Richard O’Dwyer could become the first British citizen to be extradited to the US on a copyright offense. In 2010, the now 23-year-old came under fire for hosting TVShack, a website that listed links to sites where users could access movies and TV shows – although it did not host any content itself. In January of this year, it was reported that he was facing possible extradition to the US on charges of copyright infringement pending a decision by Britain’s Home Secretary, Theresa May. May has now signed the extradition order after having “carefully considered all relevant matters,” according to a spokesperson, UK media report. The case was brought by the
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which claims TVShack earned more than $230,000 in advertising revenue before it was seized. O’Dwyer previously said he undertook the site as a project to improve his skills and job marketability and that the ad sales were to cover server fees. In January, his attorney said O’Dwyer had done nothing more than Google or Yahoo search engines. O’Dwyer would be extradited under the 2003 Extradition Act that has been criticized for being one-sided. For the UK to extradite someone from the US, probable cause must be shown. In the reverse, the US must show reasonable suspicion, according to The BBC. O’Dwyer’s mother Julia said this week: “By rights, it should make for an interesting conversation between the Obamas and Camerons aboard Air Force One, but I’m not holding my breath.” Richard O’Dwyer has 14 days to appeal the Home Secretary’s order.


Totally Shameful.
Hahaha, the US can’t get Roman Polanski back, but this web-hosting guy they can extradite.
We will drag you to America so our lawyers can shake you down for everything you’ve got.
Or you can have a “public defender”
More ridiculous UK to US extradition – funny how it never happens the other way round.
Those making this decision apparently don’t know how to handle issues involving technology. And, yes, Polanski preyed on a little girl and is enjoying a long, profitable life. The U.S. could easily block the legal distribution of any of his new films in the states.
Look, Sorry, Polanski settled with a $100k to his victim. Regardless, you really think an artist’s work should be “blocked” from viewing just because you are outraged with that person’s behavior/morals? You might be living in the wrong country/era.
The 2003 Extradition Act was passed as part of the UK’s anti-terrorism measures. Since then the U.S. has constantly used it for other purposes, many in the UK would say abused it, such as the above case of Richard O’Dwyer. Now before you go all Rush Limbaugh on my ass, I can understand many Americans might not care. But it is exactly this kind of heavy handed, disproportionate and all too one sided action that has created and is now driving a groundswell of ill will in the one country in Europe that is still really onside.
Hi,
The other thing is that it was meant to be equal between countries, but with everything the sold-out politicians in the UK do, they enacted it, while the American politicians didn’t enact their side of the law.
Nothing like how a colonial/empirical power might act!
Kind regards,
Shakir Razak
This is not about money, This is about sending a message.
I hope the message will end with the appeal.
Nobody in this industry nor in government knows jack about the internet. The dude did not host content.
So I suppose they’re going to prosecute Google next because you can search on it for an illegal TV show download and it will give you the link?