http://www.physorg.com/news66500807.html

it is a peaceful facet for transferring idea"s. There is no need to extradite over petty crimes, if the government cant keep them out, they tough luck for them.

many hackers advocate freedom of speech. one cannot endorse the Chinese freedom hackers while shunning anyone who dare pursue the same venues in American culture.

There's a whole different facet here: why would a British individual be tried in the US? What laws apply here -- the British laws or the US laws? If a British citizen sits in front of his British PC and hacks into a US computer -- who's judicial process should be followed? Who's courts should be employed? Who's prisons should house him if he's convicted?

I do not think that the answer to any of these questions is particularly clear.

Would the GB extradite the guy to, say, Syria? Where he might face the death penalty for the same kind of crime? But of course the US does have a death penalty as well (pretty much the only western nation that does). Would the US deport a US citizen to Shanghai if he was found to have hacked into a computer system there?

There's some interesting precedents being set here these days...

This is too easy. This guy is obviously harmless. Simply have the guy work off the damages. Have him help improve security by having him attempt to crack the latest schemes. Of course, this could be what the US already has in mind.

she dissappeared...they hadn't even said one word to her....jerks!

This is fairly simple, wherever the computer systems are located is where the individual should be tried. If I were to perpetrate a crime against a data-server in Mexico I would more than likely be extradited to Mexico to face punishment, though they do have a loose law system regarding these sort of acts. The severity of punishment is moot, he did the crime and must pay.

The motives for his crime have not been proposed as some sort of 'protest' against something the United States has done, he admitted to doing it and said he didn't mean to cause damage. So, it looks to me as though he was digging in a place that he wasn't meant to dig and 'accidentally' did some damage.

I would like to point out that compromising the security of a computer-system that could potentially hold information regarding national security is NOT a petty crime. Kevin Mitnick went to jail and had his civil-rights violated so that Tsutomu Shimomora and a few other individuals could have a few minutes in the lime-light, he was convicted of wire fraud and illegal access to Fujitsu data systems, he caused no damage, proportionate to his crimes?

This is the US, the compromised systems were on US soil, he should be tried here and punished to the full extent of OUR law.

-fin
Thales

would someone explain how viewing files on a few dozens of computers causes $700,000 in damages? if that money is not the cost of "damages" but rather the cost of nasa et al. to rewrite their security, i'd say the severity of this crime is grossly exaggerated. if anything, they should thank him for finding a hole in their system before a legitimately hostile organization did.

So the guy caused $700,000 in damage and he should be tried and go to prison. Meanwhile, our country's leader is costing us, what was the last figure, something like a billion a week for a war that we know for a FACT is a lie. And yet he sit's atop his throne. Is there truly justice in America? Remember the new golden rule for America, he who has the gold makes the rules. And so our computer hacker must not have had much invested........in money anyway.

Where should he be tried? Hmmm, let me think, where the damage/crime was completed?

If an IRA bomber on vacation in Israel blows up a train station in London via a phone call set to trigger the bomb, should he be tried in Israel, England or Ireland?

The guy broke into obviously secured computers. He did damage. He broke US and international law. Laws and treaties between the US and GB provide for his extradition and he will in no way be executed for his crime. Because the US has more serious sentences for crimes than in his native England has no bearing.

The US deports it's citizens all the time to nations WE HAVE TREATIES with. The example above, with Syria mentioned, is not applicable as the US (nor most free nations) has no extradition treaties with Syria.

The hacker did the crime, and under British law and international treaties, he is to be extradited to the US to stand trial for breaking the laws of the country he violated.

I hope he gets 10-20 years. That will set a precedent that might scare off other hackers.

Mike S