Federation Commander Forum Index Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Where are SVC and Jean on January 18, 2011?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Federation Commander News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dharras
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 31 Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Location: Bristol, UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

storeylf wrote:

The case in question is analgous to an American doing something in America that happens to violate Iranian Law and the US being expected to extradite that person to Iran.


Not quite; apparently some of the seized servers were in the USA, so there's a link there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1832

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In that case then sieze the servers by all means, or demand the owner (which would normally be a hosting company, not the individual, who may have no idea where servers are hosted) remove stuff that is against the law in that country.

Though my understanding is that the site was not hosted in the US, so what servers would they be?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1832

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jean wrote:
storeylf, I agree that legally there is a difference. However, not being a lawyer, I tend to speak colloquially. The same court case includes "While one may colloquially link infringement with some general notion of wrongful [473 U.S. 207, 218] appropriation, infringement plainly implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud."

Smile I guess I must not be the only one to think as I do.



I understand your sentiment. I don't necessarily disagree either.

But look at it this way. Copyright holders argument is that the law gives them some right. Their rights do not derive via any other mechanism. Surely, therefore, they should stick to accusing people of what the law says they may be guilty of, namely copyrght infringement.

I think that strengthens their argument, it makes them sound more rational when they are not misrepresenting what is happening. Accusing people of something the law doesn't recognise whilst claiming rights under the same law rather weakens the argument IMHO. There is little question that the likes of Disney or the RIAA are well of aware of the legailities, hence I consider them to be deliberately dishonest when they use the term theft. Two wrongs don't make a right as they say.

mojo jojo wrote:
I view it as the equivalent of someone sneaking into a theater without paying, even if the theater isn't full.


I can't speak to US law, but in the UK that is still not theft that I'm aware of, I would assume it would be prosecuted as a fraud (specifically obtaining services by deception).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 2998

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It might be trespassing more likely than fraud.

Fraud could be printing your own fake ticket, or claiming to be a police officer in pursuit of a suspect and deserving free admission.

Whether the crime is theft of fraud or zababoobo, if the UK is enriched by this guy making money off a violation of US law, the UK needs to hand him over or be considered an outlaw nation.

Jaywalking is not even worthy of discussion. If you Jaywalked in one country and were given a ticket with orders to show up at court Thursday and pay the $10 fine and you left the country, then you're still guilty of the crime (and owe the $10) but now you're also guilty of flight to avoid prosecution.

None of which applies to a situation in which somone who never left country X committed a crime in country Y via the internet, earned money from the crime, and spent the money in country X. Country X is enriched by allowing the crime and needs to
a. hand him over for prosecution
b. pay restitution
c. be branded an outlaw nation that steals from other nations.

There is a case of a British fellow who ran a certain website which showed a certain kind of content. His content was very popular with a lot of English-speaking people and he had a lot of customers in the US. He failed to have the performers in his content fill out a Form 2257, which is required for US performers performing in the US. That did not make his website illegal in the US nor did it make him subject to extradition even though he got rich off of his website. He was terrified that if he went to the US on vacation he would immediately be arrested and thrown in prison for the lack of a form 2257. This was total nonsense, and he was eventually convinced by friends and barristers that there would be no case and he enjoyed a nice trip to the Grand Canyon without incident. I suppose if his website had been promoting terrorism that might have been different, but violent crime and money crime is not handled the same way.

Now, sitting in the USA and via the internet extolling the virtues of rebelling against the Iranian government is another thing. It certainly would have been a crime in Iran, but it's not enriching the US. The US just has to decide if national policy is served by trying to start a revolt in Iran.

Now again, if you go to a Christian church for sunday services you did something that would be a crime in Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia would never try to extradite you since Saudi Arabia was not harmed nor you nor the US enriched by said action. Moreover, your action had nothing to do with Saudi Arabia and had no effect on anyone in Saudia Arabia.

Apples and bricks. Totally different things.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ctchapel
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 16 Jun 2008
Posts: 60
Location: Federal Way, WA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As to the theatre thing. I was a theatre manager as a kid and that behavior was prosecuted as "defrauding an innkeeper" under Washington state law. And yes, our company prosecuted, but only the uncoopertating jerks that made problems. On weekends we always had 2 King county deputies on site.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1832

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

Whether the crime is theft of fraud or zababoobo, if the UK is enriched by this guy making money off a violation of US law, the UK needs to hand him over or be considered an outlaw nation.


That should at least be quite funny as we go down that route. All those Amercans making money in violation of communist laws can be sent to commie countries (are there any left?, ah North Korea). Mmm well at least most places are drier than the UK Smile

When every one is an outlaw nation in the eyes of everyone else will any one have any idea whose laws are being referred to when we say outlaw nation. Confused

Quote:

Now, sitting in the USA and via the internet extolling the virtues of rebelling against the Iranian government is another thing. It certainly would have been a crime in Iran, but it's not enriching the US. The US just has to decide if national policy is served by trying to start a revolt in Iran.


Ah but law is not about just enrichment, its also about the harm, loss and rights violated (especially if it was copy right Wink ) as well remember, so all those people inciting rebellion need to be sent for a stoning in Tehran.

Quote:

Now again, if you go to a Christian church for sunday services you did something that would be a crime in Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia would never try to extradite you since Saudi Arabia was not harmed nor you nor the US enriched by said action. Moreover, your action had nothing to do with Saudi Arabia and had no effect on anyone in Saudia Arabia.


Did you pay the 10% tithe, priests enriching themselves via illegal heathen means, holy cow, extradite the priests. The mental anguish caused by all those evangelists praying for the downfall of Islam. Better send them to Riyadh prison. Shocked
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mojo jojo
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 340

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

storeylf wrote:

I can't speak to US law, but in the UK that is still not theft that I'm aware of, I would assume it would be prosecuted as a fraud (specifically obtaining services by deception).


In the US, sneaking into a theater without paying would be considered 'theft of services'. It would be charged as a misdemeanor if below a certain threshold and a felony if above the threshold. I don't know if the UK has the concept of 'theft of services'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sgt_G
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 264
Location: Offutt AFB, Nebraska

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Now again, if you go to a Christian church for sunday services you did something that would be a crime in Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia would never try to extradite you since Saudi Arabia was not harmed nor you nor the US enriched by said action. Moreover, your action had nothing to do with Saudi Arabia and had no effect on anyone in Saudia Arabia.
Going waaaay off-topic: there are a few radical Imams in Saudi and other countries that will say that you are a heathen for going to a Christian church anywhere in the world and should therefore be condemed to death. Very scary people out there.
_________________
Garth L. Getgen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1832

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mojo jojo wrote:
storeylf wrote:

I can't speak to US law, but in the UK that is still not theft that I'm aware of, I would assume it would be prosecuted as a fraud (specifically obtaining services by deception).


In the US, sneaking into a theater without paying would be considered 'theft of services'. It would be charged as a misdemeanor if below a certain threshold and a felony if above the threshold. I don't know if the UK has the concept of 'theft of services'.


The nearest I can think of is the above noted one, obtaining services by deception. The various deception laws were recently rationlised/simplified into the new Fraud act. Back when I was studying law they were in the theft acts as it happens, though they were not necessarily theft. Many acts of deception could be that as well of course. The difference often coming down to whether whether the owner was permanently deprived of something. Deceiving someone out of their savings would be a form of theft, but obtaining a service would probably not be. In a very simplified way: theft requires both appropiation by the accused and the permanent loss by the victim, fraud only requires one or the other (or both). Though I must say I am out of date with our laws.

I remember once on a visit to some solicitors back in the early-mid 90s talking to one of them about how I'd like to merge my 2 main interests (law and computing) and concentrate on IP and the emerging internet. I don't think napster or broadband was even around back then, but I'd already noticed that copyrights and the internet were creating a conflict. I thought it would be an interesting area in years to come. I didn't realise how interesting. Of course I missed the boat on that, I just went on to become a software developer rather than carry on with law. Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1929
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find it interesting that, in this thread, we have been allowed to 'talk politics' (isn't that against the Forum rules, though?) but still we have managed to keep it civil.

For a bunch of warmongers whose main thing in common is that we like to shoot the *$!@ out of each other around a game board, that's not bad going Wink
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, thank you everyone for keeping it civil! And do not look at this topic as a new trend. It is most definitely a one-off exception.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1929
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mjwest wrote:
Yes, thank you everyone for keeping it civil! And do not look at this topic as a new trend. It is most definitely a one-off exception.

I kind of thought it might be, but I'm sure we all felt free to chip in because it was started 'in-house' Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 2998

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also note that the US has more than one legal system.

49 states use English Common Law with 250 years of local modifications. Different modifications in different locations. And a dozen western states also bring in a bit of gothic real estate law (community property states).

1 state uses Code Napoleon with 250 years of local modifications. That state (Louisiana) might as well be another country as far as law goes.

Puerto Rico has a legal system even the locals do not understand. Guam is about the same. There are some islands out there under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Federal property is another bunch of laws. Crime on a national guard armory compound is ... you do NOT want to go there, it varies day by day sometimes depending on what unit is having drill that day.

What is a theft of services in one state is defrauding an innkeeper in another, but it's always a crime in all 50 states, and on any Federal territory.

Downloading a copyrighted file is, well, still just plain old stealing (in all 50-odd jurisdictions), no matter what specific crime in what specific jurisdiction, and no matter whether you'd have paid for it if you had the chance.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sgt_G
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 264
Location: Offutt AFB, Nebraska

PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, heck, Steve, go to Washington DC and check out jurisdiction overlap. I reported an incendent (someone driving around the city with an AR-15 / M-16 in their car), and it took them 45 miniutes to sort out whose ball it was to play with.

I reported it to Park Rangers, but where I first saw the car was in a parking area patrolled by Park Police (which is a different service from the Park Rangers), but the car turned onto a street in Metro Police jurisdiction, and then the last I saw of it, ithey were heading toward an area controlled by Maryland State Troopers. Of course, the FBI and Secret Service were both interested. When I got back to base, I had to file reports with USAF Security Police and Air Force OSI.

I wonder if they ever found the car, but somehow I doubt it.
_________________
Garth L. Getgen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 2998

PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Garth: I smell a one-page snapshot fiction story in a future captain's log about Romulan police.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Federation Commander News All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group