Richard O'Dwyer Cuts Deal To Avoid Extradition To The US
from the sad-that-it-had-to-come-to-this,-but-good-that-it's-over dept
It appears that the ridiculous saga of the US's baseless criminal case against Richard O'Dwyer is now ending, as O'Dwyer has effectively cut a deal to pay a small sum in exchange for avoiding extradition and trial in the US. If you don't recall, O'Dwyer, a computer science student, ran TVshack.net, one of the sites that ICE and the DOJ seized during one of their many questionable censorship days, in which they seize domain names, in direct conflict with what the law requires. Then they went the extra step of seeking to extradite O'Dwyer to face criminal charges in the US. In this case, it was doubly bizarre, because O'Dwyer, a UK citizen, was running a site that was nearly identical to some other sites that had been found to be perfectly legal in the UK -- and one of the pre-requisites for a criminal copyright charge is that the person needs to be willfully violating the law. Given that other comparable sites were found to be legal, it's difficult to see how US officials could meet that bar. There was also the fact that the US was, as it had attempted in the Rojadirecta case, trying to create a completely made up theory of criminal copyright liability for secondary infringement. In fact, as we noted in other cases, US courts have found that what TVshack was doing was not infringement.The O'Dwyer case continued to get plenty of attention, with widespread protests in the UK, especially after UK officials approved his extradition to the US. Now, however, the case will be wrapped up under what's known as "deferred prosecution" in which O'Dwyer will pay a "small sum" and the case will be concluded. You can see why O'Dwyer would do this deal after a year and a half of fighting the extradition. It's also not too surprising that the DOJ would agree to such a deal, given how it ran from other similar cases once it realized that there was competent legal help absolutely decimating its ridiculous legal theories. The DOJ had to realize that it was likely to lose badly even if O'Dwyer was extradited -- so now they get to save face and pretend that O'Dwyer paying a small sum is a form of "victory."
It's good that the case is over and that O'Dwyer can get on with his life, though it's ridiculous that any part of this case ever happened.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, doj, domain seizures, extradition, ice, richard o'dwyer
Companies: tvshack
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Abraham Lincoln just hates it when slavery is enforced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://thetrichordist.com/2012/11/24/the-most-important-fact-academics-and-the-copyleft-neg lect-to-mention-copyright-is-optional/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And no, copyright is not optional. EVERYTHING IS COVERED BY COPYRIGHT AT THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION. What is optional is releasing it under various licenses, but it's automatically covered by copyright. Thus making it "not optional". Then again, Lowery, or Lowery lackey, facts never were your strong suit. Why let a thing like actual facts get in the way of trying to pass off that complete and utter bullshit writing and forcing it upon others.
Lowery. Synonym for "douchebag hack who can't cope in a modern era and thus sits around yelling at others to 'get off my lawn'".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Deferred Prosecution
What concerns me is that O'Dwyer has been invited to the States to sign an agreement. Can he not do this at the US Embassy? What if they invent a reason to detain him? After what I've seen them do so far, I wouldn't put it past them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Deferred Prosecution
The best option, under these circumstances, is to give him "an offer he can't refuse". This way, he shuts up (diverting media attention from the potential embarrassment) and still looks like a criminal, and they get to look "tough on piracy".
That is, assuming they won't nab him once he touches down on the US. That would just make the bad situation look much worse. I mean, law enforcement shouldn't have to be sneaky to enforce the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Deferred Prosecution
Were I in his shoes, I'd probably insist on a nice, neutral courtroom for any agreement signings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Deferred Prosecution
The distinction is important, as extra-territoriality can in theory be revoked unilaterally by the host country: during the stand-off between Britain and Ecuador over Julian Assange, the British government dropped some none too subtle hints that they might go down that route if the Ecuadorian embassy did not evict Assange tout de suite.
[IANAL, much of this gleaned from Wikipedia, usual caveats apply, etc.]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Deferred Prosecution
Kind of like that cartoon where the coyote is "invited" to stand under the falling 10-ton weight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Deferred Prosecution
Bunch of Rich Greedy Corrupted A-Holes in Washington.
We who follow News intelligently will know that USA should never have hassled this young man.
US GOV = FAIL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why is copyright infringement so much worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The reason alleged copyright infringement is so much worse is because of the particularly heinous nature of the crime. Isn't it worth suspending some minor civil liberties in exchange for the security of ensuring properly licensed content?
I hope that helps answer your question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The difference is that people (including governments) tend to want to do significantly worse things to people in these categories, than to people merely accused of copyright infringement (the exception being the copyright enforcement lobby). As such, they need to rely on that protection to a greater extent, and far more often.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
Now, I know you pirates will say that a) Mike supports copyright, and b) second-hand income from knowing infringement is perfectly legitimate, but the first is sheer assertion in light of this piece, and you go wrong morally on the latter point.
And by the way, it ain't over until he's BACK in merrie olde Englande: he's supposed to travel to US and pay up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
TVShack was not breaking any laws in the country it was operated in.
If TV were not such a messy mishmash of region and other restrictions, everyone would go to the legitimate sources. We just subscribed to Hulu Plus. It works on our tablets and computer browsers, and barely works on the TiVo, but isn't available on the Google TV box.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
Instead of giving consumers what they want, the media gatekeepers lobby for more complex laws and regulations and demand that the government enforce those laws and regulations. Throw in old contracts that determine royalties and you end with crap like the DVD release of WKRP in Cincinnati - where songs were removed or replaced, lines dubbed over and scenes deleted.
Hey media gatekeepers, I was really looking forward to buying WKRP on DVD, but when I heard that contracts, royalties and copyright 'forced' you to alter the show, I didn't buy it. The entertainment business has no one but themselves to blame for this mess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
Hey now. Aren't you the guy who bitches at everyone for not including sunk costs when talking about market prices?
But, here on this side of the argument, you are essentially doing the same thing by saying "O'Dwyer got $230,000! OMG!" without even mentioning the cost of operating a website, like hardware costs, server space rental and bandwidth, not to mention any actual manhours involved.
Awfully disingenuous of you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
Now, I know you pirates will say that a) Mike supports copyright, and b) second-hand income from knowing infringement is perfectly legitimate, but the first is sheer assertion in light of this piece, and you go wrong morally on the latter point.
And by the way, it ain't over until he's BACK in merrie olde Englande: he's supposed to travel to US and pay up.
While I agree with you, I do think it is over. Despite the moanings of the piracy apologists, our judicial system stands on integrity. There's no way they'd sucker this kid in and lock him up over such a small matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet again, Mike is FOR commercial scale infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good for O'Dwyer, bad for the rest of us
Despite a (mostly) positive outcome (for the US, at least), there was no High Court trial, which means no precedent on whether extradition is possible in these sorts of cases, or even on whether or not what O'Dwyer (allegedly or actually) did is criminally illegal. It also means those of us in the UK are still none the wiser as to whether we can legally link to things or stream things without a licence, whether linking sites can be seized/shut down legally, or how broad criminal copyright law actually is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Good for O'Dwyer, bad for the rest of us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Good for O'Dwyer, bad for the rest of us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Good for O'Dwyer, bad for the rest of us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Charges
Domain name
theft,
amendments broken 1st, 4th, Ect.
As subject was NOT in the US or us citizen.
Extortion
ICE & DOJ should have to pay full costs of England & Richard O'Dwyer
ICE & DOJ should be fined and charges brought against it for trying this grouse violation of Richard O'Dwyer a citizen and resident of england
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actually, I think it's more of a partridge violation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Either way, it still tastes like chicken.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its a trap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright Cops for the world?
> "Case after case shows that our extradition arrangements must
> be overhauled to allow people who have never left these shores
> to be dealt with here at home," she said.
That was good. But then this . . .
> "It does not remove the underlying problem, though. The US
> cannot be allowed to be the copyright cops of the world," he said.
And that, my copyright maximalizing friends, is going to come back to bite. And hard.
The world is beginning to take note that the US, and not really the government, but private industry is trying to act like some kind of worldwide police force. They are willing to extradite a British citizen to the US -- when he did not commit any crime in his own country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Murder by or assisted by the government while letting the guilty in government go free.
the same with torture.
The violation by the government of it's own laws.
The government use of the same tactics as the mafia to get it's way at home and around the world. Note around the world the demands are normally higher the home
The World just needs to say "NO More"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*** I POSSESS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ***
am i lying or telling the truth? you'll never know, nor will you care.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
O'Dwyer persecution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Someone's selling out
This comment is very pertinent:
Open Rights Group chief Jim Killock said in a statement that it was "great that [O'Dwyer's] extradition request will be dropped",but he should not have been up for extradition at all. "Is the UK government happy for the US to assume jurisdiction over every UK Internet user? The government would do well to take a long hard look at its extradition arrangements with the USA," Killock said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]