So? Most of the comments I have read don't dispute the fact that he (may) have committed crimes against UK and/or US laws.
The problem is that the UK allows extradition of its own citizens.
Of course this is a more general problem than just "copyright" and involves the fact that the UK let itself become some kind of colony of the US (ironically).
If an American college student displayed a banner on his website saying "Fuck Iran" (and you don't have to look too far to find such things: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MiedE1CY9I) would you consider it ok to send him to Iran to be tried there?
- - -
Additionally, according to the ruling, he did not exactly provide a "cute 'Fuck the Police' banner"; it was a quote from someone else's work:
> Also posted on the homepage of this new website was the photograph of a rap music group and the title OF ONE OF THEIR SONGS “Fxck the Police” (capitalization mine).
And this is not even what the ruling says; the ruling is quoting the complaint produced by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
What you have listed in the parent is NOT what the defendant did; they're just allegations from the prosecution, produced in order to obtain his extradition.
The problem is that the UK allows extradition of its own citizens.
Of course this is a more general problem than just "copyright" and involves the fact that the UK let itself become some kind of colony of the US (ironically).
If an American college student displayed a banner on his website saying "Fuck Iran" (and you don't have to look too far to find such things: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MiedE1CY9I) would you consider it ok to send him to Iran to be tried there?
- - -
Additionally, according to the ruling, he did not exactly provide a "cute 'Fuck the Police' banner"; it was a quote from someone else's work:
> Also posted on the homepage of this new website was the photograph of a rap music group and the title OF ONE OF THEIR SONGS “Fxck the Police” (capitalization mine).
And this is not even what the ruling says; the ruling is quoting the complaint produced by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
What you have listed in the parent is NOT what the defendant did; they're just allegations from the prosecution, produced in order to obtain his extradition.