"why wouldn't US citizens be able to be extradited to Thailand on charges of disrespecting the king or to China for undermining the government by being critical of it?"
This sounds like a clever point, but really isn't. Extradition requires that the crime is also a crime under the local laws. Which is why Swiss Bankers would never be extradited to the US for tax evasion, and why Americans would never be extradited to Thailand for making fun on the King.
I don't think copyright infringement should warrant extradition, but I don't have a good reason why I hold that belief.
If he committed no crime under British laws, I guarantee he would not have been eligible for extradition. The article is so thin on substance that it is hard to formulate an intelligent opinion on the matter.
Edit:
I just skimmed the PDF, and the kid argued that he shouldn't be extradited for three reasons: 1) Not illegal in both countries 2) US copyright punishment is "unjust or oppressive" 3) An extradition would be "disproportionate" relative to the crime.
I agree with points #2 and #3, but not #1. I think #3 is the strongest argument. Copyright infringement is not a severe enough impediment to other's natural freedoms to merit sending a citizen to a foreign country to face charges.
Absolutely. In this case I think it is possible to argue (rather than it being cut and dried) about the legality in the UK - at least to a reasonable degree.
If the judge decides it is then, fine, that's what he rules :)
I agree; #3 is the most compelling. If anything it's the same reason the CPS declined a UK prosecution (because to do so would be disproportionate).
This whole thing is nuts. A case where there are proportionally as many UK victims as US victims, but the UK declines to prosecute should not be eligible for extradition. It does't pass a stink test, nor a "disproportionate" test.
That point ignores that in the UK he would receive a reasonable fine, whereas in the US he will possibly be fined $150.000 per infringement or face a prison sentence.
This sounds like a clever point, but really isn't. Extradition requires that the crime is also a crime under the local laws. Which is why Swiss Bankers would never be extradited to the US for tax evasion, and why Americans would never be extradited to Thailand for making fun on the King.
I don't think copyright infringement should warrant extradition, but I don't have a good reason why I hold that belief.