Misplaced Pages

Richard O'Dwyer: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:54, 19 September 2014 editSteel (talk | contribs)20,265 editsm Reverted edits by Gumpwert1978 (talk) to last version by ColorOfSuffering← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:31, 19 May 2024 edit undo145.224.74.72 (talk) Undid revision 1204400624 by Elijah B4 (talk)Tag: Undo 
(84 intermediate revisions by 52 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|British computer programmer}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2013}}
{{for|the Newfoundland politician|Richard Horton O'Dwyer}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2021}}
{{Use British English|date=January 2013}} {{Use British English|date=January 2013}}
{{Infobox person {{Infobox person
| image=Img-r-o-dd.jpg | image=Img-r-o-dd.jpg
| name = Richard O'Dwyer | name = Richard O'Dwyer
| caption = Richard O'Dwyer | caption = O'Dwyer c. 2011
| birth_date = {{Birth date and age|df=y|1988|5|5}} | birth_date = {{Birth date and age|df=y|1988|5|5}}
| birth_place = ], England | birth_place = ], England, UK
| known_for = {{Plainlist| | known_for = {{Plainlist|
* TVShack website * TVShack website
* U.S. extradition request * U.S. extradition request
}} }}
| education =] | education = ]
| criminal status = All charges dropped
| alma_mater =
| criminal charge = Conspiracy to commit ]; Criminal infringement of a copyright
| criminal charge = All charges dropped
| website =
| criminal penalty =
| criminal status =
| website =
}} }}


'''Richard O'Dwyer''' (born 5 May 1988) is a British computer programmer who created the TVShack.net website<ref name=NYT71212>{{cite news|title=U. S. Pursuing a Middleman in Web Piracy|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/technology/us-pursues-richard-odwyer-as-intermediary-in-online-piracy.html|accessdate=13 July 2012|newspaper=The New York Times|date=12 July 2012|author=Somini Sengupta}}</ref> while a student at ]. '''Richard O'Dwyer''' (born 5 May 1988) is a British entrepreneur & computer programmer who created the TVShack.net search engine<ref name=NYT71212>{{cite news|title=U. S. Pursuing a Middleman in Web Piracy|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/technology/us-pursues-richard-odwyer-as-intermediary-in-online-piracy.html|accessdate=13 July 2012|newspaper=The New York Times|date=12 July 2012|author=Somini Sengupta}}</ref> while a student at ].


In May 2011, the ] sought to extradite him from the UK in relation to the website. In May 2011, the ] sought to extradite O'Dwyer from the UK in relation to the website.
The site did not host any infringing media, but American authorities said it contained indexed links to media hosted on other sites, and defined it as a "linking" website.<ref name=NYT71212/><ref name="DOJ PR">{{cite web|title=Manhattan Federal Court Orders Seizures of Seven Websites for Criminal Copyright Infringement in Connection with Distribution of Pirated Movies Over the Internet |work=Press Release United States Attorney Southern District of New York |publisher=U.S. Justice Department |date=10 June 2010 |url=https://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/June10/websitedomainnameseizurepr.pdf |accessdate=10 July 2011 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141006090311/http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/June10/websitedomainnameseizurepr.pdf |archivedate=6 October 2014 }}</ref>
The site is not alleged to have hosted any media, but American authorities say it did index links to media on other sites much like Google.<ref name=NYT71212 /> The Southern District Court in New York has charged O'Dwyer with conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal infringement of copyright. Each charge carries a maximum sentence of five years. Richard O'Dwyer's lawyers opposed extradition and argued that any criminal prosecution should be brought in the UK, as TVShack was not hosted on American servers. On 13 January 2012, a UK ] ruled that O'Dwyer could be extradited to the U.S. to face copyright infringement allegations.<ref name="BBC 120113">, '']'', 13 January 2012</ref><ref name="Judgment 120113">, ], 13 January 2012</ref> The extradition order has been approved by UK ] ].<ref name="BBC17355203">{{cite news |title=Richard O'Dwyer case: TVShack creator's U.S. extradition approved |author= |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-17355203 |publisher=] |date=13 March 2012 |accessdate=25 March 2012}}</ref> O'Dwyer launched an appeal against the extradition.<ref name="BB17472142">{{cite news |title=Richard O'Dwyer case: Lawyers lodge extradition appeal |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-17472142 |publisher=] |date=22 March 2012 |accessdate=25 March 2012}}</ref>


The ] charged O'Dwyer with conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal infringement of copyright. O'Dwyer's lawyer Ben Cooper opposed extradition, stating that the site acted as a mere conduit, and should be afforded the same protection given to ] such as ] and ]. Ben Cooper also argued that any criminal prosecution should be brought in the UK, as TVShack was not hosted on American servers.{{citation needed|date=October 2015}}
On 28 November 2012, it was announced that O'Dwyer and the US had reached an agreement to avoid extradition, and all charges had been dropped.<ref>, ''Richard O'Dwyer's two-year extradition ordeal ends in New York'', 7 December 2012.</ref>


On 13 January 2012, UK ] Quentin Purdy rejected those arguments and ruled that O'Dwyer could be extradited to the U.S. to face copyright infringement allegations. The extradition order was approved by then UK ] ] in March, 2012, and O'Dwyer launched an appeal.{{citation needed|date=February 2016}}
Judge Sir John Thomas called the outcome "very satisfactory", adding, "It would be very nice for everyone if this was resolved happily before Christmas".<ref>, ''Misplaced Pages founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform'', 28 November 2012.</ref>


On 28 November 2012, it was announced that O'Dwyer had signed a ] to avoid extradition. He was ordered to pay a fine of £20,000 and remain in contact with a US correctional officer over the next six months. In return, the United States would drop all charges.<ref name=GUAR1206>{{cite news|title=Richard O'Dwyer: living with the threat of extradition|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/dec/06/richard-o-dwyer-avoids-us-extradition|accessdate=13 July 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|date=6 December 2012|author=Adam Gabbatt}}</ref>
== TVShack ==
]


], the judge, called the outcome "very satisfactory", adding, "It would be very nice for everyone if this was resolved happily before Christmas".<ref>, ''Misplaced Pages founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform'', 28 November 2012.</ref>
O'Dwyer, a student at ], created the website TVShack at the ] TVShack.net in December 2007.<ref>. Independent.ie. (2012-01-13). Retrieved on 2012-01-29.</ref><ref name=about>. tvshack.net (Archived 2009-05-31). Retrieved on 2012-01-29.</ref> The website had the categories Movies, Television, Anime, Music and Documentaries, included the disclaimer "TV Shack is a simple resource site. All content visible on this site is located at 3rd party websites. TV Shack is not responsible for any content linked to or referred from these pages."<ref>. tvshack.net (archived 2008-02-13). Retrieved on 2012-01-29.</ref>


O'Dwyer now works as director of a computer software business<ref>{{cite web|title=O'Dwyer Software official website|url=https://odwyer.software/}}</ref> and racing driver.<ref>{{cite web|title=1st Team HARD Driver announced for 2016|url=http://www.team-hard.co.uk/news/1st-team-hard-driver-announced-for-2016|accessdate=11 February 2016}}</ref>
=== Domain seizure ===


==TVShack==
As authorized by the court warrant for the domain seizure, visitors to are redirected to "a banner that advises them that the domain name has been seized by Order of the Court, in connection with criminal copyright violations. "<ref name="DOJ PR">{{cite web| title = Manhattan Federal Court Orders Seizures of Seven Websites for Criminal Copyright Infringement in Connection with Distribution of Pirated Movies Over the Internet| work = Press Release United States Attorney Southern District of New York| publisher = U.S. Justice Department| date = 10 June 2010| url = http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/June10/websitedomainnameseizurepr.pdf| format = PDF | accessdate = 10 July 2011}}</ref>
]
While he was a student at ], O'Dwyer created TVShack.net in December 2007.<ref>. Independent.ie, 13 January 2012; retrieved 29 January 2012.</ref>


The website contained indexed links for movies, television, anime, music, and documentaries. The site FAQ included the disclaimer: "TV Shack is a simple resource site. All content visible on this site is located at 3rd party websites. TV Shack is not responsible for any content linked to or referred from these pages."<ref name=gigaom>{{cite web|last=Ingram|first=Matthew|title=Criminalizing links: Why the Richard O'Dwyer case matters|publisher=Gigaom|date=3 July 2012|url=https://gigaom.com/2012/07/03/criminalizing-links-why-the-richard-odwyer-case-matters|accessdate=7 October 2014}}</ref> The ] considered TVShack.net a linking site that provided links to other sites hosting infringed content,<ref name="guardianpwalker">{{cite news|last=Walker|first=Peter|date=13 January 2012|url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jan/13/tvshack-student-founder-extradition|title=TVShack's student founder can be extradited to US, court rules|newspaper=The Guardian|accessdate=7 October 2014|location=London, UK}}</ref> while O'Dwyer and his supporters argued that the site was little different from a search engine, and would be legal under the ].<ref>{{cite news|last=Enigmax|date=19 October 2011|url=https://torrentfreak.com/tvshack-admin-eyes-court-hearing-after-us-extradition-blow-111019|title=TVShack Admin Eyes Court Hearing After US Extradition Blow|newspaper=TorrentFreak|accessdate=28 October 2015}}</ref>
On 30 June 2010 ] (ICE) officials seized seven domains for "violations of Federal criminal copyright infringement laws". This action was authorized by a warrant issued by the Manhattan Federal Court following a request by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office alleged that the seven websites engaged in "criminal copyright infringement" and were "involved in the illegal distribution of copyrighted movies and television programs over the Internet".


===Domain seizure===
Besides O'Dwyer's TVShack.net, the other domains involved were Movies-Links.tv, FilesPump.com, Now-Movies.com, PlanetMoviez.com, ThePirateCity.org and ZML.com. TVShack was, along with five other websites, described as a "linking website", providing "access or links to other websites where pirated movies and television programs are stored". The seventh website, ZML.com, was described as a "]".
{{BLP sources section|date=February 2016}}
As authorized by the court warrant for the domain seizure, visitors to TVShack.net are redirected to "a banner that advises them that the domain name has been seized by Order of the Court, in connection with criminal copyright violations. "<ref name="DOJ PR"/>


On 30 June 2010 ] (ICE) officials seized seven domains for "violations of Federal criminal copyright infringement laws".{{citation needed|date=October 2015}} This action was authorized by a warrant issued by the Manhattan Federal Court following a request by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office alleged that the seven websites engaged in "criminal copyright infringement" and were "involved in the illegal distribution of copyrighted movies and television programs over the Internet".{{citation needed|date=October 2015}}
The domain seizure was undertaken by the Complex Frauds and Asset Forfeiture Unit of ICE in partnership with the ]. Assistant United States Attorneys Thomas G.A. Brown, Rebecca Rohr, Joseph Facciponti, Jason Hernandez, and Michael Ferrara, were in charge of the investigation.<ref name="DOJ PR" /><ref>{{cite web| last = Fiveash| first = Kelly| title = U.S. authorities shut down websites accused of movie piracy| publisher = The Register| date = 1 July 2010| url = http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/01/us_movie_piracy_crackdown/| accessdate = 10 July 2011}}</ref> At the time Kevin Suh, Vice President of Content Protection for the ] (MPAA) said the domain seizure was the "largest takedown of illegal movie and television websites in a single action by the federal government. "<ref>{{cite web| last = Smith| first = Shireen| title = NinjaVideo.net, TVShack.net and other Domains Seized| publisher = Azrights| date = 7 July 2010| url = http://ip-brands.com/blog/2010/07/ninjavideo-net-tvshack-net-and-other-domains-seized/| accessdate = 10 July 2011 }}</ref>


Besides O'Dwyer's TVShack.net, the other domains involved were Movies-Links.tv, FilesPump.com, Now-Movies.com, PlanetMoviez.com, ThePirateCity.org and ZML.com. TVShack was, along with five other websites, described as a "linking website", providing "access or links to other websites where pirated movies and television programs are stored". The seventh website, ZML.com, was described as a "]".{{citation needed|date=October 2015}}
Within four hours of the TVShack.net domain seizure, TVShack was moved to the TVShack.cc domain.<ref name="telegraph1">{{cite news |last=Williams |first=Christopher |date=2012-01-13 |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9013803/Student-Richard-ODwyer-can-be-extradited-over-TV-website.html |title=Student Richard O'Dwyer can be extradited over TV website |newspaper=The Telegraph |accessdate=2012-01-29 |location=London}}</ref>


The domain seizure was undertaken by the Complex Frauds and Asset Forfeiture Unit of ICE in partnership with the ]. Assistant United States Attorneys Thomas G.A. Brown, Rebecca Rohr, Joseph Facciponti, Jason Hernandez, and Michael Ferrara, were in charge of the investigation.<ref name="DOJ PR"/><ref>{{cite web|last=Fiveash|first=Kelly|title=U.S. authorities shut down websites accused of movie piracy|website=The Register|date=1 July 2010|url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/01/us_movie_piracy_crackdown|accessdate=10 July 2011}}</ref> At the time Kevin Suh, Vice President of Content Protection for the ] (MPAA) said the domain seizure was the "largest takedown of illegal movie and television websites in a single action by the federal government."<ref>{{cite web|last=Smith|first=Shireen|title=NinjaVideo.net, TVShack.net and other Domains Seized|publisher=Azrights|date=7 July 2010|url=http://ip-brands.com/blog/2010/07/ninjavideo-net-tvshack-net-and-other-domains-seized|accessdate=10 July 2011}}</ref>
=== November seizure ===


In late November 2010, roughly five months after the initial seizure, a second operation saw a total of at least 82 domains seized by ICE. This included TVShack.cc.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.zeropaid.com/news/91413/ice-seizes-more-domain-names-tvshack-for-2nd-time/ |title=ICE Seizes More Domain Names – TVShack for 2nd Time |publisher=Zeropaid.com |date=2010-11-30 |accessdate=2012-01-29 }}</ref> Within four hours of the TVShack.net domain seizure, TVShack was moved to the TVShack.cc domain.<ref name="telegraph1">{{cite news|last=Williams|first=Christopher|date=13 January 2012|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9013803/Student-Richard-ODwyer-can-be-extradited-over-TV-website.html|title=Student Richard O'Dwyer can be extradited over TV website|newspaper=The Telegraph|location=London|accessdate=29 January 2012}}</ref>


===November seizure===
O'Dwyer was visited by UK and U.S. police at this time, and some computer equipment was seized.<ref>. Bbc.co.uk (2012-01-13). Retrieved on 2012-01-29.</ref> O'Dwyer's mother stated that he shut down the website the next day.<ref name="Guardian 110617">{{cite news| last = Walker| first = Peter| title = Student who ran file sharing site TVShack could face extradition to U.S. | publisher = Guardian.co.uk | date = 17 June 2011| url = http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jun/17/student-file-sharing-tvshack-extradition| accessdate = 10 July 2011| location=London}}</ref>
In late November 2010, roughly five months after the initial seizure, a second operation saw a total of at least 82 domains seized by ICE. This included TVShack.cc.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.zeropaid.com/news/91413/ice-seizes-more-domain-names-tvshack-for-2nd-time|title=ICE Seizes More Domain Names – TVShack for 2nd Time|publisher=Zeropaid.com|date=30 November 2010|accessdate=29 January 2012}}</ref>


O'Dwyer was visited by UK and U.S. police at this time, and some computer equipment was seized.<ref>, bbc.co.uk, 13 January 2012; retrieved 29 January 2012.</ref> O'Dwyer's mother said her son had shut down the website the next day.<ref name="Guardian 110617">{{cite news|last=Walker|first=Peter|title=Student who ran file sharing site TVShack could face extradition to U.S.|work=Guardian.co.uk|date=17 June 2011|url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/jun/17/student-file-sharing-tvshack-extradition|accessdate=10 July 2011|location=London, UK}}</ref>
== MPAA memo==


==MPAA memo==
On 5 August 2012, a leaked memo from the ] showed the MPAA's attempts to recruit ] to write news stories and blog posts to back their own interests. In the document they note the overwhelming support for O'Dwyer and that 95% of the public did not support the extradition, and also point out the difficulty of finding "allies" within the United Kingdom. The MPAA gave no comment on this strategic document leak.<ref>{{cite web |author=Ernesto |url=http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-recruits-surrogates-to-support-extradition-of-uk-student-120806/ |title=MPAA Recruits "Surrogates" to Support Extradition of UK Student |publisher=torrentfreak.com |date=2012-08-06}}</ref>
On 5 August 2012, a leaked memo from the ] showed the MPAA's attempts to recruit ] to write news stories and blog posts to back their own interests. In the document they note the overwhelming support for O'Dwyer and that 95% of the public did not support the extradition, and also point out the difficulty of finding "allies" within the United Kingdom. The MPAA gave no comment on this strategic document leak.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-recruits-surrogates-to-support-extradition-of-uk-student-120806|title=MPAA Recruits "Surrogates" to Support Extradition of UK Student|publisher=torrentfreak.com|date=6 August 2012}}</ref>


== U.S. charges and extradition request == ==U.S. charges and extradition request==
In May 2011 the ], through the London U.S. Embassy, asked for Richard O'Dwyer to be extradited to the U.S. under the ].<ref name="TechDirt 110617">{{cite web|last=Masnick|first=Mike|title=Why Is the Justice Department Pretending U.S. Copyright Laws Apply in the UK?|publisher=TechDirt|date=17 June 2011| url=http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=richard+o%27dwyer|accessdate=10 July 2011}}</ref>


In May 2011 the ], through the London U.S. embassy, asked for Richard O'Dwyer to be extradited to the U.S. under the ].<ref name="TechDirt 110617">{{cite web| last = Masnick| first = Mike| title = Why Is the Justice Department Pretending U.S. Copyright Laws Apply In The UK?| publisher = TechDirt| date = 17 June 2011| url = http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=richard+o%27dwyer | accessdate = 10 July 2011 }}</ref> The extradition request followed the Southern District Court in New York bringing two charges against O'Dwyer for criminal ] in relation to TVShack.net. The two charges, conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal infringement of copyright, each carry a maximum sentence of five years.<ref name="PCPro 110616">{{cite web| last = Mitchell| first = Stewart| title = UK student vows to fight copyright extradition | publisher = PCPro | date = 16 June 2011| url = http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/368110/uk-student-vows-to-fight-copyright-extradition| accessdate = 10 July 2011}}</ref> The extradition request was made after the Department of Justice had filed charges against O'Dwyer for criminal ] at the Southern District Court in New York.<ref name="DOJSDNY">{{cite web|title=United States v. Richard J. O'Dwyer|work=Affidavit in Support of Request for Extradition of Richard J. O'Dwyer|publisher=U.S. Justice Department|date=23 February 2011|url=http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic1210912.files//U-S-v-O-Dwyer-SDNY-5-Affidavit-of-AUSA-Reh-ISO-Request-for-Extradition.pdf|accessdate=17 November 2014}}</ref> The two charges, conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal infringement of copyright, each carry a maximum prison sentence of five years.<ref name="PCPro 110616">{{cite web|last=Mitchell|first=Stewart|title=UK student vows to fight copyright extradition|publisher=PCPro|date=16 June 2011|url=http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/368110/uk-student-vows-to-fight-copyright-extradition|accessdate=10 July 2011}}</ref>


When the extradition request was made in May 2011, O'Dwyer spent one night in Wandsworth prison before arrangements were made for ]. On 14 June 2011, he then appeared before the Westminster ] for a preliminary hearing regarding the extradition request.<ref name="Guardian 110617" /> O'Dwyer's barrister opposed extradition and argued that any criminal prosecution should be brought in the UK, as TVShack was not hosted on American servers.<ref name="Telegraph 110617">{{cite news| last1 = Williams| first1 = Christopher| last2 = Bloxham | first2 = Andy| title = Student faces extradition to US over TV website| publisher = The Telegraph | date = 17 June 2011| url = http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8579936/Student-faces-extradition-to-US-over-TV-website.html| accessdate = 10 July 2011| location=London}}</ref> The hearing for the extradition was scheduled for 12 September.<ref name="PCPro 110616" /> On 13 January 2012, a judge ruled that O'Dwyer can be extradited to U.S. to face copyright infringement allegations.<ref name="BBC 120113" /><ref name="Judgment 120113" /> When the extradition request was made in May 2011, O'Dwyer spent one night in ] before arrangements were made for ]. On 14 June 2011, he appeared before ] for a preliminary hearing regarding the extradition request.<ref name="Guardian 110617"/> O'Dwyer's barrister Ben Cooper opposed extradition and argued that any criminal prosecution should be brought in the UK, as TVShack was not hosted on American servers.<ref name="Telegraph 110617">{{cite news|last1=Williams|first1=Christopher|last2=Bloxham|first2=Andy|title=Student faces extradition to US over TV website|newspaper=The Telegraph|location=London|date=17 June 2011|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8579936/Student-faces-extradition-to-US-over-TV-website.html|accessdate=10 July 2011}}</ref>


The hearing for the extradition was scheduled for 12 September.<ref name="PCPro 110616"/> On 13 January 2012, a judge ruled that O'Dwyer can be extradited to U.S. to face copyright infringement allegations.<ref name="BBC 120113">, '']'', 13 January 2012</ref><ref name="Judgment 120113"> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120115192326/http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/us-v-odwyer-ruling.pdf |date=15 January 2012 }}, ], 13 January 2012.</ref>
In February 2012, businessman ] undertook to fund O'Dwyer's defence, in the event of his standing trial in the USA.<ref name="Myers">{{cite news|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2096621/Tycoon-aid-pirate-legal-fight-extradition-U-S-copyright-theft-charge.html|title=Tycoon to aid 'pirate' legal fight against extradition to the U.S. on copyright theft charge|last=Myers|first=Russel|date=2012-02-05|work=]|accessdate=5 February 2012|location=London}}</ref> David Cook of Pannone Solicitors, who successfully represented defendants in some of the UK's leading cybercrime cases, also undertook to assist in the O'Dwyer case on a '']'' basis.


In February 2012, businessman ] offered to fund O'Dwyer's defence, in the event of his standing trial in the US. David Cook of Pannone Solicitors, who successfully represented defendants in some of the UK's leading cybercrime cases, also undertook to assist in the O'Dwyer case on a '']'' basis.{{citation needed|date=October 2015}}
On 13 March 2012, ], the UK ], approved the extradition of O'Dwyer to the United States.<ref name="BBC17355203"/> On 26 March, an appeal against the extradition was lodged on his behalf.<ref name="BB17472142"/>


On 13 March 2012, ], the UK ], approved the extradition of O'Dwyer to the United States.<ref name="BBC17355203">{{cite news|title=Richard O'Dwyer case: TVShack creator's U.S. extradition approved|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-17355203|publisher=]|date=13 March 2012|accessdate=25 March 2012}}</ref> On 26 March, an appeal against the extradition was lodged on his behalf.<ref name="BB17472142">{{cite news|title=Richard O'Dwyer case: Lawyers lodge extradition appeal|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-17472142|publisher=]|date=22 March 2012|accessdate=25 March 2012}}</ref>
In June 2012 ] co-founder ] launched a campaign calling for the extradition to be stopped.<ref>{{cite news |first=James |last=Ball |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/24/wikipedia-founder-richard-odwyer-extradition-stopped |title=Misplaced Pages's founder calls for Richard O'Dwyer extradition to be stopped |newspaper='']'' |date=2012-06-24 |location=London}}</ref> He had also been supported by '']'' newspaper<ref></ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Misplaced Pages founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform |author=Davies, Lizzy, James Ball and Owen Bowcott |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/28/wikipedia-extradiction-law-review-odwyer |newspaper=The Guardian |date=28 November 2012 |accessdate=28 November 2012 |location=London}}</ref> and others.


In June 2012 ] co-founder ] launched a campaign calling for the extradition to be stopped.<ref>{{cite news|first=James|last=Ball|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/24/wikipedia-founder-richard-odwyer-extradition-stopped|title=Misplaced Pages's founder calls for Richard O'Dwyer extradition to be stopped|newspaper=]|date=24 June 2012|location=London, UK}}</ref> He had also been supported by '']'' newspaper,<ref name="guardian">{{cite news|title=Misplaced Pages founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform|author=Davies, Lizzy, James Ball and Owen Bowcott|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/nov/28/wikipedia-extradiction-law-review-odwyer|newspaper=The Guardian|date=28 November 2012|accessdate=28 November 2012|location=London, UK}}</ref> and others.
In November 2012 O'Dwyer agreed to a "deferred prosecution" agreement. The high court in the UK was told that he would travel to the US voluntarily to complete the agreement, which would entail him paying a small sum in compensation and giving an undertaking not to infringe copyright laws again.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-2052589 | deadurl=yes}} {{Dead link|date=April 2014|bot=RjwilmsiBot}}</ref> He has not been convicted of any crime, in the US or UK.


In November 2012, O'Dwyer agreed to a deferred prosecution agreement. The High Court in the UK was told that he would travel to the US voluntarily to complete the agreement, which would entail him paying a small sum in compensation and giving an undertaking not to infringe copyright laws again.<ref name=GUAR1206/><ref name="guardian"/>
== Legal objections ==


==Legal objections==
=== U.S. and UK copyright offences ===


===Public opinion in the UK===
According to the ] UK citizens should not be subject to U.S. legal standards on copyright infringement.<ref name="OutLaw 110705">{{cite web|title=U. S. could use extradition agreement to force UK copyright infringing suspects to face trial in the U.S., media reports say|publisher=Out-Law|date=5 July 2011|url=http://www.out-law.com/page-12056|accessdate=10 July 2011}}</ref> Iain Connor from ] said, "It appears that U.S. copyright owners are seeking to rely on the Extradition Act and the U.S. case law to secure a prosecution for the authorisation of copyright infringement by the provision of links to infringing content. " He observed that "U.S. companies are likely to try and secure a conviction in the U.S. where they know that they could succeed on the basis of an offence of ''authorising copyright infringement''", and that in the UK "the only case where this was looked at was the ']' case" where it had proved unsuccessful."<ref name="Guardian 110617" /><ref name="OutLaw 110705" />
A July 2012 poll conducted by ] showed that 9% of the UK population thought O'Dwyer should be extradited, 26% thought he should face charges in the UK, and 46% thought he should not face any criminal charges.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/07/09/odwyer-extradition/|title=O'Dwyer extradition|last=Gardiner|first=Bonnie|publisher=]|date=9 July 2012|accessdate=24 November 2012}}</ref>


===U.S. and UK copyright offences===
During O'Dwyer's extradition hearing, it was held by the judge that the offences alleged were also illegal under UK law. Whereas TV-Links was able to successfully argue it was a "mere conduit" under the EU ], aggregating content "they did not select or modify", O'Dwyer had exerted considerable control over the content hosted on TV-Shack, and therefore the allegations, if true, constituted a crime in the UK.<ref name="telegraph1" />
According to the ] UK citizens should not be subject to U.S. legal standards on copyright infringement.<ref name="OutLaw 110705">{{cite web|title=U. S. could use extradition agreement to force UK copyright infringing suspects to face trial in the U.S., media reports say|publisher=Out-Law|date=5 July 2011|url=http://www.out-law.com/page-12056|accessdate=10 July 2011}}</ref>


Iain Connor from ] said, "It appears that U.S. copyright owners are seeking to rely on the Extradition Act and the U.S. case law to secure a prosecution for the authorisation of copyright infringement by the provision of links to infringing content. " He observed that "U.S. companies are likely to try and secure a conviction in the U.S. where they know that they could succeed on the basis of an offence of ''authorising copyright infringement''", and that in the UK "the only case where this was looked at was the ']' case" where it had proved unsuccessful."<ref name="Guardian 110617"/><ref name="OutLaw 110705"/>
=== Jurisdiction ===


During the extradition hearings, the judge held that the offences alleged were also illegal under UK law. Whereas TV-Links was able to successfully argue it was a "mere conduit" under the EU ], aggregating content "they did not select or modify", O'Dwyer had exerted considerable control over the content hosted on TV-Shack, and therefore the allegations, if true, constituted a crime in the UK.<ref name="telegraph1"/>
At the preliminary hearing for the extradition request, Richard O'Dwyer's barrister Ben Cooper argued that "the server was not based in the U.S. at all", and that "Mr O'Dwyer did not have copyrighted material on his website; he simply provided a link. The essential contention is that the correct forum for this trial is in fact here in Britain, where he was at all times."<ref name="Guardian 110617" />


===Jurisdiction===
Calling the extradition request for O'Dwyer "absurd", the Open Rights Group warned that lacking certainty about jurisdiction is "potentially opening an individual to dozens of prosecutions" for copyright infringement.<ref name="OutLaw 110705" />
At the preliminary hearing for the extradition request, O'Dwyer's barrister Ben Cooper argued that "the server was not based in the U.S. at all", and that "Mr O'Dwyer did not have copyrighted material on his website; he simply provided a link. The essential contention is that the correct forum for this trial is in fact here in Britain, where he was at all times."<ref name="Guardian 110617"/>


Calling the extradition request for O'Dwyer "absurd", the Open Rights Group warned that lacking certainty about jurisdiction is "potentially opening an individual to dozens of prosecutions" for copyright infringement.<ref name="OutLaw 110705"/>
=== 2003 U.S.–UK extradition treaty ===


===2003 U.S.–UK extradition treaty===
There has been criticism of the ] in the UK in respect of the cases of ] and the ].<ref name="Telegraph 110617" /> In particular, the Act has been criticised for reducing the level of evidence required for extradition from the UK to the U.S. from '']'' evidence to "reasonable suspicion", and for allowing extradition to proceed on the basis of offences in U.S. rather than UK law. In addition, the standard of proof required for extradition from the U.S. to the UK is different, in accordance with the ] – the standard of "probable cause".
There has been criticism of the ] in the UK in respect of the cases of ] and the ].<ref name="Telegraph 110617"/> In particular, the Act has been criticised for reducing the level of evidence required for extradition from the UK to the U.S. from '']'' evidence to "reasonable suspicion", and for allowing extradition to proceed on the basis of offences in U.S. rather than UK law. In addition, the standard of proof required for extradition from the U.S. to the UK is different, in accordance with the ] – the standard of "probable cause".{{citation needed|date=October 2015}}


When in opposition the ] and ] criticised the Extradition Act 2003 and in September 2010 Home Secretary ] an independent review of all extradition arrangements was begun.<ref name="Guardian 110617" /> The review, completed in September 2011, concluded that the "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause" tests had "no significant difference", and that there was no imbalance in this respect. Moreover, the UK extradition procedure was found to be more elaborate, and more difficult to achieve, than that from the U.S. In respect of the NatWest Three, the report noted that the extradition evidence had been prepared according to the standards of the pre-2003 Treaty, and that was therefore no grounds to criticise the 2003 Treaty in respect of this case.<ref name=review> p. 242 et seq</ref> When in opposition the ] and ] criticised the Extradition Act 2003 and in September 2010 Home Secretary ] an independent review of all extradition arrangements was begun.<ref name="Guardian 110617"/> The review, completed in September 2011, concluded that the "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause" tests had "no significant difference", and that there was no imbalance in this respect. Moreover, the UK extradition procedure was found to be more elaborate, and more difficult to achieve, than that from the U.S. In respect of the NatWest Three, the report noted that the extradition evidence had been prepared according to the standards of the pre-2003 Treaty, and that was therefore no grounds to criticise the 2003 Treaty in respect of this case.<ref name=review>, homeoffice.gov.uk, p. 242 et seq</ref>


A forum bar amendment to the Extradition Act was included in the Police and Justice Act 2006, but has not been brought into effect. The unimplemented bar provision indicates that extradition would be barred if "a significant part of the conduct alleged to constitute the extradition offence is conduct in the United Kingdom" and "in view of that and all the other circumstances, it would not be in the interests of justice for the person to be tried for the offence in the requesting territory", taking into account "whether the relevant prosecution authorities in the United Kingdom have decided not to take proceedings against the person in respect of the conduct in question." A forum bar amendment to the Extradition Act was included in the Police and Justice Act 2006, but has not been brought into effect. The unimplemented bar provision indicates that extradition would be barred if "a significant part of the conduct alleged to constitute the extradition offence is conduct in the United Kingdom" and "in view of that and all the other circumstances, it would not be in the interests of justice for the person to be tried for the offence in the requesting territory", taking into account "whether the relevant prosecution authorities in the United Kingdom have decided not to take proceedings against the person in respect of the conduct in question."{{citation needed|date=October 2015}}


Civil liberties groups have called on the government to effect the forum clause into UK law in relation to the extradition request for Richard O'Dwyer, amid concerns over whether the U.S. courts are the appropriate legal forum. According to ], "Enacting the forum amendment would have been quite simple. It's not that we're arguing that in every case where activity has taken place here we shouldn't allow people to be extradited. But we should at least be leaving our judges some discretion to look at the circumstances."<ref name="Guardian 110617" /> According to Liberty, the forum clause would allow UK courts to "bar extradition in the interests of justice where conduct leading to an alleged offence has quite clearly taken place on British soil."<ref name="OutLaw 110705" /> Civil liberties groups have called on the government to effect the forum clause into UK law in relation to the extradition request for Richard O'Dwyer, amid concerns over whether the U.S. courts are the appropriate legal forum. According to ], "Enacting the forum amendment would have been quite simple. It's not that we're arguing that in every case where activity has taken place here we shouldn't allow people to be extradited. But we should at least be leaving our judges some discretion to look at the circumstances."<ref name="Guardian 110617"/> According to Liberty, the forum clause would allow UK courts to "bar extradition in the interests of justice where conduct leading to an alleged offence has quite clearly taken place on British soil."<ref name="OutLaw 110705"/>


The 2011 extradition review, however, concluded that the forum bar clause "would require the judge to consider the evidence available to the requesting State and the evidence available to the domestic prosecution authorities. It would also require scrutiny of the prosecution decision making process", and that to do this would be "time consuming, costly and undermine the efficient and effective operation" of the Act.<ref name="review" /> The 2011 extradition review, however, concluded that the forum bar clause "would require the judge to consider the evidence available to the requesting State and the evidence available to the domestic prosecution authorities. It would also require scrutiny of the prosecution decision making process", and that to do this would be "time consuming, costly and undermine the efficient and effective operation" of the Act.<ref name="review"/>

=== Public opinion in the UK ===

A July 2012 poll conducted by ] showed that 9% of the UK population thought O'Dwyer should be extradited, 26% thought he should face charges in his own country, and 46% thought he should not face any criminal charges.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/07/09/odwyer-extradition/|title=O'Dwyer extradition|last=Gardiner|first=Bonnie|publisher=]|date=9 July 2012|accessdate=24 November 2012}}</ref>

== See also ==


==See also==
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
Line 106: Line 111:
* ] * ]


== References == ==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}} {{Reflist}}


== External links == ==External links==
* *
*
*
* (Richard O'Dwyer's mother)


{{Persondata <!-- Metadata: see ] -->
| NAME = O'Dwyer, Richard
| ALTERNATIVE NAMES =
| SHORT DESCRIPTION = Student
| DATE OF BIRTH = 5 May 1988
| PLACE OF BIRTH = ], ]
| DATE OF DEATH =
| PLACE OF DEATH =
}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:ODwyer, Richard}} {{DEFAULTSORT:ODwyer, Richard}}
] ]
] ]
] ]
]
] ]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 17:31, 19 May 2024

British computer programmer For the Newfoundland politician, see Richard Horton O'Dwyer.

Richard O'Dwyer
O'Dwyer c. 2011
Born (1988-05-05) 5 May 1988 (age 36)
Sheffield, England, UK
EducationSheffield Hallam University
Known for
  • TVShack website
  • U.S. extradition request
Criminal charge(s)Conspiracy to commit copyright infringement; Criminal infringement of a copyright
Criminal statusAll charges dropped
Websitewww.richard.do

Richard O'Dwyer (born 5 May 1988) is a British entrepreneur & computer programmer who created the TVShack.net search engine while a student at Sheffield Hallam University.

In May 2011, the U.S. Justice Department sought to extradite O'Dwyer from the UK in relation to the website. The site did not host any infringing media, but American authorities said it contained indexed links to media hosted on other sites, and defined it as a "linking" website.

The Southern District Court in New York charged O'Dwyer with conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal infringement of copyright. O'Dwyer's lawyer Ben Cooper opposed extradition, stating that the site acted as a mere conduit, and should be afforded the same protection given to search engines such as Google and Yahoo!. Ben Cooper also argued that any criminal prosecution should be brought in the UK, as TVShack was not hosted on American servers.

On 13 January 2012, UK District Judge Quentin Purdy rejected those arguments and ruled that O'Dwyer could be extradited to the U.S. to face copyright infringement allegations. The extradition order was approved by then UK Home Secretary Theresa May in March, 2012, and O'Dwyer launched an appeal.

On 28 November 2012, it was announced that O'Dwyer had signed a deferred prosecution agreement to avoid extradition. He was ordered to pay a fine of £20,000 and remain in contact with a US correctional officer over the next six months. In return, the United States would drop all charges.

Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, the judge, called the outcome "very satisfactory", adding, "It would be very nice for everyone if this was resolved happily before Christmas".

O'Dwyer now works as director of a computer software business and racing driver.

TVShack

Official TV Shack Logo

While he was a student at Sheffield Hallam University, O'Dwyer created TVShack.net in December 2007.

The website contained indexed links for movies, television, anime, music, and documentaries. The site FAQ included the disclaimer: "TV Shack is a simple resource site. All content visible on this site is located at 3rd party websites. TV Shack is not responsible for any content linked to or referred from these pages." The MPAA considered TVShack.net a linking site that provided links to other sites hosting infringed content, while O'Dwyer and his supporters argued that the site was little different from a search engine, and would be legal under the Electronic Commerce Regulations 2002.

Domain seizure

This section of a biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libelous.
Find sources: "Richard O'Dwyer" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (February 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

As authorized by the court warrant for the domain seizure, visitors to TVShack.net are redirected to "a banner that advises them that the domain name has been seized by Order of the Court, in connection with criminal copyright violations. "

On 30 June 2010 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials seized seven domains for "violations of Federal criminal copyright infringement laws". This action was authorized by a warrant issued by the Manhattan Federal Court following a request by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office alleged that the seven websites engaged in "criminal copyright infringement" and were "involved in the illegal distribution of copyrighted movies and television programs over the Internet".

Besides O'Dwyer's TVShack.net, the other domains involved were Movies-Links.tv, FilesPump.com, Now-Movies.com, PlanetMoviez.com, ThePirateCity.org and ZML.com. TVShack was, along with five other websites, described as a "linking website", providing "access or links to other websites where pirated movies and television programs are stored". The seventh website, ZML.com, was described as a "cyberlocker".

The domain seizure was undertaken by the Complex Frauds and Asset Forfeiture Unit of ICE in partnership with the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center. Assistant United States Attorneys Thomas G.A. Brown, Rebecca Rohr, Joseph Facciponti, Jason Hernandez, and Michael Ferrara, were in charge of the investigation. At the time Kevin Suh, Vice President of Content Protection for the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) said the domain seizure was the "largest takedown of illegal movie and television websites in a single action by the federal government."

Within four hours of the TVShack.net domain seizure, TVShack was moved to the TVShack.cc domain.

November seizure

In late November 2010, roughly five months after the initial seizure, a second operation saw a total of at least 82 domains seized by ICE. This included TVShack.cc.

O'Dwyer was visited by UK and U.S. police at this time, and some computer equipment was seized. O'Dwyer's mother said her son had shut down the website the next day.

MPAA memo

On 5 August 2012, a leaked memo from the Motion Picture Association of America showed the MPAA's attempts to recruit "third party surrogates" to write news stories and blog posts to back their own interests. In the document they note the overwhelming support for O'Dwyer and that 95% of the public did not support the extradition, and also point out the difficulty of finding "allies" within the United Kingdom. The MPAA gave no comment on this strategic document leak.

U.S. charges and extradition request

In May 2011 the U.S. Justice Department, through the London U.S. Embassy, asked for Richard O'Dwyer to be extradited to the U.S. under the Extradition Act 2003.

The extradition request was made after the Department of Justice had filed charges against O'Dwyer for criminal copyright infringement at the Southern District Court in New York. The two charges, conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal infringement of copyright, each carry a maximum prison sentence of five years.

When the extradition request was made in May 2011, O'Dwyer spent one night in Wandsworth prison before arrangements were made for bail. On 14 June 2011, he appeared before Westminster Magistrates' Court for a preliminary hearing regarding the extradition request. O'Dwyer's barrister Ben Cooper opposed extradition and argued that any criminal prosecution should be brought in the UK, as TVShack was not hosted on American servers.

The hearing for the extradition was scheduled for 12 September. On 13 January 2012, a judge ruled that O'Dwyer can be extradited to U.S. to face copyright infringement allegations.

In February 2012, businessman Alki David offered to fund O'Dwyer's defence, in the event of his standing trial in the US. David Cook of Pannone Solicitors, who successfully represented defendants in some of the UK's leading cybercrime cases, also undertook to assist in the O'Dwyer case on a pro bono basis.

On 13 March 2012, Theresa May, the UK Home Secretary, approved the extradition of O'Dwyer to the United States. On 26 March, an appeal against the extradition was lodged on his behalf.

In June 2012 Misplaced Pages co-founder Jimmy Wales launched a campaign calling for the extradition to be stopped. He had also been supported by The Guardian newspaper, and others.

In November 2012, O'Dwyer agreed to a deferred prosecution agreement. The High Court in the UK was told that he would travel to the US voluntarily to complete the agreement, which would entail him paying a small sum in compensation and giving an undertaking not to infringe copyright laws again.

Legal objections

Public opinion in the UK

A July 2012 poll conducted by YouGov showed that 9% of the UK population thought O'Dwyer should be extradited, 26% thought he should face charges in the UK, and 46% thought he should not face any criminal charges.

U.S. and UK copyright offences

According to the Open Rights Group UK citizens should not be subject to U.S. legal standards on copyright infringement.

Iain Connor from Pinsent Masons said, "It appears that U.S. copyright owners are seeking to rely on the Extradition Act and the U.S. case law to secure a prosecution for the authorisation of copyright infringement by the provision of links to infringing content. " He observed that "U.S. companies are likely to try and secure a conviction in the U.S. where they know that they could succeed on the basis of an offence of authorising copyright infringement", and that in the UK "the only case where this was looked at was the 'TV Links' case" where it had proved unsuccessful."

During the extradition hearings, the judge held that the offences alleged were also illegal under UK law. Whereas TV-Links was able to successfully argue it was a "mere conduit" under the EU Electronic Commerce Regulations 2002, aggregating content "they did not select or modify", O'Dwyer had exerted considerable control over the content hosted on TV-Shack, and therefore the allegations, if true, constituted a crime in the UK.

Jurisdiction

At the preliminary hearing for the extradition request, O'Dwyer's barrister Ben Cooper argued that "the server was not based in the U.S. at all", and that "Mr O'Dwyer did not have copyrighted material on his website; he simply provided a link. The essential contention is that the correct forum for this trial is in fact here in Britain, where he was at all times."

Calling the extradition request for O'Dwyer "absurd", the Open Rights Group warned that lacking certainty about jurisdiction is "potentially opening an individual to dozens of prosecutions" for copyright infringement.

2003 U.S.–UK extradition treaty

There has been criticism of the Extradition Act 2003 in the UK in respect of the cases of Gary McKinnon and the NatWest Three. In particular, the Act has been criticised for reducing the level of evidence required for extradition from the UK to the U.S. from prima facie evidence to "reasonable suspicion", and for allowing extradition to proceed on the basis of offences in U.S. rather than UK law. In addition, the standard of proof required for extradition from the U.S. to the UK is different, in accordance with the Fourth Amendment – the standard of "probable cause".

When in opposition the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats criticised the Extradition Act 2003 and in September 2010 Home Secretary Theresa May an independent review of all extradition arrangements was begun. The review, completed in September 2011, concluded that the "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause" tests had "no significant difference", and that there was no imbalance in this respect. Moreover, the UK extradition procedure was found to be more elaborate, and more difficult to achieve, than that from the U.S. In respect of the NatWest Three, the report noted that the extradition evidence had been prepared according to the standards of the pre-2003 Treaty, and that was therefore no grounds to criticise the 2003 Treaty in respect of this case.

A forum bar amendment to the Extradition Act was included in the Police and Justice Act 2006, but has not been brought into effect. The unimplemented bar provision indicates that extradition would be barred if "a significant part of the conduct alleged to constitute the extradition offence is conduct in the United Kingdom" and "in view of that and all the other circumstances, it would not be in the interests of justice for the person to be tried for the offence in the requesting territory", taking into account "whether the relevant prosecution authorities in the United Kingdom have decided not to take proceedings against the person in respect of the conduct in question."

Civil liberties groups have called on the government to effect the forum clause into UK law in relation to the extradition request for Richard O'Dwyer, amid concerns over whether the U.S. courts are the appropriate legal forum. According to Liberty, "Enacting the forum amendment would have been quite simple. It's not that we're arguing that in every case where activity has taken place here we shouldn't allow people to be extradited. But we should at least be leaving our judges some discretion to look at the circumstances." According to Liberty, the forum clause would allow UK courts to "bar extradition in the interests of justice where conduct leading to an alleged offence has quite clearly taken place on British soil."

The 2011 extradition review, however, concluded that the forum bar clause "would require the judge to consider the evidence available to the requesting State and the evidence available to the domestic prosecution authorities. It would also require scrutiny of the prosecution decision making process", and that to do this would be "time consuming, costly and undermine the efficient and effective operation" of the Act.

See also

References

  1. ^ Somini Sengupta (12 July 2012). "U. S. Pursuing a Middleman in Web Piracy". The New York Times. Retrieved 13 July 2012.
  2. ^ "Manhattan Federal Court Orders Seizures of Seven Websites for Criminal Copyright Infringement in Connection with Distribution of Pirated Movies Over the Internet" (PDF). Press Release United States Attorney Southern District of New York. U.S. Justice Department. 10 June 2010. Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 October 2014. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  3. ^ Adam Gabbatt (6 December 2012). "Richard O'Dwyer: living with the threat of extradition". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 July 2012.
  4. , Misplaced Pages founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform, 28 November 2012.
  5. "O'Dwyer Software official website".
  6. "1st Team HARD Driver announced for 2016". Retrieved 11 February 2016.
  7. Background: How TVShack blazed a trail for illegal downloaders – Technology, Business. Independent.ie, 13 January 2012; retrieved 29 January 2012.
  8. Ingram, Matthew (3 July 2012). "Criminalizing links: Why the Richard O'Dwyer case matters". Gigaom. Retrieved 7 October 2014.
  9. Walker, Peter (13 January 2012). "TVShack's student founder can be extradited to US, court rules". The Guardian. London, UK. Retrieved 7 October 2014.
  10. Enigmax (19 October 2011). "TVShack Admin Eyes Court Hearing After US Extradition Blow". TorrentFreak. Retrieved 28 October 2015.
  11. Fiveash, Kelly (1 July 2010). "U.S. authorities shut down websites accused of movie piracy". The Register. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  12. Smith, Shireen (7 July 2010). "NinjaVideo.net, TVShack.net and other Domains Seized". Azrights. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  13. ^ Williams, Christopher (13 January 2012). "Student Richard O'Dwyer can be extradited over TV website". The Telegraph. London. Retrieved 29 January 2012.
  14. "ICE Seizes More Domain Names – TVShack for 2nd Time". Zeropaid.com. 30 November 2010. Retrieved 29 January 2012.
  15. BBC News – 'Piracy' student Richard O'Dwyer loses extradition case, bbc.co.uk, 13 January 2012; retrieved 29 January 2012.
  16. ^ Walker, Peter (17 June 2011). "Student who ran file sharing site TVShack could face extradition to U.S." Guardian.co.uk. London, UK. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  17. "MPAA Recruits "Surrogates" to Support Extradition of UK Student". torrentfreak.com. 6 August 2012.
  18. Masnick, Mike (17 June 2011). "Why Is the Justice Department Pretending U.S. Copyright Laws Apply in the UK?". TechDirt. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  19. "United States v. Richard J. O'Dwyer" (PDF). Affidavit in Support of Request for Extradition of Richard J. O'Dwyer. U.S. Justice Department. 23 February 2011. Retrieved 17 November 2014.
  20. ^ Mitchell, Stewart (16 June 2011). "UK student vows to fight copyright extradition". PCPro. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  21. ^ Williams, Christopher; Bloxham, Andy (17 June 2011). "Student faces extradition to US over TV website". The Telegraph. London. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  22. 'Piracy' student Richard O'Dwyer loses extradition case, BBC News, 13 January 2012
  23. Text of judgment Archived 15 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine, Westminster Magistrates' Court, 13 January 2012.
  24. "Richard O'Dwyer case: TVShack creator's U.S. extradition approved". BBC News. 13 March 2012. Retrieved 25 March 2012.
  25. "Richard O'Dwyer case: Lawyers lodge extradition appeal". BBC News. 22 March 2012. Retrieved 25 March 2012.
  26. Ball, James (24 June 2012). "Misplaced Pages's founder calls for Richard O'Dwyer extradition to be stopped". The Guardian. London, UK.
  27. ^ Davies, Lizzy, James Ball and Owen Bowcott (28 November 2012). "Misplaced Pages founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform". The Guardian. London, UK. Retrieved 28 November 2012.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  28. Gardiner, Bonnie (9 July 2012). "O'Dwyer extradition". YouGov. Retrieved 24 November 2012.
  29. ^ "U. S. could use extradition agreement to force UK copyright infringing suspects to face trial in the U.S., media reports say". Out-Law. 5 July 2011. Retrieved 10 July 2011.
  30. ^ A REVIEW OF THE UNITED KINGDOM’S EXTRADITION ARRANGEMENTS, homeoffice.gov.uk, p. 242 et seq

External links

Categories: