Just a lulz, innit?
Now who's laughing?
American prosecutors have filed charges with a federal grand jury against accused British LulzSec member Ryan Cleary over hacking attacks on Sony, Fox, and several US hosting companies. Cleary, 20, is already facing charges in the UK that he hacked into the website of Soca (the UK police agency charged with investigating …
Now who's laughing?
Ending up in a cell on an Afganistan airbase is no laughing matter.
...has too much time on his hands!
-anonymous, cause you know we are next...
I honestly thought that was a typo at first, and you meant to write Cleary
hmmm. which answer would make me look smarter?; admitting it was a typo, or not...
British courts try Britons charged with crimes committed on British soil?
The French don't hand French citizens over to the States, and it is very hard to get people from the States, so why are the British bending over and saying do it again?
US justice is not justice, it is revenge.
It's old, but don't do the crime if you cannot do the time. Personally, I don't think borders should ever be a viable way to avoid paying for your misdeeds.
"I don't think borders should ever be a viable way to avoid paying for your misdeeds"
While I might agree with the sentiment behind that statement, I'll also point out that there are a lot of things which are legal in one country and illegal in another. So it's perfectly possible for me to go on-line a commit a "crime" in another country without knowing it and suddenly face extradition.
So long as Laws are inconsistent across Countries (and, sometimes, across States) then you will always have these ambiguities. To whit: *where* was the crime committed? In England, where the accused resides, or in the USA, where the accusers are located? (note that I use "accused" and "accusers" as I have no legal knowledge of this particular case)
I never suggested borders would afford an escape, just that British citizens should be tried, in Britain, for offences committed on British soil.
If Gary Glad can be prosecuted, in Britain, for sex crimes committed overseas why can't this guy be prosecuted for crimes he committed in Britain?
Talk about perversion.
the problem in this case is that the crime was committed against US based companies. Other case only involved either tenuous links to US or that information came from the US. Excuse the analogy but would you expect no action if I used a remote drone to fly into a country and kill someone. ( oh wait a minute the US do) bad analogy but you get my drift.
The US does it for the lulz.
Considering what he did is a crime in both countries that scenario doesn't apply. Also if your crime involves taking something from a company in that country or causing damage in that country then I'd have to say I am less sympathetic.
Also this is what happens everytime. He has no reason not to expect the US will want a piece of his ass and yet he still committed the crime. So clearly he was ok with the risk.
That may well be the case that something is illegal in one country which is legal in another, but in this case it is not as most countries have computer crime laws that cover hacking and ddos.
The difference between the USA and Britain in regards to computer crime is the USA has a harsher punishment for it than we do with at least 10 years in prison last I checked.
As others have said don't do the crime if you don't want to do the time, and the lesson here should be don't hack an organisation in the USA if you don't want to be extradited and spend over a decade in prison.
Maybe it's trade-off for the number of US libel cases that get tried in the UK. Part of an exchange programme, or something...?
So he can be selectively prosecuted in the country that has the harshest punishment and the least rights?
If the crime breaks English law then he should be tried, sentenced, and punished in England.
mpup, looks like the usa is claiming jurisdiction here because the damage was done to equipment in their country and they are the ones seeking prosecution in this case.
There is no question he broke UK laws as well as American ones by targeting SOPA and The Sun in his spree. Thats the thing with Internet crime, when crimes have been committed in two countries who gets the guy? Thats for them to work out, but I bet the Americans will push and get him you know what our extradition is like.
@That Steve Guy: I don't buy the location of equipment argument as being a great reason. By that rationale if I attack <company>.co.uk website but they've hosted part of the back end in Thailand I can expect a stay at the Bangkok Hilton? The crime was committed in the UK, where the accused was located at the time of the crime because we have computer crime laws. If we didn't then it's more up for grabs.
"British courts try Britons charged with crimes committed on British soil?...." Don't worry, the little mammary gland is going to be prosecuted for the SOCA "hack". Then the US can have their turn.
And WTF did he have against "League of Legends"? Did he get flamed in-game and decide to throw a bot-tantrum? What a prime example of genetic dross.
Gary Glad, or do you mean Gary Glitter, the one who was tried in Vietnam for sex crimes, having done a runner from the UK where someone had found child pr0n on his HD, which meant he was prosecuted for sex crimes in the Yook?
Is he that guy hacking with a cat in his bedroom? I remember a LulzSec tweet referring to him as "who's the poor bastard?" and eventually admitting using an IRC service run by him. Now it looks they knew him much better. What will happen to the cat after that?
Perhaps he can take it to prison with him. A man needs a little pusseh every now and then.
1. Charging him in this country for crimes he's committed here (and that were felt here).
2. Using the US as a proxy to gain more punitive sentencing that might not go down too well at home.
I believe the Home Office will direct the CPS not to proceed with a trial in trial in the UK due to a lack of evidence.
Clearly they knew they were participating in a DDOS when they downloaded it.
Does anyone else think that 25 years in an Americ*nt prison a tad excessive? The boy's clearly a bit of a plank but we all did silly stuff when we were young.
"Does anyone else think that 25 years in an Americ*nt prison a tad excessive?"
Maybe 25 years is a bit excessive, but that's the maximum, not the mean.
"The boy's clearly a bit of a plank but we all did silly stuff when we were young."
Being silly is getting pissed on a Saturday night and letting down the neighbours tyres. I think what he is accused of is just wee bit more than being silly.
"....but we all did silly stuff when we were young." I once met a complete plank that tried to excuse his son's raping of an underage girl when she was drunk with just such an excuse. Unfortunately for his son, the girl's parents weren't so "understanding" and the son ended up on the pado register as well as getting a record. Shame there wasn't a responsible figure in Cleary's life to explain the difference between "fun" and "crime".
"raping of an underage girl" and f-in around with a computer that doesn't belong to you, do you really equate these equally?
Glad you picked the right icon.
""raping of an underage girl" and f-in around with a computer that doesn't belong to you, do you really equate these equally?...." EXACTLY the issue at hand. YOU do not consider Cleary's crime serious, just "f-in around", in EXACTLY the same way the father of the rapist said "the girl was out partying, she was drinking, she was asking for it". His son was no doubt influenced by his father's example. Just as your inability to recognise Cleary's crimes as serious clearly exposes the failings of your parents. Their fail is truly epic.
OK you're right it's the max but what do these internet super mega criminals seem to get?
This is less then white collar crime, I'm not saying that the boy was right, clever, or even not delusional but a misguided not for profit idiot crime for some misguided cause, in my opinion, shouldn't carry a sentence which is effectively life over.
Also, I might have got pissed and let down a few tyres in my yoof, but I also remember playing with other people's computers before this stuff got serious.
"This is less then white collar crime, I'm not saying that the boy was right, clever, or even not delusional but a misguided not for profit idiot crime for some misguided cause, in my opinion, shouldn't carry a sentence which is effectively life over."
Actually, I agree with you. There is too much focus on the maximum penalty, but article writers push these things because it makes good headlines and sells newspapers, or in this case pushes advertising space on an otherwise respected IT forum.
Nonetheless, if he is found guilty of what is alleged, he should fully expect to be doing bird for more than just a couple of months. How much is for the court to decide and it may feel that it should enhance the tariff to send a clear message to those who might be tempted down the same path. 3 to 5 years maybe?
What a sad waste of talent. I hope he learns from his mistakes and is able to turn it around one day.
You mean his Guy Fawkes mask wasn't effective in protecting his identity from the cops? I am shock. How can the internet let me down like this?
Not enough proxies?
the rather amusing spoonerism in the url of this article?
Not quite a spoonerism. The famous example shows why; you have hissed my mystery lectures, meaning you have missed my history lectures.They've only buggered up one word in the link. Shame really, because they could have changed it to a letter w and something else, with a stretch.
"What a sad waste of talent. I hope he learns from his mistakes and is able to turn it around one day."
Glad to agree, not sure if you were there for the last hacker crackdown but a surprising amount of people came out of that being productive members of society, and some blinkin rich.
25 years, or the threat of it, in a a federal prison is punitive and just destroys a misguided young man's life and ensures they will never be a productive member of society.
I agree with you that due to the financial implications that 3 to 5 is probably a realistic sentence, even if I find that pretty horrific personally, but every time I hear about sentences like these for crimes of the immature it reminds me of cruel and unusual punishment.
Anon 'coz there but by the grace of god and it's pint o'clock soonish.
"How much are you puckering when that knock on the door comes in the middle of the night?"
Puckerbutt, that's the way! How l33t!
These guys don't seem very anonymous to me. He looks like he'll be pretty visible for the next 25+ years.
He's not exactly goody two-shoes.
Asbergers is not something to hide behind for outright malicious behaviour. There's a huge difference between his and Garry McKinnon's actions.
Neither were all the companies on the receiving end something the corpwhores on here tend to forget.
".....corpwhores...." Ah, would you like some cheese to go with that whine?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017