Page 2 of 2
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 6:58 am
my non-legal but logical take:
If the buyer had come to Canada and picked up the seeds, the seller wouldn't be subject to US laws. But, the seller chose to ship into/through the US via mail/UPS/whatever. By importing/shipping an illegal substance through the US, the seller broke US laws. The rest is up to whatever mutual agreements the two countries have regarding extradition.
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:20 am
nick705 wrote:I don't know the specifics of this particular case, but I'm guessing there's a MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) in operation between the USA and Canada which covers drugs related crimes such as this even if no crime has technically been committed under Canadian law.
There was a fairly high-profile case a while ago where the FBI seized servers in London and carried out arrests in Switzerland for supposed copyright infringements which fell under the scope of the (American) Digital Millennium Copyright Act, even though no British or Swiss laws had been broken.
It is not legal to sell marijuana in Canada (unless for medical purposes, and then it is regulated). Since when do the British and the Swiss not abide by international copyright infringement laws?
These claims are mostly urban legend and have no basis in fact.
I didn't say that selling marijuana was legal in Canada, nor did I say that Britain and Switzerland do not abide by international copyright laws (which are not necessarily the same thing as American copyright laws even though many Americans seem to believe otherwise). And I'm not sure what you mean by "urban legend" and "having no basis in fact" if you're referring to the Indymedia case in particular.
In fact, I can't understand what point you're making, unless you're just being argumentative for the sake of it.
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 12:02 pm
As far as I understand it, this is the problem:
Selling marijuana seeds in the US is illegal.
Selling marijuana seeds in Canada is legal (or quasi-legal) because it does not contain any THC, the narcotic ingredient in cannabis.
IMHO I think this isn't the right thing to do, because whenever you see certain products offered for international sale on the internet you often see disclaimers on their store sites saying that they aren't responsible for selling things that are deemed prohibited in whatever country they are from, and that it is up to the buyer to ensure that it is legal there. I am pretty sure you don't see these store owners fined or even contacted whenever they send something across a border only to have it siezed. It's only the buyer who gets a nasty letter from their own customs officials saying they tried to import contraband.
So why is this case different? I suspect it may be an alternative and convenient way for Canadian politicians to shut him down, since police have raided his establishment before, but have always failed to legally stop him (as far as I know). Skinning the proverbial cat another way....
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:27 pm
m0002a wrote:It is not legal to sell marijuana in Canada (unless for medical purposes, and then it is regulated). Since when do the British and the Swiss not abide by international copyright infringement laws?
These claims are mostly urban legend and have no basis in fact.
whoa. read again? maybe "these" claims have no basis in fact because you distorted them pretty bad.
these are apparently marijuana seeds, not plant material, you'd be stupid to try mailing pot. seeds are usually handled differently (legally); because of the large scale of the marijuana industry i'm sure it's still a bad idea in most countries to openly buy and sell marijuana seeds, but for things like baby wood rose seeds, poppy seeds and mushroom spores it's all about intent and/or what you do with them.
the DMCA is just a convenient tool for oppression, like the threat of a SLAPP suit. doesn't have a whole lot to do with copyright infringement and certainly isn't international. aside from that, even Dmitry Sklyarov wasn't arrested under the DMCA until he set foot on USA soil of his own accord.
edit: and more on point, this is pretty outrageous. you'd be pretty pissed off if someone you knew were extradited to France for selling WW2 memorabilia, or to Canada for drawing cartoon porn, no?
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:05 pm
Reading the article, the arrested guy doesn't look as innocent as implied in
The real issue is once you start talking cross-border legal issues, things get muddied by your point of view. Instead of US-Canada, consider Russia-Chechenia or Greece-Machedonia, etc. Instead of seeds, consider violent acts. Are they terrorist activities or freedom movements?
However, if you want to go into the moral issues, let me give you a real bender.
Turkey has fought a 15 year war with terrorists based in Iraq/Iran/Syria. We suffered around 45,000 (yes, fortyfive THOUSAND) casualties, mostly women & children. The fighting included incursions into Iraqi terratory by Turkish Armed Forces to pursue, catch & bring back terrorists.
The terrorist organization responsible, PKK, is also on US "most dangerous terrorist organizations" list.
The results of the 15 year war is that casualties fell down to 5 in 2003.
After the US operation in Iraq, the terrorist organization has flared up again. The US forces in Iraq are turning a blind eye to the situation (war on terrorism anyone?) In 6 months, casualties in Turkey have soared up to 115 already with news of new bombings coming in everyday. (btw, it's interesting to note that UK termed those attackers "militia" when the casualties were Turkish and "terrorists" when UK nationals were among those killed)
Now, would it be morally and/or legally right for Turkey to conduct cross-border attacks to eliminate the terrorist threat? Because this time, such incursions wouldn't be into Saddam's regime, but into a supposedly democratic Iraq and right into US forces positioned there.
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 7:39 am
burcakb wrote:Turkey has fought a 15 year war with terrorists based in Iraq/Iran/Syria.
Watch out, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".
If there were some Armenians here, things would have gotten really out of hand by now.
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:56 am
I didn't mean to imply that Emery is innocent, that's another issue entirely. Certainly, the money-laundering is something that Canadian authorities can and should have taken care of. My issue was that he was being arrested and deported at the request of American authorities. I think BrianE hit it on the head when he said that this is just a convenient way for Canadian police to get rid of someone who's been a thorn in their side. Cowardly and not right, IMO, but that's already been discussed.
As far as I can tell, any cross-border attacks constitute an act of war unless sanctioned by the country in which the attacks are to take place. Who is in charge (Saddam or Bush) seems irrelevant to me. If the moral cause for the attacks hasn't changed, I don't see how its moral status could have changed.