Back in February I blogged about Hew Griffiths who was in danger of being extradited to the US on charges of software piracy.
Unfortunately, Griffiths is now in the US awaiting sentencing. He could face up to ten years in fail for software piracy.
It is interesting to note that the UK based members of the group, Drink or Die, that Griffiths belonged to were tried in the UK. I won’t reiterate all my views as they are contained in the aforementioned post but simply say the Australian government has set a disturbing precedent.
If we expect America to comply with our extradition requests then we must do likewise.
This “broke the law and the law won”. He knew it was a crime and he new about the punishment. He also effectively put hundreds of people out of work.
Is this a consequence of our ‘free trade’ agreement with the US? I seem to remember the agreement places certain issues in the hands of US law, especially with respect to intellectual property. Even Australian legislation counter to the terms of the agreement can result in the Government being prosecuted in a US Court of Law.
Australia often wonders how much our culture is independent and unique in the face of the US onslaught. The governments response in this case is suggestive of an embarassing lack of Australian self respect.
Legality aside, Melaleuca, the fact he “effectively put hundred of people out of work” is a fairly big call.
You seemed to have swallowed the record companies’ bullshit on this one: the mind-blowing funds they talk about are cherry-picked figures, based on conjectures of how many downloads there were, and positing a world where those who downloaded would actually buy what they got for free.
Obviously, those are two big ifs. Dreamweaver, for example, goes for around $300-$400 - I don’t think everyone who downloads that for free is going to buy it (assuming they could even afford it!).
If you add up all the money the different industries claim they lose in piracy - it’s in the trillions, bigger than the world’s economy (sorry, can’t find link, but it’s out there somewhere).
There is a lot of spin out there about pirating. I’m not saying it’s good or bad. I do think most record/entertainment/software companies are aresholes, however, used to having a monopoly and charging prices that don’t have anything to do with the costs of production, and now competition is more intense, seeking to blame their steadily falling revenues on an easy target.
It will be a tragedy if this guy gets ten years/$150 000. If he had been selling fakes in ‘hard copy’, for profit, he would have been looking at three/four years, tops.
Great! Let’s extradite Bush, Cheney, Rice, etc and try them for War Crimes!
Alternatively, why don’t we just declare that Australia is now the USA’s 52nd state and be done with the farce?
Thanks Shaun, for the update on Hew Griffiths - hopefully da judge will go lightly on this bloke, and take into account time served etc - but the US Attorney General’s Dept wanted and has gotten, via Ratty and Co. a ‘foreign’ sacrificial lamb. (who said lamb exports to the US were down?)
I emailed my federal member (Malcolm) back in February - with a polite and considered email about this case - but I’ve had no reply to date. (Too busy trying to spin that this Govt has a plan for climate change I spose.)
All together now:
O say, can you see, by the dawn’s early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight
O’er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Melaleuca,
So, Rupert and the rest of the directors of News Corp will be facing prison time for breaching copyright in relation to myspace, and also the owners of youtube, etc etc etc? These sites represent millions of supposed copyright infringements…..
Does anyone know what is happening in Universal’s case against myspace - or was it settled in the court of big money payouts?
My understanding of the problem is that Hew never committed a crime on American soil and didn’t commit a criminal offense under Australian law - copyright breaches being, as I understand them, a civil rather than criminal matter over here.
Our community has decided that people shouldn’t face criminal sanctions for copyright violations, but you think its OK to hand them over to face 10 years jail to some band of lunatics who have. So the precedent is: we’ll hand over our citizens, who’ve commited no crime under our law, because another country has criminalised their actions.
And you’re supporting that. That’s fantastic.
I look forward to your empassioned defense of the system if the government decides to ship Janet Albrechtson off to North Korea to face charges of having criticised Dear Leader…
And of course the fact is the US’s IP ‘laws’ are the most corrupt joke you can imagine. The donation hungry US congress has repeatedly passed extensions for Disney and others which effectively acts as a free gift, extending a right after something had been created in the context of an original right.
US IP laws as they now stand are basically a standover bill passed by corrupt interests to extort money from the rest of us.
And we are now fully subject to them! without being able to vote against them!. What a gutless craven government we have
We need IP laws to encourage innovation, yes. But not open ended ones that extend endlessly into the future because some lobbyist wants it.
Actually, there are presently criminal sanctions for copyright infringements pursuant to s 123AC of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). These were introduced in 2006, and came into operation on 1 January 2007, so they would not cover Griffiths’ conduct given that it took place in the 1990s. In fact, the new provision were introduced to comply with Australia’s obligations pursuant to the Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA).
The previous version of the Copyright Act also had criminal sanctions for copyright violation, but these were tied far more to whether an infringer did so for the purpose of personal advantage or profit.
However, I would suggest that s 132(2)(b) of the previous version of Copyright Act would cover Griffiths’ conduct:
In fact, in his appeal to the NSW Court of Appeal, it was noted that the relevant provisions of Australian law which Griffiths would have been said to have breached were s 132(2)(b) of the Copyright Act and 11.2 of the Criminal Code.
The extradition of Griffiths is not legally required by AUSFTA as far as I can see. The fellow has already served three years in gaol here. He could arguably be prosecuted under Australian law, even though s 132 has some shortcomings from a US point of view. But it’s our law and he is a resident of our country. I think the government should not encourage the operation of extraterritorial US laws on the basis that it is a derogation of our sovereignty.
For more info, I have written a post of my own.
Excellent post Legal. Especially the comparison to Hicks (y’all have to go and follow the link).
Why thank you!
I think it was your original post which initially brought the matter to my attention, good to know about these things.
Based on Legal Eagle’s post, I change my mind. Griffiths should be prosecuted here rather than in the US.
Legal Eagle, your reference to the law in Australia with which Hew could have been charged is spot on. To add to this it should be noted that the burden of proof falls on the government. To prosecute a coptright infringement case it must be proven that a copyrighted work was infringed by the defendant , and the owner of said copyright identified. The indictment against Hew by the Grand Jury of Eastern Virginia is very vague to say the least. It does not attribute any thing specifically to Hew Griffiths, but a generalisation that Hew was responsible for uploading and downloading 100s of movies, games and software. It is not my intentention to condone or
condemn Hews alleged actions but to point out how sloppy the US Department of Justice has been in this case and to ask why this case has played out as it has.
The evidence with which this indictment was handed down was based on the here say testimony of the American members of DoD
who plea bargained for lighter sentences. The inability to prove the copyright charge has resulted in this charge being dismissed as part of Hew Griffiths plea bargain last month. I would like to quote some sections of the US appeal in the Federal Court to show there thoughts regarding the actual charge of copyright infringement;
“Article 135: The conduct constituting the offence of copyright infringement is stated in count two of the indictment and in the statements contained in the affidavits of Mr Wiechering and Ms Gable. Count two may be insufficent by itself because it merely alleges infringement by reproduction and distribution of ten or more copyrighted works.”
“Article 136: However, Mr Wiecherings affidavit describes in paragraphs 38 to 40 acts done by Mr Griffiths in reproducing and distributed copyright works without the authorisation of copyright owner. Ms Gable’s list of software releases “cracked & distributed” by DoD contains a staement of the copyrighted items which Mr Griffiths is said to have infringed as principal. It is true that the acts are attributed by Ms Gable to DoD rather than Mr Griffiths but he is stated in the indictment to have been a council member and leader of DoD during this period.”
I would put forward that the US government used unsubstantiated here say to pursue Hew Griffiths. I would also put forward that they willingly lied in putting forward their appeal to the Federal Court for Hews extradition. The sad part is that the Austarlian courts went along with this.
Where is the burden of proof? what ever hapeened to the basic human right of Innocent until proven guilty?
This matter re Hew Griffiths is injustice-plus. I have sent off a protest letter to Today Tonight, A Current Affair, Jon Faine (3LO radio) in the hope that the more publicity the matter receives the better. But a question: On radio 3CR a few weeks ago Mr. Griffiths senior said that (and I may have this wrong) an FBI agent and a number of our Federal Police took Hew from his home at 3 a.m. If I haven’t got it wrong, do FBI agents have the authority to take an Australian resident from his house for transportation to, and sentencing and imprisonment in America?. Hasn’t this country gone back 200 years.
Mairi
Another thought re Hew Griffiths. If Hew Griffiths and others were able to “crack” and download “millions of dollars?” of property from American Companies - it doesn’t say much for the security these companies use. Isn’t it possible these companies are guilty of failing to secure their property and therefore should bear some of the blame for making themselves easy targets. Perhaps rather than locking up these folks, the companies should employ them to help make their systems less vulnerable.
Mairi.
Mairi: “If I haven’t got it wrong, do FBI agents have the authority to take an Australian resident from his house for transportation to, and sentencing and imprisonment in America?”
No, they do not. FBI agents have no authority outside of US territory. Unless they are given it by local officials who are too ignorant or spineless to stand up to them.
This whole sorry mess is another example of the Federal government and other Australian officials acting as colonial governors for a foreign power instead of taking responsibility for running Australia for the benefit of Australians.
Our politicians and senior public servants seem to need formal training and examination in the powers, rights and responsibilities inherent in governing a fully sovereign democratic state, and to demonstrate proper respect for Australian independence and commitment to Australia’s best interests above those of any other nation, before they are allowed to take those jobs. Too many of them seem to think that being local branch agent for the US is enough.
Hint: we aren’t allowed to vote in their elections.
Another problem for Hew Griffiths. Taken from his home in the middle of the night for transportation to the US, Hew had no time to renew his residency visa. He will have to re-apply for a visa - how easy will it be to get one now he is outside of Australia and “has a criminal record”.
And in the matter of care/visits for residents in foreign jails, can we hope Australia will do the right thing here - or will there be an argument between Australia and Britain as to who has responsibility to check on Hew’s “wellbeing”. Doesn’t bear thinking about.
Why did the government give up Hew Griffiths so willingly, when they are making little (or no) effort to have so-called “doctor” Patel (responsible for the death and maiming of Australians in Bundaberg hospital, Qsld, several years ago) returned to Australia. Hew Griffiths physically harmed no-one - yet he is imprisoned in America while Patel is “home free”. And that doesn’t bear thinking about either.
The first part of this is to Andyc. I probably didn’t put my email properly. What I should have said is “Is it true that an FBI agent (accompanied by 7 Federal police) took Hew Griffiths from his home in the middle of the night”. (FBI being main part of the question.)
Further info re the injustice handed to Hew Griffiths: heard on News Radio 4.10 pm Friday 26 October: Lawrence Rivera (wanted in America for murder) has been in NSW fighting extradition to America since his arrest in Orange in May 2002. His latest appeal against extradition has failed. But, wait for it - Rivera has just been granted Legal Aid to help him continue to fight extradition. For a fool read: theage.com.au: in the Search window type Lawrence Rivera. You won’t believe what you read.
I seem fated to have Hew Griffiths in my face - either from newspaper or radio broadcasts. So be it!