The UK high court has finally ruled on the extradition of Lauri Love, the Finnish-British student accused of cracking U.S. government websites. He will not be extradited to face trial in America. The court accepted both of the main arguments that there is no reason he cannot not be tried in England and that he might suffer serious damage to his health if he were extradited.
Source: Hacking Suspect Lauri Love Wins Appeal Against Extradition to US
Previously: Lauri Love to be Extradited to the U.S.
Lauri Love's Appeal Will be Heard in the UK on November 28th and 29th
(Score: 1, Disagree) by khallow on Tuesday February 06 2018, @03:59PM (2 children)
Committing crimes on US soil, even when you're in another country when you do it, is within US jurisdiction.
Yes, that's a loathsome thing, but what's "random" about it? Do you really think someone is throwing darts at a board or other random process, and then bombing what happens to be a wedding?
Let us note that ample amounts are already spent on such things, and one key problem of that spending has been that it made the services in question more expensive.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 06 2018, @06:37PM (1 child)
Nope, you can't have it both ways. How can one both "commit a crime on US soil" and "not be in the country"?
You could also say that the DoD was negligent in exposing its data to other countries, and that this particular freedom fighter just picked it up in England.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by khallow on Tuesday February 06 2018, @07:08PM
How can you ask that question when the story just demonstrated how it can be done. Computer networks allow you to commit crimes at a distance.
Blaming the victim. Modest degrees of negligence don't excuse crimes. You need something pretty epic, like Trump non-sarcastically inviting the world's hackers to give it a try or the DoD never persecuting computer intrusions for decades.