[javajosh]

Wow, that's just...mind-numbingly awful. If that's true, the Emmanuel just forfeits all that money?

I suspect that a good lawyer will be able to recover most of it for him, especially since his presence in the US was not material to the earning of that income.

[nandemo]

What part is mind-numbingly awful? It's pretty standard for countries to give out student visas with the proviso that the student cannot accept employment, or can only work up to (say) 15~20 hours a week after getting a special permit. As far as visa regulations in developed countries go, this one sounds fairly reasonable to me.

> I suspect that a good lawyer will be able to recover most of it for him, especially since his presence in the US was not material to the earning of that income.

I'd be very surprised if this argument were accepted, given that presumably a lot of OP's income came from US sources (if OP was temporarily in the US, AND was being paid from non-US sources, AND the total sum was not as high as 200 grand, then arguably the case would be in a gray area [1]). Otherwise, it would be too easy to enter the US on a tourist visa and work from home, coding or teaching $foo via Skype, but good luck explaining that to the immigration authorities on entry.

However, it's not clear whether OP was actually in the US when they were selling the licenses.

[1] http://www.nationofimmigrators.com/employment-based-immigrat...

[packetslave]

IANAL (which is why the OP should definitely talk to one).

If the work that generated the income was done while he was physically in the US, then the immigration folks will definitely have an opinion on if it was legal under his visa terms. This may or may not have an impact on any potential legal remedies that are available wrt Paypal.

[Lewisham]

Yeah, as someone who has held an F1 in the past, the US authorities take a very dim view of getting income while you are here without authorization. I think actually committing misdemeanor crime is of less consequence to your legal status than taking money. We were warned about it very specifically.

I heard of someone who was deported because he was painting fences for some disposable income. My guess is that the OP actually needs an immigration lawyer, not a civil claims lawyer (or whatever they are called).

It's a sticky situation, and likely depends on whether the money was being posted to a PayPal account with a US or Venezuelan address/bank account, and whether he actually performed any work on turn.js while in the US. My guess is that if PayPal are asking for the SSN, he tied it to the USA, which is going to be a problem.

[jholman]

IANAL, and the OP should talk to one.

I'm working legally in the US (TN-1), but my wife is here without permission to work (TD-1) (and is not working). When I discussed her options with my immigration lawyer, like maybe should could remote-work for a company back home, my lawyer said (informally) that any work or any income, while in the US, was subject to immigration law. In fact, I was told US immigration's opinion is that when non-US citizens answer work email while on vacation in Hawai'i, it's technically illegal (although obviously everyone happily ignores that in practice).

What a surprise, countries are really no-fooling serious about protecting jobs for their own citizens.

So it's quite possible that in this case, Paypal had no legal alternative.

[dhughes]

The other night there was something on CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corp) about a Canadian guy visiting his wife/girlfriend in the US.

US Customs took his aside and was't going to let him pass (no surprise) but let him through but told him he could pass but he couldn't work in the US not even housework, not a joke.

[cunac]

AFAIK you can't work for US employer or perform services for US employer. Not sure that this covers outside of country services/work. This is meant to protect US jobs which you didn't take and that is a bottom line.

[anigbrowl]

IANAL either, but there's no law against making income, there's a alw against accepting employment. If OP can show he created and sold his own product then that should not violate his visa constraints in any way. In any case, I've never heard of anyone having their income confiscated even if they were a candidate for deportation (though not a lawyer I follow immigration law very closely, it's a pet issue of mine).

[nborwankar]

There is a law against participating in a business. The only way you are allowed to earn an income is if it is an approved on-campus job.

[anigbrowl]

That's only true for a student in their first academic year, but since we don't really know the OP's specific situation I don't want to get into an argument about details. http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b...

[nborwankar]

Even in the years after the first, the "jobs" have to be related to your course work ergo "practical training" i.e. internships with some company. There is no allowance for running your own business anywhere at anytime. I maybe wrong if laws have changed. Please point to something that says it's ok to run a business. Thanks.

[URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9Ht92B3WaM ]youtube downloader mp3[/URL]

[packetslave]

The (possible) immigration issue and the Paypal-locked-my-account issue are somewhat tangential. The money's (probably) not being held because of a visa issue. It's being held because it looks suspicious.

BUT, let's say OP gets a lawyer and starts exchanging nasty letters with Paypal. Any Paypal lawyer worth his salt is going to quickly say "Hmm, you're a student? Does your visa situation allow you to earn money in the US, or was this income generated illegally? Let's ask USCIS for their expert opinions. By the way, you do realize they can deport you, right? Are you SURE you want to continue down this road?"

[jholman]

I agree entirely that they're almost certainly tangential. I generally agree with the line of your argument.

But you're being nasty about Paypal, and I very much doubt the implication. I'll bet you 10:1 that Paypal would rather give him his money. But they also want to be in compliance with the law. They also want to spend the least they can on policy-vio detection and fraud detection ("least they can" means "a hell of a lot", say my professional connections; they're serious about fraud), and the least they can on customer service, and have minimal PR consequences.

It's not like they get to keep the money if they decide it's not legal to move it; they have to give it back, or pass it on. They'd rather pass it on and have more future business, from which they can take their cut. But they won't flagrantly break the law to do it, and they can't spend infinite resources making sure the right thing happens in every single case.

[newbie12]

PayPal doesn't give a shit about claiming the money for the government and they damn sure don't care about his immigration status. They just don't want to get ripped off.

[packetslave]

As I said, if lawyers get involved Paypal will care very much about his immigration status. If his visa doesn't allow making money while in the US, he's just handed Paypal's counsel a very big stick with which to make him go away.