Legal Question in Technology Law in California
Internet Jurisdiction, Extradition
Writing a Research Paper on Internet Virtual Presence, Extradition and obscenities like child pornography. Ran into some roadblocks, needed some legal questions answered, if possible.
Background :
The UK bans all forms of child pornography on their internet. The US bans it if an individual panders, distributes or possesses it. UK ISP servers are required to report on offensive materials for investigation to their government. The US will not extradite any individual if they believe the crime committed was constitutionally protected. Now my questions,
1) Does the US implicitly protect the viewing of child pornography - but ban the pandering, possession, and distribution of aforementioned material? Is this a mistake or oversight on the lawmaker's part or some extension of the constitution?
2) This question is more scenario based, if a viewer in the U.S. views child pornography on the internet, but the server was hosted in the UK - does the UK have grounds to request extradition? Is there a high likelihood of such an act?
Would you mind if I quoted your response in my paper?
1 Answer from Attorneys
Re: Internet Jurisdiction, Extradition
The problem with outlawing viewing of child pornography is that some innocent viewing may occur. Web surfers may click on a link that appears to be for something innocuous, but then results in display of a web page with child pornography, and the images are downloaded to the web client and the hard drive even where the web surfer did not want that.
So that is why US law allows for some innocent viewing of otherwise unlawful content.
US law applies to those bad actors that pander (seek to create child pornography) or distribute (send it to others) or possess (fail to delete material once viewed).
So the mere viewing of child pornography may be protected, because it could be the result of an inadvertent mistake, but saving it, sharing it, or seeking to create it is a violation of law. This is no mistake on the part of US lawmakers, in my opinion.
The second question you ask is more interesting - what if an US viewer got the child porn from an UK server. Could that person be extradited to the UK? The answer may well depend on the facts of the case. Any country might be unwilling to extradite a citizen based upon what it views as an innocent mistake, but may not oppose extradition for offenses that it has no interest in prosecuting on its own shores.
Given the level of cooperation between the US and the UK, I would expect that there would little controversy over extradition, once discussed between officials for the countries, and more just *negotiation* between agents of both countries. If either the US or the UK were in a dispute with Thailand, the results might be different. Do you see why?
You are free to quote this response in any document created for purely educational purposes and as otherwise allowed under the terms of lawguru.com, as, e.g., http://www.lawguru.com/disclaimer.html#bbssection. To the extent you intend commercial benefit from quotation of this response, you would have to separately contact me, LawGuru.com, or an attorney in your jurisdiction.
Feel free to contact me at any time, by telephone or by email to [email protected].
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
