I disagree with you there, it was the people in the US that were under US jurisdiction, betonsports was not an American company and so American jurisdiction does not apply to them. The fact that the guy was arrested on a sealed warrant is quite telling, if he was really in violation of the law in his jurisdiction they would have applied for his extradition instead. The US would like its law to extend to all the countries in the world, but in turn does not even allow its citizens to stand trial abroad when for instance accused of war crimes.
Incidentally, I feel the same about France trying to apply its laws to Yahoo! and Ebay, and Italy trying to apply its laws to Google (though, in both cases the company involved did have a presence on the soil of those countries, but said presences were absolutely not involved in the perceived transgressions).
I prefer to see the grays :)
Keeps me sane and stops me from going all out about 'how great' the place where I happen to live is, a bit of perspective is badly needed.
> They did break a US law interacting with people under US jurisdiction. The appropriate marijuana comparison in my opinion, would be when a US citizen mail ordered marijuana from someone who is allowed to export it under their local laws. Ignoring any illegal actions taken by other people to get the drugs into the US, should the marijuana dealer be immune to arrest when they enter the US?
Good question. My point of view would be 'absolutely not'.
And my main reason for feeling that way is that it should not be a requirement of a business abroad to even be aware of all the laws and statues of countries where they are not based when doing business over the internet. If the bets were legal in England it doesn't matter whether a US person visits in person or the transaction takes place online.
The drugs scenario you describe is being acted out every day by the way.