I want to join the AFP, will be hard enough making arrests without the US pilfering the easy to catch ones from me...
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
You wouldn't object if you were tried in an Australian court for breaking Australian firearms laws whilst on US soil?usmarine2005 wrote:
Would I complain...yes. Should I complain...no.Bubbalo wrote:
So, if you were extradited to Australia and charged with possessing illegal firearms you wouldn't complain?usmarine2005 wrote:
Still holds true after 2 pages.
Besides which, he didn't steal anything. He allowed others to steal.
Who gives a fuck where and what and how he did it. He broke the law, allowed millions to be stolen, so I say fuck him. Maybe he should be sent to a Mexican prison, then I would feel some compassion.
Last edited by Bubbalo (2007-05-07 07:59:30)
Last time I checked, I couldn't shoot a glock across the Pacific and harm anyone in Australia. I think with pirating there are no borders.Bubbalo wrote:
You wouldn't object if you were tried in an Australian court for breaking Australian firearms laws whilst on US soil?
Bahahaha...Bubbalo wrote:
You wouldn't object if you were tried in an Australian court for breaking Australian firearms laws whilst on US soil?usmarine2005 wrote:
Would I complain...yes. Should I complain...no.Bubbalo wrote:
So, if you were extradited to Australia and charged with possessing illegal firearms you wouldn't complain?
Besides which, he didn't steal anything. He allowed others to steal.
Who gives a fuck where and what and how he did it. He broke the law, allowed millions to be stolen, so I say fuck him. Maybe he should be sent to a Mexican prison, then I would feel some compassion.
Bubs makes me laugh so much. He shares my sense of humour I think.
+1 for hilarity in the D&ST forums!
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Okay, so why have the US come down so heavy on this guy? Why not go target the Russian sods who are being sued for $1 trillion?usmarine2005 wrote:
Last time I checked, I couldn't shoot a glock across the Pacific and harm anyone in Australia. I think with pirating there are no borders.Bubbalo wrote:
You wouldn't object if you were tried in an Australian court for breaking Australian firearms laws whilst on US soil?
There are far, far bigger fish to fry. This is a political stunt.
A poor one at that. I think I might let Sunrise know about this, imagine the stink that lot will kick up.
Better yet, somebody tell the Chaser crew...
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Nope Guess again. ACT and the NT are TERRITORIES not States, and hence dont have Self Government.Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
There is seven....Pubic wrote:
Because I thought there were 7Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Your flag has 57 stars. Australia is made up of 6 states, and America is nade up of 50 states. Since when does 6+50=57?
[*]1. South Australia
[*]2. Western Australia
[*]3. Tasmania
[*]4. Northern Territory
[*]5. Queensland
[*]6. New South Wales
[*]7. Australian Capital Territory
The 7 Pointed Star under the Union Jack stand for the 6 states and the 7th is for the TERRITORIES (NT, ACT, Australian Antartic Territory).
Sorry but you are wrong here too...-101-InvaderZim wrote:
Nope Guess again. ACT and the NT are TERRITORIES not States, and hence dont have Self Government.Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
There is seven....Pubic wrote:
Because I thought there were 7
[*]1. South Australia
[*]2. Western Australia
[*]3. Tasmania
[*]4. Northern Territory
[*]5. Queensland
[*]6. New South Wales
[*]7. Australian Capital Territory
The 7 Pointed Star under the Union Jack stand for the 6 states and the 7th is for the TERRITORIES (NT, ACT, Australian Antartic Territory).
The NT and ACT have limited self government. They give us cash to run ourselves and if we do anything they don't like they can overturn it instantly. Oh, and we only have one house of parliament and 2 senators in the Federal Senate; among other rather dodgy things (hence the push for NT statehood here every few years).
There are five states and four territories that constitute the Federation of Australia...
States:
New South Wales
Victoria
Western Australia
Queensland
South Australia
Territories with limited self governance:
Northern Territory
Australian Capital Territory
The other two territories that not self governed:
Australian Antartic Territory
Christmas Island
Notable mentions:
New Zealand, which thinks it's another country but it's all really a conspiracy and it is just another part of Australia.
That retarded place in WA that counts as another country to the various Taxation organisations in Australia.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Call NZ a part of Aussie?? GO BOIL YOUR HEAD FLECCO, and as for the rest of it? Meh close enuff, when you consider that I havent lived in Aussie since '87, and back then thats the way Aussie was.... or something along those lines anyways
Last edited by -101-InvaderZim (2007-05-07 08:36:16)
But with laws there are. What difference does it make where the company is, the crime was committed in Australia. You keep trying to argue that the internet has no borders, but the internet also has no laws. Countries do, and they also have borders.usmarine2005 wrote:
Last time I checked, I couldn't shoot a glock across the Pacific and harm anyone in Australia. I think with pirating there are no borders.Bubbalo wrote:
You wouldn't object if you were tried in an Australian court for breaking Australian firearms laws whilst on US soil?
Can you break a US gun law in Australia without smuggling anything? No.Bubbalo wrote:
But with laws there are. What difference does it make where the company is, the crime was committed in Australia. You keep trying to argue that the internet has no borders, but the internet also has no laws. Countries do, and they also have borders.usmarine2005 wrote:
Last time I checked, I couldn't shoot a glock across the Pacific and harm anyone in Australia. I think with pirating there are no borders.Bubbalo wrote:
You wouldn't object if you were tried in an Australian court for breaking Australian firearms laws whilst on US soil?
Can you break a US law from Australia over the internet? Yes.
I like how they say its an estimated amount of US $50 million. That number is completely fictitious. They have no way of knowing exactly how much was lost in sales. Seriously, what percent of the people that downloaded the software that this guy cracked would have purchased a legitimate copy? The MPAA and RIAA are notorious for over inflating the lost sales numbers to pull at the heart strings of joe public and the government.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
Also, I remember reading about the bust of DoD back when it happened, and for what it is worth, I do not believe he should have been extradited to the US for his crime.
What relevance does that have to anything I just said?usmarine2005 wrote:
Can you break a US gun law in Australia without smuggling anything? No.Bubbalo wrote:
But with laws there are. What difference does it make where the company is, the crime was committed in Australia. You keep trying to argue that the internet has no borders, but the internet also has no laws. Countries do, and they also have borders.usmarine2005 wrote:
Last time I checked, I couldn't shoot a glock across the Pacific and harm anyone in Australia. I think with pirating there are no borders.
Can you break a US law from Australia over the internet? Yes.
The internet part.Bubbalo wrote:
What relevance does that have to anything I just said?usmarine2005 wrote:
Can you break a US gun law in Australia without smuggling anything? No.Bubbalo wrote:
But with laws there are. What difference does it make where the company is, the crime was committed in Australia. You keep trying to argue that the internet has no borders, but the internet also has no laws. Countries do, and they also have borders.
Can you break a US law from Australia over the internet? Yes.
Look, you want to know why I do not care where he is sent? Because he broke the law and allowed millions of dollars to be stolen. Fuck em.
But that's the point. The US doesn't have jurisdiction on Australian soil. We aren't objecting to him being charged under Australian law, we're objecting to him being charged under US law despite the fact that he's never been on US soil.usmarine2005 wrote:
The internet part.Bubbalo wrote:
What relevance does that have to anything I just said?usmarine2005 wrote:
Can you break a US gun law in Australia without smuggling anything? No.
Can you break a US law from Australia over the internet? Yes.
Look, you want to know why I do not care where he is sent? Because he broke the law and allowed millions of dollars to be stolen. Fuck em.
The servers were on US land, so they are under US jurisdiction. If he was responsible for the data on those server, even if he was not in the US, he would be held accountable. That is why P2P networks, like Kazaa, and Morphus tried to move their servers to China when Napster got shut down.Bubbalo wrote:
Yes there are. If the servers were in the US and the content was illegal they could have wiped them, and they could have arrested those connected who were in the US, but deporting an Australian citizen from Australia to a country they have never set foot in is unnacceptable. There's no question that he broke US law but the US only has jurisdiction of people on US soil.dubbs wrote:
I think the article maybe leaving some information out. For example, were some of the servers he using in the US? If so then those servers are subject to US laws. That would mean that if there were pirated material on those severs, then he did break American laws.
I could read deep into the story and say that the person that wrote it maybe trying to bash America, or the RIAA, or the US entertainment/software companies in general.
There are not enough facts here to say it is was correct or if it was incorrect to have him departed.
If that is the guess, the US probally told Australia what had happened and requested that they send him to the states. This happens with other crimes also, like with the La Costa Nosta. There were round ups in other nations, because the US requested it. That is why the godfathers started meeting in international waters, and in Cuba, because they could not be handed over.
But you don't understand me: the servers may have been in US jurisdiction, but he was not. Therefore, he was never subject to US law. If he entered at a later date they might hold him accountable, but until then they have no legal standing to extradite him.
Amazing how far Australia will bend over for the US. Could have charged him and locked him up but because some big american corps want to make a statement they ship him over. Pitiful...
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
You just want our sheep.Flecco wrote:
New Zealand, which thinks it's another country but it's all really a conspiracy and it is just another part of Australia.
Keep 'em. I wouldn't want to catch anything.Pubic wrote:
You just want our sheep.Flecco wrote:
New Zealand, which thinks it's another country but it's all really a conspiracy and it is just another part of Australia.
John howard is george bush's biatch......thats all there is to it