Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Trapezohedron]

Alright, I stand corrected. Well, I guess they deserved it too, although I feel pity for the other people who used the service legitimately.

[Max White]

Because the NZ court system was convinced that the allegations against said offenders was legitimate enough for an arrest and extradition proceedings to be made. That kind of thing happens all the time. The crime took place in the USA, at least partly, as there were servers based in the USA.

How was it partly in the US? I'm pretty sure the servers were over in Canada and the Netherlands, at least two people were from NZ... What part was US?

[Frumple]

Th'mega folks were using data centers that were in (or at least headquartered or partly set up in) the US, apparently, at least in part. It's in the indictment.

[Dae]

Bear in mind that we are a few weeks from the launch of MegaMusic and MegaBox. MegaMusic was supposed to be a platform of distribution for the music produced by artists registered under the label MegaBox, which was announced as giving 90% of the retail title to the artist.

And guess who started the process ? Universal. As in Universal Music. What a surprise.

Anyway, I'm not versed at all in US right, but from the 10 pages or so that I have read this all sounds very tenuous. The only bad thing these guys are supposed to have done is:

"Since at least September 2005, Megaupload.com has been usedby the defendants and other members and associates of the Mega Conspiracy to willfullyreproduce and distribute many millions of infringing copies of copyrighted works."

But that is quite easily defendable, the owner of a platform being responsible only to an extent concerning what the users do. Plus they always ensured to do enough to respect the law, e.g. remove any link that was reported as copyrighted work.

All this mess just because these guys are accused. That's what I found mindnumbing. They haven't been declared guilty of anything, and here they are, arrested halfway across the world, their whole company taken down because of an accusation. That doesn't sound like presumed innocence to me.

Moreover, what is the role of an indictment exactly ? If it's supposed to guide the trial, it sounds like said trial has already happened.

"The defendants [...] were members of the “Mega Conspiracy,” a worldwide criminal organization whosemembers engaged in criminal copyright infringement and money laundering on a massive scale."

Isn't the role of this whole action to determine whether MegaUpload is a criminal group ? Plus, "Mega Conspiracy" ? Seriously ? Does EVERYTHING have to be marketable in the US ?

[sneakey pete]

I'm pretty sure that the biggest thing they're going for is that the owners knowingly didn't properly take down files under the DMCA act, and colluded with listing sites to maintain high traffic while appearing outwardly not to condone piracy.

Because the NZ court system was convinced that the allegations against said offenders was legitimate enough for an arrest and extradition proceedings to be made. That kind of thing happens all the time. The crime took place in the USA, at least partly, as there were servers based in the USA.

How was it partly in the US? I'm pretty sure the servers were over in Canada and the Netherlands, at least two people were from NZ... What part was US?

From the FBI release, "...and targeted sites where Megaupload has servers in Ashburn, Va., Washington, D.C., the Netherlands, and Canada."


edit: news story about their extradition hearing. I'd imagine they'd get bail. Also mentions in there that the investigation was begun in march 2010. That's a long time ago. Not like its a reaction to their new music page.

[sluissa]

I really hope they have money to hire some really good lawyers. Yes, they might deserve punishment, but it would, in my opinion, be very good precedent if they could get out of it.

[Tilla]

They have a lot of money. Their CEO is american DJ Swizz Beatz, who is married to top 40 recording artist Alicia Keys, and they are estimated to have quite a lot of revenue between memberships and ads in the  site.

[Dae]

After reading it all through, the only thing worthy of interest is the mails the defendants exchanged. A part refers to how they designed a soft to download videos from youtube, but most of what this text features shows that yes, they were aware there was illegal content on their servers, but nothing such as "why did you remove that link to Transformer ? it was a huge boost for our bank account !". There is even a part that says they disqualify uploaders for the reward if they uploaded illegal content.

The only mentions of knowingly using illegal content were as normal users. So I guess if these mails are used as proof, they could be charged with whatever you have to pay in the US when you give a link to illegal material. Then again, there may be things such as "you have the right to watch it online if you own a copy" in which case they could just say both owned a legally acquired copy of whatever they gave.

Thing is, can these mails be used a proof or element of proof in the US ? Apart from the fact they could've been faked, I thought every proof that was presented could only be used as proof if the accusation proves it was obtained legally.

Seriously, if there is someone willing to give us a crash course of US federal law, he should be welcomed to speak. If such a person lurks on a forum, it has to be on the DF one.

[olemars]

From the BBC article:

"The conspirators allegedly paid users whom they specifically knew uploaded infringing content and publicised their links to users throughout the world," a statement said.

In what way did MU ever pay users to do anything?

[Mictlantecuhtli]

If they are guilty for having a site that happens to make piracy a bit simpler (considering the plethorah of other file-sharing sites), yet not for commiting the piracy/theft themselves, then how is is their legal liability? It's not like Megaupload is a piracy advocate of the Interwastes. It's almost like they're arresting them for racketeering, except without any actual racket..

I mean, is Bill Gates being arrested because hackers across the world utilize MS operating systems to write/distribute viruses and adware? Does this not cause monetary and emotional (bullshit) damages to these great entertainment conglomerates and their associations?

I'm an Engineer, law is just a hobby. I'm sure we could all use a bit of a crash-course in this, so to speak.

[kaijyuu]

Basically they're pinning the responsibility of preventing piracy on those hosting the services.


Imagine if your local department of transportation was asked to police the highways. That's essentially what's happening here (and on youtube, etc). Failing to do so is assisting in piracy or some such bullshit.

[Jimmy]

Basically they're pinning the responsibility of preventing piracy on those hosting the services.


Imagine if your local department of transportation was asked to police the highways. That's essentially what's happening here (and on youtube, etc). Failing to do so is assisting in piracy or some such bullshit.

No, it's not that.

It's saying that Toyota is responsible for a person driving their Camry over the speed limit, and should install GPS tracking devices in all cars at their own expense to alert police when it occurs.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Basically they're pinning the responsibility of preventing piracy on those hosting the services.


Imagine if your local department of transportation was asked to police the highways. That's essentially what's happening here (and on youtube, etc). Failing to do so is assisting in piracy or some such bullshit.

I've seen the exact same charges presented against multiple true piracy sites, such as Demonoid and Piratebay. I'm sure you can guess how well those worked.

No, it's not that.

It's saying that Toyota is responsible for a person driving their Camry over the speed limit, and should install GPS tracking devices in all cars at their own expense to alert police when it occurs.

Well, to be honest, that's basically the same idea of forcing a silly idea of self policing on the Internet.

Especially because anyone with half a brain knows that 'combating piracy' is about as worthwhile as the War on Drugs, and would rather use the trend to benefit themselves, such as appealing to the market of people who need online storage (oddly enough, seems to be people that want to share things on the internet!), as opposed to trying to stifle the world innovation brought by it.

[justinlee999]

I forgot, does the US have the rights to travel to another country to arrest people in the first place?

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I forgot, does the US have the rights to travel to another country to arrest people in the first place?

Unless it's a puppet/protectorate, I do not think so. Besides, the arrest was carried out by the local Bobbies/Newzealander forces.