The British government needs to secure a trade deal with the US post Brexit. Biden must want to unify his people, and gain some support from the right; and being the man to get Assange would do him good at the start of his presidency.
Assange might find himself becoming an important trading token to Britain getting better terms from the US in a deal.
Our government will happily throw him to the lions for a sniff at a better trade deal.
The UK's extradition treaty with the US is famously (here at least) one-sided. The UK can only contest an extradition request if to do so would risk the life of that person.
The precedence for this is the case of Gary McKinnon - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon (please excuse the wikipedia reference, but its a good platform for plenty of other material on the case).
If Assange's lawyers insist he is so mentally fragile that he may commit suicide they will be leaning heavily on this case as precendence. It will need to go through a number of courts - Appeal, Supreme, House of Lords and (maybe) European Court of Human Rights.
(Side note - countries belong to the ECHR and the EU seperately so Brexit does not, in theory, preclude Assange going there for adjudication)
The buck will finally end up in front of the Home Secretary. At this moment that is Priti Patel. She ain't so pretty. She has a well-documented disdain for actual law, is a bully, and could easily be flattered by the US.
I wouldn't bet on Assange's chances if the decision came before her.....
Disclosure: I sell insurance for a living, including cyber insurance.
Insurers have been paying ransoms for years. When the Somali piracy problem was at its height, insurers seriously considered ceasing ransom payments and diverting the money to a mercenary navy: https://www.wired.com/2008/10/mercenaries-vs/
At municipality level cyber insurance is booming as many are now being told this cover (particularly the third party liability aspect) is compulsory alongside their other insurances. The first party section of the policy is commonly bought alongside the third party cover and it is the former which pays for the rebuilding and reinstatement of data post attack... or the payment of ransom.
However, even insurance companies will say that their products should be bought in conjunction with existing tech protections. The policy should be the safety net if your system protections fail.
Municipality and Enterprise level policies are not off the shelf - they are structured and the contract is built around existing protections in place, attitude of the buyer and any claims history to date.
If your system protections are low, user culture poor and buying attitude "give me the cheapest bit of paper so I can tick the box" then you will get an expensive (low value) policy with low limits of cover.
If you have strong systems, a good internal attitude towards infosec and active risk management; you will have more insurers quoting for your business, greater market competition, greater premium value and also an insurer with a more pro-active claims attitude than "how little can we pay to get out of this".
Its a great idea, but they will attempt to monetise it by letting people choose their three words for their company location.
The plan will be to get it adopted widely enough in a territory, then start pushing companies to pay to have specific words reallocated and chosen for them.
I would bet a shiny US dollar (do you still have those in coin?) that attractive 3 word addresses - are already reserved for sale - like licence plates.
Notice how the format is like a web address? I bet if you wanted your entry on the database changed to www.XYZ.com then money would need to change hands.
I remember being contacted by Nielsen about 10 years ago to say they wanted to track those who streamed video and I would be rewarded. I was assured this was all anonymous and only related to video. Out of interest I agreed and was amused to be sent a blank, unbranded CD to "load onto all internet-connected devices in the house" which would then "track all my internet communications and relay them back to Nielsen".
No more mention of anonymity and they threatened to charge me £20 if i didn't return the CD - which i did.
I decided at that point that they really had no idea what they were doing.
A good point - the judge has followed the money. what i find more interesting is that the party itself - which has some very wealthy donors (Google Arron Banks; though i think he is now an ex-donor) isn't being pulled up for the actions.
It does seem to me (and i think an AC has commented below) that the judge realises the local party (different to the national party) is actually the one who should be held responsible and has pinged the chairman accordingly.
Hi there - I know this is written tongue in cheek but I need to clarify why your example would not work in the UK.
The law being used here is relates to agency, as defined in UK law. Specifically, where you are an employee, volunteer or member of a group you are (almost) automatically considered as acting on behalf of the company, political party, club or society. Posting to a group social media account is a prime example. The chairman of said group is ultimately responsible under law for the actions of that group - though there are defences which could have been used here:
- having a social media policy that is evidenced as being delivered to members and having breaches enforced when occurring. - if unwitting about the original tweet reacting in a positive manner on discovery.
He certainly did not do the latter (as we can see he basically ignored the initial complaint) and the former is the kind of internal risk management which is anaethema to UKIP almost to point of policy.
What the law is enforcing here is that senior members of any company or group cannot suddenly absolve themselves from actions of junior members but need to evidence that the junior member did so against group policy, and that when made aware of the transgression they reacted swiftly.
In your example, a property owner would not be responsible for the alleged actions of a tramp on social media because the tramp does not have agency for the property owner.
Finally - I agree with you it is dumb as hell but this would come under our racial incitement laws, which further limit freedom of speech, rightfully or wrongfully is a whole other disucssion.
Just a quick "point of fact" to raise - Norway is not in the EU.
It's in the EEA - European Economic Area. This is a group of countries which also includes members of the EU but is seperate. It has some bilateral treaties with the EU.
I'm no expert at this - so I'll quit soon - but it is worth noting when it comes to civil law Norway is very much its own beast and does not follow EU rulings without question (nor does it have to).
In addition to the "Most Insightful" and "Funniest" posts of the week can we just be done with it and have an "Asshole of the Week" too? 1st Nomination - this guy.
As an added benefit I bet the page views will go up too. Disappointed page views admittedly.
I agree with comment above. When i looked at the evidence i have to agreed with him. Yes it was a sex party, was it Nazi themed - no not really.
Of course the reason this offends Max so much - and which US readers may not be aware - is that his father is Oswald Mosley - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Mosley - leader of the UK Fascist Party and supporter of Nazism.
Its not just Germany that is touchy about its Nazi past; Max is too.
Now, just because he was formulating a plan to severely cut back the BBC (in favour of giving Sky/New International more say) and then on the same day two respected BBC reporters just happened to completely accidentally, without any hint of malice, refer to him as Jeremy C*nt, does not mean they actually meant to do it.
Even if his middle name should be changed to "The".
Re: Re:
The British government needs to secure a trade deal with the US post Brexit. Biden must want to unify his people, and gain some support from the right; and being the man to get Assange would do him good at the start of his presidency.
Assange might find himself becoming an important trading token to Britain getting better terms from the US in a deal.
Our government will happily throw him to the lions for a sniff at a better trade deal.
Smart legal move, but maybe only option
The UK's extradition treaty with the US is famously (here at least) one-sided. The UK can only contest an extradition request if to do so would risk the life of that person.
The precedence for this is the case of Gary McKinnon - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon (please excuse the wikipedia reference, but its a good platform for plenty of other material on the case).
If Assange's lawyers insist he is so mentally fragile that he may commit suicide they will be leaning heavily on this case as precendence. It will need to go through a number of courts - Appeal, Supreme, House of Lords and (maybe) European Court of Human Rights.
(Side note - countries belong to the ECHR and the EU seperately so Brexit does not, in theory, preclude Assange going there for adjudication)
The buck will finally end up in front of the Home Secretary. At this moment that is Priti Patel. She ain't so pretty. She has a well-documented disdain for actual law, is a bully, and could easily be flattered by the US.
I wouldn't bet on Assange's chances if the decision came before her.....
Nothing new here
Disclosure: I sell insurance for a living, including cyber insurance.
Insurers have been paying ransoms for years. When the Somali piracy problem was at its height, insurers seriously considered ceasing ransom payments and diverting the money to a mercenary navy: https://www.wired.com/2008/10/mercenaries-vs/
At municipality level cyber insurance is booming as many are now being told this cover (particularly the third party liability aspect) is compulsory alongside their other insurances. The first party section of the policy is commonly bought alongside the third party cover and it is the former which pays for the rebuilding and reinstatement of data post attack... or the payment of ransom.
However, even insurance companies will say that their products should be bought in conjunction with existing tech protections. The policy should be the safety net if your system protections fail.
Municipality and Enterprise level policies are not off the shelf - they are structured and the contract is built around existing protections in place, attitude of the buyer and any claims history to date.
If your system protections are low, user culture poor and buying attitude "give me the cheapest bit of paper so I can tick the box" then you will get an expensive (low value) policy with low limits of cover.
If you have strong systems, a good internal attitude towards infosec and active risk management; you will have more insurers quoting for your business, greater market competition, greater premium value and also an insurer with a more pro-active claims attitude than "how little can we pay to get out of this".
Bespoke addresses for money
Its a great idea, but they will attempt to monetise it by letting people choose their three words for their company location.
The plan will be to get it adopted widely enough in a territory, then start pushing companies to pay to have specific words reallocated and chosen for them.
I would bet a shiny US dollar (do you still have those in coin?) that attractive 3 word addresses - are already reserved for sale - like licence plates.
Notice how the format is like a web address? I bet if you wanted your entry on the database changed to www.XYZ.com then money would need to change hands.
Nielsen's Internet Tracking
I remember being contacted by Nielsen about 10 years ago to say they wanted to track those who streamed video and I would be rewarded. I was assured this was all anonymous and only related to video. Out of interest I agreed and was amused to be sent a blank, unbranded CD to "load onto all internet-connected devices in the house" which would then "track all my internet communications and relay them back to Nielsen".
No more mention of anonymity and they threatened to charge me £20 if i didn't return the CD - which i did.
I decided at that point that they really had no idea what they were doing.
Re: Nothing ironic to see here... Keep moving along...
You forgot to note that the two men who own the brewery are immigrants from the EU.
Irony +2
Re: Re: Today's Zombie: Dave W or Dave or David W!
I'm happy to be odd, at least I'm not an arse hole.
Re: Re: Re: How to get rich quick in the UK in four easy steps:
It does seem to me (and i think an AC has commented below) that the judge realises the local party (different to the national party) is actually the one who should be held responsible and has pinged the chairman accordingly.
Re: How to get rich quick in the UK in four easy steps:
The law being used here is relates to agency, as defined in UK law. Specifically, where you are an employee, volunteer or member of a group you are (almost) automatically considered as acting on behalf of the company, political party, club or society. Posting to a group social media account is a prime example. The chairman of said group is ultimately responsible under law for the actions of that group - though there are defences which could have been used here:
- having a social media policy that is evidenced as being delivered to members and having breaches enforced when occurring.
- if unwitting about the original tweet reacting in a positive manner on discovery.
He certainly did not do the latter (as we can see he basically ignored the initial complaint) and the former is the kind of internal risk management which is anaethema to UKIP almost to point of policy.
What the law is enforcing here is that senior members of any company or group cannot suddenly absolve themselves from actions of junior members but need to evidence that the junior member did so against group policy, and that when made aware of the transgression they reacted swiftly.
In your example, a property owner would not be responsible for the alleged actions of a tramp on social media because the tramp does not have agency for the property owner.
Finally - I agree with you it is dumb as hell but this would come under our racial incitement laws, which further limit freedom of speech, rightfully or wrongfully is a whole other disucssion.
Sorry - I felt an urge to be legally pedantic.
Norway not in the EU...
It's in the EEA - European Economic Area. This is a group of countries which also includes members of the EU but is seperate. It has some bilateral treaties with the EU.
I'm no expert at this - so I'll quit soon - but it is worth noting when it comes to civil law Norway is very much its own beast and does not follow EU rulings without question (nor does it have to).
Re: Re: Last Week tonight Special
Last Week tonight Special
- Mr Nutterbutter
- Mike Myers as Dr Evil
- Jamie Lynn Crofts of the ACLU
- Mike Masnick (to raise the issue of SLAPP)
I'd also like to see Bob Murray invited, but when he doesn't show, his position taken by a tub of lard instead.
Suggestion
As an added benefit I bet the page views will go up too. Disappointed page views admittedly.
(untitled comment)
Nice and neat.
She needs legal counsel
I'm sure they'll get along like a thread on fire.
Re:
Of course the reason this offends Max so much - and which US readers may not be aware - is that his father is Oswald Mosley - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Mosley - leader of the UK Fascist Party and supporter of Nazism.
Its not just Germany that is touchy about its Nazi past; Max is too.
Re: Re: References
Even if his middle name should be changed to "The".
Sources
I can hear the Streisand Effect machine rumbling into action on this one.
(untitled comment)
(Tip your waitress)
Re: Funniest Post of the Week
More comments from Dave W >>
Dave W’s Submitted Stories.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt