Who cares about a U.S. law outside of US jurisdiction?
If the U.S. wants other countries to follow the same rules they need to make international treaties like the outer space treaty from 1967. That requires actual diplomacy of course.
Who cares about a U.S. law outside of US jurisdiction?
If the U.S. wants other countries to follow the same rules they need to make international treaties like the outer space treaty from 1967. That requires actual diplomacy of course.
Alas, Julian Assange for one, as an Australian citizen, indicted for breaking a US law while not in the US. The recent UK court decision not to extradite him to the US nevertheless in no way disputes US standing nor jurisdiction, and he remains in custody while the US appeals. So, we're all living in America.
[Edit: I can just imagine the slogan of "America means America"]
Not being flippant here - there are territories already within the USA that for various reasons cannot become a "US state".
Might be the only good thing to come of it.
Australian court agreed to treat his activity as having taken place within US jurisdiction despite him never leaving Australia.
If I'm a German citizen residing in France hacking UK hospitals, the UK very obviously would want brought to justice, which both France and Germany would happily agree to in this case, I'd imagine.
> As things stand at the time of writing, following the UK’s departure from the EU [...], the UK will no longer be part of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) system. This means that, unless and until other arrangements are agreed, future extradition requests with European states will be governed, as with many countries outside the EU, by the 1957 Convention on Extradition, leading to increased costs, delay and complexity in extradition proceedings. Certain EU states already do not extradite their citizens to countries outside the EU. Three EU states – Germany, Austria and Slovenia – have already announced that they may even refuse to surrender their respective nationals to the UK pursuant to an EAW during the transition period.
It can be seen as a "small step" (pun intended) to creating something larger like the World Heritage Convention, via diplomacy as you say.
I cannnot believe that those types of claim and the advance of the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program is entirely a coincidence.
Of course, the situation will slowing evolve for decades before anything concrete comes out of it. And I do think the "common heritage" claim, even if doomed to fail eventually, tend to slow down the conquest by national powers. The situation in Antarctica is illuminating in this regard.
Many countries exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction laws and go after people who break them, this includes the US. If they can reach you, they will prosecute you if they want.
Normally this applies to the states own citizens but they will target foreign citizens who have hurt the state (see Assange).
Spying, poaching, abuse of children and war crimes are where some of these extraterritorial laws are exercised.