Megaupload Demands Return of Millions of Dollars From U.S. Govt.

http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-demands-return-of-millions-of-dollars-from-u-s-govt-120531/

by Garbage • 14 years ago

191 89 14 years ago

torrentfreak.com

gouranga• 14 years ago

This is what happens when the US government does something blatantly immoral and illegal to the wrong guy.

Most of us bend and take it or get the fuck bombed out of us or end up in a bag.

Regardless of what Kim has supposedly done, it's nice to see someone standing up to them.

acron0• 14 years ago

Even for the US government this seems like a real stretch though. I mean, what did they think was going to happen? There is ostensibly no case here. I would just love to know what their plan was and how they thought it'd lead to the end of Megaupload.

Anyway, as long as the US political system keeps pandering to the whim of Hollywood, the Internet will keep on knocking it out the park.

jeffool5• 14 years ago

I can only hope that someone signed their name without actually using the Internet that much; without realizing what this was. It was bad enough when they ruined a legit hip hop music site. MegaUpload actually has a name, and a willingness to throw the associated clout around. You'd think anyone with the power to do this would have been familiar with them.

emiliobumachar• 14 years ago

The end of Megaupload has already happened, well before the trial. Maybe that was the plan all along.

adventureful7• 14 years ago

They thought they'd break him, that he'd capitulate and grovel. Take his money, deplete him of resources to fight, and that'd be that. They also counted on New Zealand justice not being any problem to roll over.

rdtsc• 14 years ago

> I would just love to know what their plan was and how they thought it'd lead to the end of Megaupload.

They arrest they guy, confiscate his property => Megaupload is down. Their job is done.

I am sure they probably sugar-coated it using some superficial motives about starving Hollywood actors and set designers. But in reality it is just pandering to the lobbyist pressure from Hollywood.

US Govt acting immorally and often illegally on behalf of giant corporations shouldn't be a surprise (see United Fruit company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company).

grecy5• 14 years ago

> Even for the US government this seems like a real stretch though. I mean, what did they think was going to happen?

The same thing that's happened in every country where they exert their influence: Capitulation.

Obviously, they were wrong.

Peroni• 14 years ago

Can someone with any modicum of legal experience weigh in here?

I appreciate that all of these articles are undoubtedly bias in favour of Megaupload however a lot of the facts lead me to believe that it will be near impossible for them to lose. If megaupload do in fact win, surely that will have an immense impact globally? Is it possible to actually quantify the knock on effects of either outcome from a global perspective?

Natsu2• 14 years ago

I don't claim to be a lawyer, but I have read up on this case, including the indictment. As always, if your interest in legal matters is anything but academic curiosity, consult a lawyer.

One thing that stands out to me is that most of this argument is against the idea that criminal infringement applies to secondary liability (i.e. faulting these guys for the infringement of others). One problem for them is that the indictment accuses some of them of direct infringement based on some of MU's emails. This can lead to trouble with the NET Act [1], which has the explicit criminal liability they need to extradite here. There are limits, though: they would need to be able to prove that enough infringement had happened to rise to a criminal level.

They also have criminal conspiracy charges in there, though I believe those to be predicated on proving some sort of criminal infringement. Note, however, that on the acts of direct infringement, it's possible for not everyone in the group to be involved. For example, one of the emails I remember about locating a pirate copy of some show was between a couple of employees. That wouldn't necessarily implicate Kim himself unless they could connect him to the act.

There was a lot of nonsense in the indictment, though, trying to make everything sound like it had a criminal motive. Some of the same allegations made in it could be repeated against sites like YouTube, for example. The indictment did, however, contain quite a few emails that made the Mega group look pretty bad. I believe their lawyers already addressed those, saying that their words were being twisted around.

Ultimately, I think this is going to be a fairly unpredictable case.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NET_Act

Symmetry2• 14 years ago

The problem with the actual charges, from what I read, is that the emails show that MegaUpload was trying to do the absolute minimum necceesary to comply with the DMCA. They were, in fact, not actually living up to everything that they had to do to under the DMCA and are thus guilty of copyright infringement under civil law, but the government decided to press criminal charges instead, and making a good faith effort to abide by the DMCA is enough to get out of those charges.

EDIT: A better explanation: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/is-megaupload-a-l...

ktizo• 14 years ago

I think part of the judgement involved in going after Kim was in trying to find someone who didn't fit a nice cuddly image that was easy to defend. What they didn't apparently factor in was that perhaps he might be bright and better than them at playing games.

minikomi2• 14 years ago

Torrent Freak always strikes me as very well written.. Is there a similarly well written source which supports the "other side" of the copyright story?

Zirro• 14 years ago

See http://mpaa.org/blog if you want "extreme" bias in the other direction.

minikomi2• 14 years ago

Thanks, that's quite the read!

lindenr• 14 years ago

They appear to be sticking with the "2.2 million American jobs" line even though the figures were shown to be inaccurate iirc. For me it really weakens their credibility the way they keep pretending like that.

thirdsun• 14 years ago

For music artists & piracy, see http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/

josteink• 14 years ago

If this is the US's response to people relocating outside US borders for their business because of asinine US privacy and copyright-laws, I don't think it will play out to their advantage in the end.

The one lesson learned here from everyone involved is: Whatever you do, do not involve US companies in your business.

fpp2• 14 years ago

Almost all Non-US banks have already learnt this lesson during the last years.

Try to get an account with a non-US bank or use a non-US financial service company if you're an US citizen / green card holder (or have been that until recently) - they will tell you "no thanks".

I've some time ago even seen Terms of Services on financial web sites that asked US citizens to leave because of the overstretched liabilities the US is one-sidedly trying to enforce outside their jurisdiction.

adventureful7• 14 years ago

It depends on the size of your account, as to whether they say "no thanks" or not.

talaketu• 14 years ago

> do not involve US companies in your business.

Actually, there is a whiff of a trade dispute brewing between Australia and US about this.

> "the US has accused the Australian government of misleading its agencies about the Patriot Act’s scope, and warned that its [cloud service providers] should not be barred from competing for the work."

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/public-service/trad...

Im_Mr_Manager2• 14 years ago

Am I in the tiny minority here who thinks that what Megaupload was doing was illegal and should be prosecuted? Ok I get it, the US is trying to apply their laws onto the world and that is a big issue but this seems like the wrong case to get outraged over. Megaupload was built for the purpose of hosting/sharing copyrighted files. You know it and I know it.

jeffool5• 14 years ago

I don't know how to convey the opposite opinion in a way you've likely not heard before. I'll go to extremes.

And a handgun is made to kill people. But we generally agree there's a limited context in which that is acceptable, so we allow it. If I want to store my files online, copywritten or not, there's nothing illegal about it.

cynicalkane2• 14 years ago

The accusations are that Megaupload was in conspiracy to commit piracy, knowingly working with mass pirates to make large and legally significant amounts of money for themselves, and the indictment presents IM logs and communications that allegedly prove it.

If a file host is like a gun shop, then Megaupload was allegedly like an arms dealer.

dhimes• 14 years ago

How about: If I illegally photocopy a textbook at a printing shop, is the printing shop criminally culpable?

irahul• 14 years ago

I am neither a lawyer nor an American, but if the claims in the article are true, the law wasn't followed. The outrage is over nullification of the constitution.

> Ok I get it, the US is trying to apply their laws onto the world and that is a big issue but this seems like the wrong case to get outraged over.

And what is it that you can do once they do the same for a not-so-wrong case(wrong is your phrasing; I don't think this is the case wrong case to get outraged over). The motives to circumvent the law and go after mega doesn't look altruistic to me. Since for them, it was never about right or wrong, how does your perceptions of morality even matter? You aren't the one making the calls, and the one making the calls aren't doing it because they thought mega business is evil.

> Megaupload was built for the purpose of hosting/sharing copyrighted files. You know it and I know it.

I would be happier in a world where a site for copyright infringement stays in business, compared to a world where a couple of lobbyists can circumvent the law to get what they want.

dpatru• 14 years ago

What do you mean when you say that "what Megaupload was doing was illegal"? In a civilized world, before there can be punishment for a crime, the crime must be proven. A hunch of illegal activity is not enough. That's the difference between the rule of law and a lynch mob. The government must actually prove that the law was violated. And even before the government is allowed to inconvenience a defendant by search or seizure, the government must have evidence that gives a neutral judge probable cause that a crime has been been committed by the suspect. When government doesn't follow the rules and just uses its enormous power to persecute, then it's the government that is the criminal actor, a much more dangerous criminal actor than any private one. People should be outraged when government actors abuse their power and the abusers should be severely punished. Liberty is too important to tolerate people in government who act lawlessly.

rprospero2• 14 years ago

I absolutely see where you're coming from, but let me ask you this:

I go out today and forge a $400 million dollar check from Paul Graham. I put it in at the bank and the teller, who's totally asleep at the wheel, cashes it for me. Now, the government wants to charge me with check fraud, since I signed the check and I'm obviously not Paul Graham. I want to use those $400 million dollars of Paul Graham's money to pay for my own legal defense. Would you say that, since the government hasn't proven that I've done something illegal until the end of the trial, that I should have the right to use all of the money I've stolen to pay for that defense? Or should that account be frozen for the duration of the trial so that, in the event that I am found guilty, the money could be returned to his account?

soup10• 14 years ago

Megaupload is a lot like limewire. They did the bare minimum, like honoring the occasional take down request, but make no real effort to minimize file-sharing of copyrighted content. This is clearly unethical. (unless you don't believe that sharing copyrighted content is unethical, which seems to be a popular opinion these days).

Compare this with how Apple sells iPods. iPods and pirated music go together very well, but Apple makes a real effort to get people to pay for music.

talmand3• 14 years ago

Doing the bare minimum to properly follow rules set by someone else is not unethical. They were doing the bare minimum as outlined by the rules. If that's not enough then the rules need to change.

If I gave you a list of twenty things you can do and I state that you only need to do five of them, are you unethical for only doing five? Now add to that where I pay you money on the first five items but then you pay me money for every item completed after that. Are you unethical for only doing five?

You can say that their efforts at doing the bare minimum were making them money and I would respond that's more the reason to change the rules. A business exists to make money and will follow the rules as best as needed to keep making money. Whether the rules concern civil laws, criminal laws, and tax laws. You can see this throughout the business world, it's not a new concept.

Im_Mr_Manager2• 14 years ago

If I were to start a file sharing service (or a file hosting service, which I don't believe MU was) it would be my number one priority to have systems in place to stop the sharing of copyrighted material. You know why? Because that is clearly my number 1 risk. The simple fact is MU built their business on it.

You're exactly right about the popular opinion seeming to be that sharing copyrighted content is ok.

alan_cx2• 14 years ago

Yes. MU was created to share files. It is not illegal.

Were you, back in the day, suggesting BASF, or who ever, should be prosecuted for selling blank cassette tapes? Were they for illegal recordings, or just recordings?

Presumably too, since google can search specifically for torrents and offers a great way to store files, that it too should be shut down, founders arrested and servers seized?

What happens when encrypted RAIDed cloud sharing happens?

amikahmad• 14 years ago

Exactly.

Symmetry2• 14 years ago

Personally I've used Megeupload many times to get entirely legit mods for video games. They were almost certainly engaging in copyright infringement, and if they'd gotten sued for millions of dollars I'd say fair's fair. But that wasn't what happened, instead a frigging SWAT team was sent in to raid their facilities and all their gear was taken, and the they were charged with felonies which they weren't, in fact, guilty of.

Yes they were criminals, but the response was way out of proportion to the crime. Its like some cop is walking down the street, sees someone clearly speeding, and pulls out his gun and tries to shoot out the car's tires. Catching the criminal isn't worth the chance of someone accidentally ending up dead.

vidarh• 14 years ago

I don't particularly care about Megaupload. For me the issue here is that the behaviour of the prosecutor seems far worse than the things they claim Megaupload has done. It seems like the prosecutor in this case does not care the least about the rule of law.

Meanwhile Megaupload might have contributed indirectly to copyright infringement and some of their staff might have copied a file or two themselves. Big deal.

I'm more concerned about the legal system being abused than about something that should have been a civil lawsuit at most. I'm particularly concerned about how they've effectively tried hard to destroy a business before either the business or its principals have even had a chance to defend themselves in court.

Confiscating money; trying to get the data erased. They're acting as if Megaupload and its principals have already been convicted. Meanwhile the case is unravelling more, to the point where the US judged involved has openly questioned whether this will go to trial at all, especially given such "little" issues as whether or not they can even serve criminal charges on a non-US company. Small little issues that the prosecutor should have known very well would be an issue before the arrests and asset seizures.

I can be outraged over the case even while thinking Megaupload probably have engaged in quite sleazy and possibly illegal behaviour.

Luc• 14 years ago

Youtube is even worse - they have the added convenience of streaming copyrighted HD video, right on their page in your web browser! With their logo and advertising around it. But that's different...

DigitalSea• 14 years ago

The US government knew they never had a solid case from the start. This whole situation was never going anywhere, it was created to disrupt traffic to Megaupload (and it did), only the exact opposite is now going to happen. Megaupload are going to get a heap of cash back, Dotcom is obviously angry and will no doubt force Megaupload back to the top of the file sharing food chain before too long.

The bottom line here is: the US turned what is a civil matter into a criminal one by dressing everything up in money laundering and conspiracy charges and it backfired. I'm no lawyer though.

freshnote• 14 years ago

Looking back at some of the earlier HN conversations, when Megaupload was first shut down by the US, you can see those who made damning accusations and blind assumptions that Megaupload were guilty.

These people should be ashamed. They are part of the problem.

It's baffling they would be so opinionated and cocksure although they plainly didn't know the facts.

I'm curious why these HN readers told bald faced lies. What's in it for them? How many other discussions have they polluted with misinformation?

pyre4• 14 years ago

I'm pretty sure those people believed that Megaupload was guilty prior to the indictments. E.g. if the US served copyright-infringement indictments against ThePirateBay and a bunch of HNers claimed that ThePirateBay was guilty, it would be a stretch to say that their opinions were solely based on the indictments...

adventureful7• 14 years ago

As an American citizen, I hope the rest of the world realizes that there are plenty of those of us here that are thankful when other countries' justice systems push back. We need a lot more of that, we need help to restrain our government and get it back to operating within a moral boundary. International push-back and isolation would help do that. I think the US Government's reach and power has mostly gone beyond the ability of Americans to restrict, and most Americans are willfully asleep at the wheel (thus our skyrocketing prescription drug abuse, Americans are numbing themselves). It might take a global concerted effort to lock the monster down (keeping in mind the monster has a $4 trillion budget, larger than the size of Germany's entire economy).

They might continue to still go all crazy police state on us anyway, but standing up to bullies is important.

sneak• 14 years ago

You contradict yourself - you claim that the government is operating outside of a moral boundary and is beyond the ability of the citizenry to restrict, but you also claim that international push-back and isolation would help.

You're right that it's totally out of control - the rule of law is gone. You're wrong about the potential solutions.

The only nonviolent solution is to leave the country and avoid the jurisdictional reach. Take your ball and go somewhere that has the rule of law.

They _will_ continue to "go all crazy police state on us", and that is precisely why it's time to leave. It's impossible to make things better while being persecuted or beaten or censored or imprisoned without trial.

adventureful7• 14 years ago

I don't think I contradicted myself at all.

I said mostly operating outside the ability of Americans to restrict (some aspects do, some aspects don't). And I said I think it will help, if the globe pitched in to restrict the US Federal Govt. There's no contradiction there at all. The push-back by international powers would accomplish international restriction of the Feds that US citizens cannot short term (US citizens mostly have no influence over New Zealand justice, nor trade relations with Singapore, nor military relations with Japan, and so on and so forth).

It would take a very large cultural shift to get the US military out of Japan from our side (it would take more than just a new President). Japan, however, can and should kick the US military out tomorrow morning. Ditto Germany.

It's better if you stop thinking of America as a 'normal' nation, and start thinking of it as an international superpower that has 180 military bases around the globe, with its fingers in every pie.

Americans for example have zero influence or control over the Federal Reserve. You'd have to turn congress inside out to then get laws passed that reach to the Fed. Other nations can however change their relationship with the Fed and its banking arms.

American voters would have to reform the entire government top to bottom before they got to restricting CIA activities in Italy (for example). Italy however, can get started on that tomorrow morning.

The US Government is extremely large and powerful, and it has a superpower's reach globally. It makes perfect sense that it would help if the rest of the world pushed back against its international abuses.

Let me provide you an example: I can vote for a congressman, that single congressman cannot realistically stop the NSA at this point, the NSA has a budget equal to the budget of Greece. It would take a complete government overhaul to restructure the NSA, and that will take a long time. Other countries however, at their choosing, can immediately alter what they allow departments like the CIA or NSA to do in their jurisdiction (and or at least make the effort to push back).

The US Government is not one thing, it's a massive entity with many powerful heads that operate independent of each other.

bad_user• 14 years ago

So I don't know where's the contradiction you mention: the author simply says that a global push-back effort would go beyond what American citizens alone are able to do.

     the rule of law is gone

What? Quite the contrary, the "rule of law" is stronger than ever.

And that's precisely the problem, as the justice system needs to calm down on passing and enforcing laws that restrict our freedoms and constitutional rights. And the institutions that enforce those laws need to remind themselves that people should be innocent until proven guilty.

     The only nonviolent solution is to leave the country

That's not a solution at all, because the U.S. has so much influence that many countries simply bend over and deport you in the blink of an eye.

Joakal2• 14 years ago

The American electoral system is slanted towards an effective duopoly dictatorship with FPTP. Even the most brilliant political analyst will vote against their favourite candidate in favour of one the lesser of two evils that are likely to win. The only way for that favourite candidate to win is to get as much popularity possible. But with many candidates, it's really difficult. Unless, they have a huge amount of money and influence.

With bi-partisan decisions such as more security over movement and Internet, American voters have no other choice.

Sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiHuiDD_oTk Is your Cat confused about the referendum on the alternative vote on the 5th May?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE&feature=rela... The Alternative Vote Explained

Fizzadar• 14 years ago

If the money is returned, I hope Dotcom gets megaupload back in it's top file-sharing spot, and shoves it in the face of the US Govt. who have clearly fucked up big time.

It does seem as if the Govt. was desperate and, without any correct process or concrete evidence, scrambled to shutter the site and Dotcom as fast as they could. And now it will hopefully backfire, and the internet will rejoice.

Megaupload Demands Return of Millions of Dollars From U.S. Govt.

Related Stories