Slashdot Mirror
MegaUpload Dares RIAA To Sue Them
Dangerous_Minds writes "Yesterday, there were reports that the RIAA and MPAA were working with Mastercard to cut off payments to so-called 'rogue-websites' like MegaUpload. Today, a spokesperson from MegaUpload issued a response to the RIAA on ZeroPaid. Bonnie Lam of MegaUpload said, 'the vast majority of our revenue is coming from advertising.' She also said, 'Megaupload is a legitimate business operating within the boundaries of the law. In five years of operation we have not been sued by a single content owner. If the RIAA or MPAA would have legal grounds they would have taken us to court by now. We suggest that they attack us within the legal system and stop labeling us until they have something to show.'"
The whole article is interesting read, but here are some interesting bits:
Kim ‘Kimble’ Schmitz is a quite unbelievable character. Born in 1974 in Germany, he grew to become a computer hacker, successful businessman and convicted criminal. In 1998 Schmitz received two years’ probation for hacking into corporate networks and abusing telephone services but the draw of big money was just around the corner.
In 2001 Schmitz pulled off a huge stock market bluff which netted him a small fortune. After buying shares worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in the almost bankrupt LetsBuyIt.com, he announced that he would invest 50 million euros in the company, but in reality he didn’t have the money. His declaration led to the biggest single-day rise on the German stock market which allowed Schmitz to sell his shares and pocket $1.5 million profit. He was arrested for insider-trading in 2002, sentenced to a term of 20 months and given a 100,000 euro fine.
Also in 2001, one of Schmitz’s companies loaned another one 280,000 euros and conveniently both went bust shortly after. Schmitz later pleaded guilty to embezzlement and received another two years probation.
According to a recent report from New Zealand, Schmitz is currently under investigation for using multiple names to register three luxury cars including a Rolls-Royce Phantom convertible. The cars are adorned with personal plates – GOD, WANTED and GUILTY.
The vehicles are registered to an address in Coatesville, New Zealand, which turns out to be a very special venue indeed – Schmitz’s newly-acquired mansion and the country’s most expensive house, a snip at just over $20 million USD.
An investigative piece found Schmitz in Hong Kong business records with the new name "Kim Tim Jim Vestor", allegedly having a Finnish passport, acting as director of several "Mega-" companies, among them Megaupload Ltd. and Megarotic Ltd.
As of 2008, Kim currently lives on the top floor of the Grand Hyatt in Hong Kong with his wife and child. He goes by an alias of “Kim Vestor.” http://www.gfy.com/showthread.php?p=15096149
I always wondered why they(and Rapidshare and other clones) haven't been sued into oblivion yet. Not that I am rooting against them, but if Napster was found guilty all those years ago...
It seems that if you want to be taken seriously about such a claim, you would issue your response elsewhere than Zeropaid.
What's in your wallet?
People don't sue because they have legal grounds. They sue because they think they can force the other side to spend so much money that they'll cave. Most lawsuits are settled in favor of whoever has deeper pockets. Being in the right isn't enough; you have to be in the right and rich. Otherwise it's better to keep your head down... sadly. If the US ever gets around to tort reform (yeah, right), this situation may change.
I piss off bigots.
I feel like once they did this for WikiLeaks, the floodgates opened and now Mastercard is going to be under pressure to cancel accounts left and right. Heck, why isn't Mastercard closing the accounts for the Ku Klux Klan? How come you can still donate using Mastercard?
Slashdot needs a new tag for stories like this?
I nominate "bitchslap".
[End Of Line]
Hand Bag Sex Port?
Umm, MC isn't halting payments - at least not yet according to the umm articles linked. Mega was mentioned as one of the services in particular that the *IAA would want this halted with - supposedly since I haven't found them mentioned in my searches. Mega is simply stating that IF this were done it a) wouldn't impact them overly much and b) if they are doing something illegal why not come after them directly?
Frankly it's a disturbing prospect that someone could knock down a company by simply trying to strangle funding in this manner - we shoudl all be concerned. I also wonder if Mega has considered that they might also go after the advertisers payments in some way also.
I don't see good coming of this at all IF indeed the *IAAs have found a way to twist the arms of funding supplies like this.
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
Absolutely. This is like Spy vs Spy.
Pass the popcorn and strap yourselves in. There might be some collateral damage.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Here's a thought... if one can so easily affect their business model as to cause a significant adverse effect on their ability to run a business, and the person can do it without breaking the law in any way, then maybe they should rethink their business model.
Losing Mastercard would create chaos for any retailer. Maybe stores that accept Mastercard should rethink their business model, since letting just anyone inside can result in anarchy. Maybe Mastercard itself should rethink its business model, since millions of people could start dropping their cards in the street, with $0 liability.
Let em try. We still have meatspace. I'm sure the board of directors of Master card would love to be payed a visit by angry bearded foul smelling maniacs at 3 am.
When it comes to other big companies like megaupload that have money to fight. They turn to dirty crap like this. they go after torrent indexer's, why haven't they hit Google? You can search out torrents on Google just like any other torrent search site.
Is it only for piracy?
If so, then it sounds to me that the **aas wouldn't have much problem going after them directly. I'm sort of thinking there is something more legitimate about megaupload that scares **AAs into taking back room negotiations over law and order.
Maybe Mastercard itself should rethink its business model, since millions of people could start dropping their cards in the street, with $0 liability.
The $0 liability doesn't count if you are careless with the card, much less if you deliberately lose it. Obviously they would have to prove it though.
I dream of a nation where a man is not judged by his skin color but by an number assigned by a credit rating agency.
As arbiter1 said, the riaa and mpaa won't attack a company that has the money to fight back. On the other hand, maybe MegaUpload should file a suit against the *AA's for all the shit they put people through.
Boredom is bliss.
Megauploads is for one thing: piracy.
Odd. I thought it was for uploading files. I guess the only purpose of a knife is too kill people, then.
I thought everyone wanted these big corporations to start acting ethically.
You act like everyone believes that copyright infringement is 'wrong'. This is not so.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
A quick check of Megaupload's website shows that their prices are about the same as all the other companies this same business. If the "vast majority" of their revenue comes from advertising then why aren't their prices significantly lower, undercutting the competition and bringing in even more customers? I have a feeling someone at MegaUpload has a big ego and is saying things they may regret later.
Using the Firefox add-on "SkipScreen" takes a lot of the misery out of dealing with Mega-whatever, and a quite a few similar sites.
WARNING: I cannot be help responsible for the above, as apparently my cats have learned how to type.
This is not about copyright infringement this is about media company's attacking the internet. They want you to be watching TV, going to the movies and renting DVD they don't want you entertaining yourself on the internet.
Quite frankly, Megaupload's response to this looks to me more like whining than anything else because getting MC to not honor payments to them probably has impacted their business in noticeable ways.
I have two words to describe what an organization pressuring MC to stop conducting business with another company would be called:
Tortious Interference with business relationships.
would probably be better and less likely to lead to jail time to send lawyers bearing restraint of trade and collusion lawsuits.
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
I've been an online merchant for about a decade. Historically, MC cards have been about 30% of sales. The lion's share is on Visa cards. MC has always been a self-righteous pack of assholes, cutting off merchants right and left over "content damaging to the MC brand" and other such bullshit. Their company policy is to piss in the face of consumer choice every chance they get. I've had 5-figure fines over content issues in the past and if it ever happens again, I'll dump their worthless asses purely out of spite. I would absolutely love to tell customers "we don't accept that piece-of-shit card, and you shouldn't either". It would be a mild inconvenience, but nothing close to "chaos". Keep in mind that the demographic merchants care about (i.e., disposable income, not living paycheck to paycheck) normally have 2 or more cards in their wallet. Nobody ever went bankrupt just by telling MC to go fuck themselves.
I don't see good coming of this at all IF indeed the *IAAs have found a way to twist the arms of funding supplies like this.
Wellll... I am just as concerned about the intent behind this as the next person. I would not be so worried though.
MC eliminating those customers is not the easiest thing to do in the world. There have been known problems with scammers and con artists putting up merchant account after merchant account with fake documentation, fake websites, etc. We are all running around Slashdot upset about MC claiming they are going to fix the holes, but seriously people, it's not like there are just a few! :) MC and Visa are like 10 mile high colanders. Good luck with that.
Even if they did make real and substantial progress with all of their indirect/direct merchant accounts it would only force the funding to the 3rd party companies like PayPal which don't even suffer the same regulations.
When MC or Visa decide to block PayPal or Amazon that is when this will have a real effect.
how is it acting ethically for mastercard to collude with the RIAA to screw with a company that apparently isn't even breaking the law?
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
Ah... so you're saying that Megaupload would have legitimate grounds to sue the RIAA and MPAA then? That'd be an interesting thing to see. I'll be sure to bring popcorn.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastercard
Revenue US$5.10 Billion (FY 2009)[1]
Operating income US$2.26 Billion (FY 2009)
Net income US$1.46 Billion (FY 2009)[1]
Total assets US$7.47 Billion (FY 2009)[2]
Total equity US$3.50 Billion (FY 2009)[2]
Employees 5,000 (2008)
Seriously? Thats pretty damn small....
world bank financial statement, as of June 30, 2009
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTAR2009/Resources/6223977-1253132981998/6440371-1253209164289/Financial_Statements.pdf
total assets- 275 BILLION
The world bank makes single loans that number in the billions.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
It isn't trolling and I have no indication to the color of it's casing.
It is spamming and it's a bot.
What you do is closer to trolling. Although I am quite sure this bot deserves it, it will probably not return here to check for reactions. Thus the only thing you accomplish is getting frustrated and irritating us.
Besides that I am unsure what a skin color has to do with trolling.
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
Mod parent UP!
I can speak for the music industry as a sound engineer and touring musician. The RIAA cannot bitch about the theft of the fake art they manufacture and promote. Produce and promote real talent and people will pay for it voluntarily, guaranteed.
For every successful band there's a dozen equally good candidates that the MIAA quash so they can produce and promote one band to capture the same market all the others would have shared. Then they take all the profits and pay the artists only slightly more than each of the dozen would have made. It is literally the mandate of the RIAA to cripple artistic development so that they make sure their offerings are only as good as will galvanize the market to their brand at the least expense. Just ask any failed musician with a huge advance they have to pay back because their A&R guy fucked them.
Napster was so popular because it was a fascinating new avenue available to people, not knowing the harm it caused. Now that it's apparent the damage piracy causes to musical development and diversity, people will pony up for artists they respect. I wish those most affected by the early days of piracy would step up and challenge both piracy and the industry's response to it. As poorly accepted as Metallica's "Beer GOOD, Napster BAD" impression of anti-piracy was, it was bang on. If say, Chris Cornell and Billy Corgan now stepped up to reinforce that argument for the sake of emerging artists, the message would be much better received.
War as we knew it was obsolete
Nothing could beat complete denial
- Emily Haines
Losing Mastercard would create chaos for any retailer.
If you've ever been in a small town store, they usually only accept 1 type of credit card (and it probably isn't mastercard).
I was a bit surprised the first time it happened to me, but the more I traveled, the more I realized it's pretty much business as usual for the large portion of the country that isn't a big city/town or its suburbs.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
My question is:
Does the MPAA/RIAA fall under the Legislative, Judicial or the Executive branch of government?
Or are they just buyers of "bought dogs"?
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
Odd. I thought it was for uploading files. I guess the only purpose of a knife is too kill people, then.
In this case, it's more like a knife that thousands use to kill people, and one token person standing there with a loaf of bread in their other hand. Putting aside legal defences of "it's not our fault if people misuse it", do you *honestly* believe the reality is other than Megaupload being overwhelmingly used for piracy?
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
In this case, it's more like a knife that thousands use to kill people, and one token person standing there with a loaf of bread in their other hand.
It wasn't made for that purpose. While that would be unfortunate, it really isn't the fault of the tool. Also, there's no accurate way to measure exactly how often that it's used for piracy. At least, I'm fairly certain of that. There's no magical way to be aware of every single file on the website and be able to tell if it's illegal or not.
"it's not our fault if people misuse it"
It isn't their fault.
do you *honestly* believe the reality is other than Megaupload being overwhelmingly used for piracy?
Did you read what he said? He said it was only used for piracy.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
fake art
Ah. So, it's your judgement about the quality of a product that makes it OK or not to rip off instead of just walking away from it, is that it? Do you steal your lunch from places that make a less-good sandwich than the next guy?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Don't complain, do what I do, wait for an email address to appear and send it to every spammer you know.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
My parents don't want me entertaining myself on the internet either - except it's not about copyright issues, they're just afraid I'll turn deaf or blind.
It wasn't made for that purpose.
Repeating a thing doesn't make it true. Some knives are made for killin' and some websites are made for copyright infringement. The only thing that is clear is that it does have substantial non-infringing use.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
MC eliminating those customers is not the easiest thing to do in the world. There have been known problems with scammers and con artists putting up merchant account after merchant account with fake documentation, fake websites, etc.
Obviously the solution is to subject the application to greater scrutiny. Verification of articles, for example. Notarization. The bar can be raised, at least. They don't try because they want these people's money and they don't care who is hurt.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you've ever been in a small town store, they usually only accept 1 type of credit card (and it probably isn't mastercard).
I have never, ever seen a credit card terminal where they could only process one type of card. Virtually every processor will take both MC and Visa, usually also Discover for some reason. And I have definitely been to all kinds of shithole podunk towns. Sometimes they don't take credit cards at all, though. Often, they don't take American Express, just like Visa said...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I can speak for the music industry as a sound engineer and touring musician.
No, you can not. You can only speak for yourself. You presume yourself right into being an asshole. This is the propaganda technique of the "Appeal to Authority".
It is literally the mandate of the RIAA to cripple artistic development so that they make sure their offerings are only as good as will galvanize the market to their brand at the least expense.
It is the purpose of the majority of businesses to expend as little money as they can to return as much profit as possible. It does not preclude the creation of art outside of their system. This is a red herring. The *AA are the ones who benefit most from strong copyright laws, because it enables them to make the most profit from their noninvolvement.
Napster was so popular because it was a fascinating new avenue available to people, not knowing the harm it caused. Now that it's apparent the damage piracy causes to musical development and diversity,
Repeating a thing does not make it true, although some people will believe a thing if you state it as fact. You are making unsupported assertions and disguising them as logic.
If say, Chris Cornell and Billy Corgan now stepped up to reinforce that argument for the sake of emerging artists, the message would be much better received.
Right, but when you say it, you're just some random yahoo using logical fallacies on slashdot to try to prove a point, and failing.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Repeating a thing doesn't make it true.
Where did I say it did? Obviously I was talking about the fact that just because some things are used in a different way than they were intended, that doesn't mean that it's the fault of the person who made it or the tool itself.
some websites are made for copyright infringement
You can upload anything you want. Does something suddenly become bad and must be ruined for everyone just because someone thinks a lot of people are abusing it?
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Am I the only one who immediately imagined samuel l. jackson doing the dare? the double dare?
See title please, thanks.
Huh?
Ah... so you're saying that Megaupload would have legitimate grounds to sue the RIAA and MPAA then? That'd be an interesting thing to see.
Yes... only more interesting thing I could think of is that if evidence came to light very publicly that would give massive numbers of individuals legitimate grounds to sue the RIAA.
For example, if evidence could emerge showing that the RIAA lied to congress, bribed officials, and falsified essential evidence and illegally obtained evidence for every single lawsuit, that both the RIAA management and their attorneys were aware of it, fully complicit, and went to great lengths to keep it secret.
Where is Wikileaks when you need them? Apparently no leaks at the **AA, or WL is too busy trying to create a diplomatic incident, by publishing Diplomat A's opinion of Country B's ambassador.
Crime is the only career path which the US government ensures all comers will get an education in, along with free room and board.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Odd... I use it to get downloads of game maps made by authors who cannot afford a web host. I have used it to download game patches too. I have myself used it to give files to friends that were too big to email or send via Skype. Files that were not infringing for sure!
Honestly downloading pirated content from a site that no doubt logs your IP address and the fact that you just downloaded an entire file completely, sans even SSL crypto BTW, seems pretty stupid to me.
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
So are you saying we should wait until they have done this to lots of other places and finally gone after one that we really really care about like Amazon? Somehow that doesn't seem so smart to me and it would certainly have allowed precedent to be set...
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
You apparently failed to understand that I was speaking about something in general. Besides that, I said that something shouldn't be banned because a lot of people use it for something other than its original intended purpose (and it definitely shouldn't be banned because people use it to commit victimless crimes).
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
If the 'tool' is overwhelmingly used to facilitate crime, then it's time to ban the tool.
Ban the tool and any legitimate uses it may have simply because a lot of people abuse it? Wow. Lots of people abuse guns for pointless wars and crime. Why aren't they banned? Going by this, I'll just assume that they only have illegitimate uses and should be banned.
Now, in addition to this, not only do we not have any accurate measurements about the amount of pirated content versus non-pirated content on their servers, but we'd be banning the 'tool' because some people use it to commit crimes of which there are no victims. If 'loss' of potential future gain could be equated to harm, then that means that you would be 'hurting' someone merely by not giving them all of your money and property.
End of discussion.
Nice argument!
I suggest you get over it and re-focus your efforts on making sure that you're in compliance with the the law, in thought and deed.
Yes, because the law is always 'right', correct? If something is illegal, that means that it's wrong. No, I believe that you should look at the law, decide if it is there for a good reason, and then if it isn't, work to change it.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Also, do you know the exact amount of pirated software on their servers? The exact amount of non-pirated software?
I believe it would be quite difficult to get these numbers. If not, then how do you know?
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
No... ban it because it's being used exactly as it was designed to
Apparently you're not understand that you can upload legal files. If they only allowed illegal content, your claim would stand more ground, but they don't. I've even heard (but I'm not sure if it's true) that they conform to DMCA requests.
no such tool is actually required to find a significant number of non-infringing works anyways.
To know the number of infringing material versus non-infringing material, yes, it is required.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!