Kim Dotcom Will Go to the US in Exchange for Legal Funds

http://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-will-go-to-the-us-in-exchange-for-legal-funds-120710/

by johnw • 14 years ago

106 90 14 years ago

danielweber5• 14 years ago

And funds for "living expenses." What's that bill come to for a guy with his own fleet of Ferraris?

ori_b• 14 years ago

His accounts were frozen by the FBI, so he has no accessible money right now. He's not asking the government for a handout, but for them to unfreeze the money he already owns.

To quote the tweet the story is based around, “Hey DOJ, we will go to the US. No need for extradition. We want bail, funds unfrozen for lawyers & living expenses,”

mbreese• 14 years ago

Well, to be fair, he's not asking the government to cover his costs, but to unfreeze assets so that he can pay them. It's a shrewd move. The US can skip an extradition hearing if he can pay his legal team.

thebmax• 14 years ago

The FBI had all his bank accounts frozen so he has limited access to cash to pay for his legal defence.

Now they have started to delay the extradition hearing and case from moving forward. This is, unfortunately, a common tactic of Federal prosecutors - they throw the book at defendants and if they realize they may actually lose the case, they keep delaying any trial as long as possible so the accused does not have a chance to get their money back or clear their name. Defendants are left defending themselves against charges the government won't allow to be brought to trial. See the case of Gibson Guitars as another example. They had their factory raided and property seized 3 years ago and has still not had their day in court and have not had their property returned.

mtgx• 14 years ago

So the US's Government's tactic is to delay the extradition trial until he's left with no money to defend himself...and then win by default. Is that what they call "justice"?

hkmurakami• 14 years ago

What was that line... "There is no good and evil, just winners and losers" ?

vwoolf• 14 years ago

Read Tom Wolfe's novel The Bonfire of the Vanities if you want a great example of the legal process portrayed in fiction.

alan_cx• 14 years ago

Yes. That is exactly what the US government call "justice". You cannot beat "the man".

gscott• 14 years ago

Even when you 'win' it costs you so much it feels like loosing. The Government has an unlimited amount of money it can print and spend.

joering2• 14 years ago

Snake house. If they (US gov) cannot win, they will delay as much as possible just to warn others: even if we are completely wrong and fucked up, we still can messed up your life for X months or years!!

briandear8• 14 years ago

Dotcom's people are the ones doing the delaying.

res0nat0r2• 14 years ago

Does anyone on HN actually read about this case from credible sources or just parrot the biased reporting from Torrentfreak that Dotcom is a hero because he gave you free movies?

Dotcoms laywers agreed to delaying his extradition hearing until next year because it is not possible for it to take place next month due to all of the still outstanding issues related to his mansion raid possibly being illegal. It has nothing at all to do with the DOJ trying to screw him by delaying the trial.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&obj...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/megaupload-founder-ki...

yardie2• 14 years ago

Dotcom would disagree:

> Dotcom complained about the delay in postings on Twitter today.

“Dirty delay tactics by the U.S.,” he wrote on the social media site. “They destroyed my business. Took all my assets. Time does the rest.”

The NZ prosecutor and DOJ screwed this so badly they'll need at least a year to get the same response. In the meantime, the business is still shut and no one is getting paid.

w1ntermute• 14 years ago

Too bad he caved. There's no way he'll get a fair trial, not in the Land of the Free.

SoftwareMaven3• 14 years ago

Look at his options:

1. Get bled until nobody will offer legal services to him because they know he can't pay. Get extradited with a public defendant (if he's lucky). Have a trial with a lawyer being provided by the DoJ (who happens to be the ones putting him on trial).

2. Get extradited with a team of really good lawyers who truly represent him.

There really aren't any options that don't end with him extradited. Why wouldn't he want to be extradited on his terms rather than the government's.

It also isn't rocket science that, regardless of whether the government is intentionally trying to get his legal team to desert him, delays are better for the government than they are for Dotcom.

As a US citizen, this case makes me sick to my stomach. It reeks of America strong-arming other countries to pursue an agenda that is in only its best interests. It is made worse by the high-level collusion between the government and Hollywood. It is topped off by a stinking pile that is a lack of respect for anybody's intellectual property except Hollywood's and a rotten cherry of government seizure that prevents somebody from defending themselves in court.

(I suppose there is a 3rd option where he goes completely underground, but, again, with no money, that's going to be a tough thing to do.)

kiba2• 14 years ago

Best interest of the United States? What do the US gain from this other than getting votes for those elected in office and pleasing an insignificant and corrupt industry we called hollywood?

Achshar• 14 years ago

US as an entity does not gain anything. The hollywood spends a lot of money on lobbying, so the people who run US get money for "pleasing an insignificant and corrupt industry we called hollywood"

briandear8• 14 years ago

You can blame Joe Biden and Chris Dodd. We all know who Hollywood gives the majority of their money to, and the people that receive it do their bidding. Hollywood isn't the problem any more than Google or Facebook's lobbies are the problem. Follow the money and vote the opposite. Their contributions aren't secret. We the people have access to the contribution records, yet people continue to vote for the people getting the money.

josteink2• 14 years ago

It is in the US's interest to protect "intellectual property", because right now that is the only profitable export it has.

Not saying it's right from a moral perspective, but from an economic perspective I don't think there can be any doubt about that.

grecy2• 14 years ago

> There really aren't any options that don't end with him extradited.

The high court of NZ has ruled the search warrants used were illegal[1]. IANAL, but I would think that's grounds enough for the case to be thrown out and for NZ to never extradite him.

[1]http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-search-warrants-ruled-ill...

SoftwareMaven3• 14 years ago

True, there may be another option: left in New Zealand broke with all of his assets frozen and unable to ever interact with the United States.

philwelch2• 14 years ago

He could always go on the run with Julian Assange.

wtvanhest• 14 years ago

Not sure why this is down voted, it is a very legitimate point.

mibbitier• 14 years ago

Can Richard O'Dwyer tag along?

powertower• 14 years ago

> As a US citizen, this case makes me sick to my stomach.

MU was the hub of piracy on the net. And from the figures posted, netted 400 million dollars from it.

It's not something that was going to be ignored, even with a legitimate upload service being offered, because the primary monetary driver for that company was tricking and/or getting people to sign-up when visiting a page to d/l pirated content.

All the US gov will have to show is a statistical sample of 10,000 random accounts, and correlate their signup to first entry ... a page hosting pirated content... More or less.

And when that comes back to show that 99% of paid-users d/l pirated content, it's over.

Anyone with access to the Apache or nginx access logs and the hosted files could do half of that in their sleep.

What I'm sick of is there are people who choose to ignore the facts, and idolize this man who's entire history for the last two decades revolves around criminal activities and lawsuits.

But hey, this is America and you're entitled to your opinion.

Perhaps you know of a better country... http://www.vice.com/the-vice-guide-to-travel/the-vice-guide-...

kiba2• 14 years ago

What I'm sick of is there are people who choose to ignore the facts, and idolize this man who's entire history for the last two decades revolves around criminal activities and lawsuits.

Providing paid access to pirated content is bad? Maybe hollywood should have taken that business model to heart.

TheEskimo• 14 years ago

>MU was the hub of piracy on the net

I'd like a source for that. I believe TPB is and was in that position. I also believe that rapidshare and all those other sites had a similar amount of pirated content. In general you'd have a mirror of a given file across 3 or so sites which would indicate MU wasn't that far different from those commonly used as mirrors.

>statistical sample of 10,000 random accounts, and correlate ... pirated content

Why? That shows that people downloaded pirated content (which makes the downloaders guilty, not MU). I don't see how that makes MU guilty.

>Anyone with access to the Apache or nginx access logs and the hosted files could do that in their sleep.

uhhhhhh no. Not at all. How the heck to you figure out if a file is actually legal or not? How do you tell if a downloader of a file legitimately owned that file or not? An artist once distributed his album to me via MU after I paid (I wanted it in a different format than was avaliable via automatic download). I was a legal downloader, but if I gave the link to my friend he/she would have downloaded it illegally. To do such a thing they would have to first catagorize all the content, determine the copyright holder, ask the holder if it was a legal download, wait on the copyright holder to look through his/her probably nonexistant logs, and so on. This is not easy.

> idolize this man who's entire history for the last two decades revolves around criminal activities and lawsuits.

His past doesn't matter in this regard. I don't actually see how any of what you posted matters. Sure, there's piracy on MU. That doesn't mean it was illegal since they apparently obeyed the DMCA.

>It's not something that was going to be ignored

Indeed, it looks like the US government isn't ignoring it even though it was likely legal and are using underhanded methods in order to destroy the business, probably due to the lobbying money from the entertainment industry. If the government not following the law to persecute someone who's not breaking the law, and isn't even a citizan of the united states, doesn't make you sick to your stomach then I'm not sure what our government could do to do such a thing.

jlgreco5• 14 years ago

He may in reality be guilty as hell (legally of course he is not yet...) but that doesn't mean the law can take shortcuts. What is up with the illegal search warrants?

That is the sort of stuff that people should be concerned about. If they were going about this in a reasonable fashion I'm sure the vast majority of us would not be concerned. Do it properly, and if he is found guilty then so be it, and if he is innocence then so be it. Just do it properly.

andyjsong• 14 years ago

Real option 3. Get legal financing[1] so he can hire competent lawyers and get a fair trial. If Dotcom is so confident that he'll win, why doesn't be borrow the money and counter sue for business interruption? Moreover, why doesn't a top law firm work on contingency? Win, get a huge payout on the counterclaim, lose nada.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_financing

hef19898• 14 years ago

These strong arming of other countries is something I really hate. Its underhanded and simply bad style and unworthy of democracies. A least for me. But the US aren't the only ones doing that, the EU isn't that much better.

But freezing his assets all over the place and such, even for legal fees? In this case you actually trying to exclude him from support. If one might call this unbiased trials, ok. I don't.

What I don't like about all this is that even if you go as far away from a certain legal system as you can for whatever reason you will never escape it. I'm not talking about being criminal, just about chossing the rules you want to live under. I think certain countries and people (and I'm not going after the US or anyone in particular) should learn to accept that individuals choose for themselves.

picklefish• 14 years ago

When I saw that the extradition was postponed to March 2013 I figured it was another move by the US to draw this saga out as long as possible.

It makes sense for Kim and his team to respond "screw that we're coming over now and you hurry this shit up so we can win our case and start our business back up." His lawyers must believe without a doubt that they have this case in the bag.

It seems fairly obvious that from the beginning this case was designed to take a long time in court, in order to keep megaupload down as long as possible. By keeping their assets frozen and postponing court dates the US is continuing to "win" this battle.

yardie2• 14 years ago

I'm curious to know if he waived his right to speedy trial? If he hasn't, his US legal team is ready, and the prosecutor isn't this will be over in 30 days.

Kelliot• 14 years ago

Are the DoJ scared of an innocent man and a team of highly skilled lawyers?

cjensen4• 14 years ago

He is willing to face trial if they give him money first? That's not how Justice works in any modern country. His lawyers presumably told him as much, so this is just another bizarre plea for attention.

dangrossman• 14 years ago

He's asking for access to his money in his bank accounts that the US had frozen so that he can pay his lawyers.

cjensen4• 14 years ago

And? Lots of people get their assets frozen. They don't get to make demands as a precondition of submitting to justice.

Asking for special conditions that are never granted can only mean one of two things: either he is utterly ignorant of how law works or he is just trolling for more attention.

I choose to view him as non-ignorant, but since my view is not fawning, apparently I get a massive karma downgrade. I'll live.

ralfn• 14 years ago

No, he wants to be able to use his own money for legal defensive, but he cant because they froze his funds.

sp3322• 14 years ago

The FBI wanted him extradited. He didn't want to be extradited. So there was going to be a hearing about whether the FBI got what they wanted, or Dotcom got what he wanted (or some court-mediated compromise, but that seems unlikely in this case). Kim negotiated with the FBI so they no longer disagree about whether he will be extradited, so the hearing is no longer required.

briandear8• 14 years ago

The FBI along with the Dutch, the British, the Germans and the Canadians. Let's not make this into an entirely US thing.

Jach• 14 years ago

If his Biden assertions have any merit, then this is coming straight from the top. It makes perfect sense to delay the case until after elections. (Not to mention all the other legal tactics mentioned here.)

J3L24043• 14 years ago

"Prosecutors and Dotcom’s lawyers agreed to the delay" - Washington Post

Looks like his lawyers sold him out.

MrBlue• 14 years ago

How do you equate that sentence with him being sold out?

J3L24043• 14 years ago

Shouldn't he have had his lawyers protest the delay so he can be quickly exonerated by his overwhelming innocence.

sp3322• 14 years ago

An earlier story quoted his lawyers saying that a delay was pretty much inevitable, they totally saw it coming and expected it. Kim then went whining to twitter about how the US is using "delay tactics".

rickmb• 14 years ago

It's a cheap challenge, because he knows it will never be answered.

He'll be lucky if the DOJ gives some generic statement about the quality of justice in the US, but most likely it will be ignored completely. Even acknowledging this challenge would be stepping into a minefield, and the DOJ is not that stupid.

ldargin• 14 years ago

IANAL: If he wants a speedy trial, and is concerned about legal fees, he should just go the U.S. on his own. Any delay at this point only helps the prosecution, giving them more time to research the case.

trotsky• 14 years ago

If the funds are subject to asset seizure the DOJ would never release them in a situation like this. If they got a conviction there'd be nothing left - all paid to his surprisingly expensive legal team based in the caymans. Even the dumbest feds ever would see that coming a mile away.

josteink2• 14 years ago

So lets not give the man a chance to a fair trial with his own attorneys paid with his own money, because by the law we are innocent until proven guilty, and we know he is a slimeball who will screw us.

Yeah. That sounds reasonable. The US is fucking this one up.

Not a single move so far has followed due process. Every move has been corrupt or illegal, ruled so by a judge. Not a single statement issued so far reassures that they will start following the rules.

I think we can safely say which side of this story is the dishonest and convicted one and it's not Dotcom.

mixmax• 14 years ago

There's something I don't quite understand. If you're accused of a crime in the US how can all your assets be frozen by the government and your website taken offline? Aren't you innocent until proved guilty?

If the answer is that it's suspected that all the money comes from illegal activity and therefore frozen until a judge rules on whether this is the case or not what would stop the US government from prosecuting, for example, Larry Page, take all his money and shut down Google until he has been to court? Which he can't pay for because he doesn't have any money.

Can you really just indite someone and convince a judge to freeze all his accounts before there has even been a trial?

J3L24043• 14 years ago

If the country you are in agrees.

briandear8• 14 years ago

The Comprehensive Forfeiture Act of 1984 allows it and US v. Monsanto upheld it. Since this is being prosecuted under RICO, it's lawful and Constitutional. Let's not forget that the US is only one of at least five countries involved in this case. No one has accused or has evidence that Larry Page has done anything illegal. But if there was evidence that page is violating RICO, then try can take his stuff until trial as well. As far as innocent until proven guilty, that actually isn't in the Constitution, it's based in English Common Law -- Dotcom's right aren't being violated as he is getting due process. Of course, te current situation of extradition requires a much lower standard of proof, the standard here is whether or not there is evidence that warrants a trial; effectively like a grand jury deliberation.

briandear8• 14 years ago

I wonder why the most common HN post on this topic comes from torrentfreak -- certainly they're objective in this case.

batgaijin• 14 years ago

Has anyone ever double checked the megaupload business model? Like, comparing how much s3 would cost to store all the data, and how many customers?

I couls never get it to work out...

nsns• 14 years ago

While I support his fight, I believe this simply adds to a long tradition in politics of offering "tempting" concessions the other side can never accept, for publicity and other purposes.

Kim Dotcom Will Go to the US in Exchange for Legal Funds

Related Stories