Slashdot Mirror


Megaupload.com Shut Down, Founder Charged With Piracy

zacharye writes "Federal prosecutors in Virginia have shut down notorious file-sharing site Megaupload.com and charged the service's founder with violating piracy laws. The Associated Press broke the story on Thursday, reporting that the indictment accuses Megaupload.com's owner with costing copyright holders including record labels and movie studios more than $500 million in lost revenue."

210 of 1,005 comments (clear)

  1. U.S. law is the new international law by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The summary doesn't mention it, but none of those indicted or arrested were U.S. citizens or had likely even ever set foot on U.S. soil. Even if you're in another country, you had better make sure you're not violating U.S. law. Here's a full list of those foreigners who foolishly thought they weren't under U.S. jurisdiction (from the DOJ website):

    Kim Dotcom, aka Kim Schmitz and Kim Tim Jim Vestor, 37, a resident of both Hong Kong and New Zealand. Dotcom founded Megaupload Limited and is the director and sole shareholder of Vestor Limited, which has been used to hold his ownership interests in the Mega-affiliated sites.

    Finn Batato, 38, a citizen and resident of Germany, who is the chief marketing officer;

    Julius Bencko, 35, a citizen and resident of Slovakia, who is the graphic designer;

    Sven Echternach, 39, a citizen and resident of Germany, who is the head of business development;

    Mathias Ortmann, 40, a citizen of Germany and resident of both Germany and Hong Kong, who is the chief technical officer, co-founder and director;

    Andrus Nomm, 32, a citizen of Estonia and resident of both Turkey and Estonia, who is a software programmer and head of the development software division;

    Bram van der Kolk, aka Bramos, 29, a Dutch citizen and resident of both the Netherlands and New Zealand, who oversees programming and the underlying network structure for the Mega conspiracy websites.

    Dotcom, Batato, Ortmann and van der Kolk were arrested today in Auckland, New Zealand, by New Zealand authorities, who executed provisional arrest warrants requested by the United States. Bencko, Echternach and Nomm remain at large.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by alphatel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most will confuse this with a SOPA action, which will make it that much easier to hype.

      --
      When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    2. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      SOPA might as well be called iDMCA because it basically takes the DMCA Takedown system to an international level. (I.E. If a TLD won't take down a piracy site, ban the whole TLD from the US Internet.) Maybe what we should trade for that is a punitive damages clause added for incorrect DMCA letters.

    3. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by geekoid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But they used server located in the US.

      If you stand in Mexico and use a remote control car to rob a bank in the US, the US will come after you..and visa versa.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All that with the money he made from piracy.

      Or by running a useful business. Come on, they have an advertisement with a bunch of artists about how useful their site is for their work. Some people using Google to find unauthorized files doesn't mean Schmidt's money is "made from piracy".

    5. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, this is a good argument for why we don't need SOPA/PIPA.

    6. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and people think Ron Paul is the crazy one for wanting America's fingers out of other country's pies.

      This sort of thing is going to spark widespread international hatred for the United States. No, not the general dislike that many countries have for us now, but honest-to-god hatred. Look what good things came out of that situation in the mideast.

    7. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by poity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Before anyone gets voted up to the stratosphere or down to oblivion here, we should remind ourselves that there is no way to tell how legitimately or illegitimately he made his money until a breakdown of his income is published.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    8. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm just glad it doesn't work the other way around. I could put swastikas all over my website on some server in Germany, confident that the FBI would laugh at Germany if they tried to have an American citizen arrested and deported.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    9. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. I have used services like that to move large files between offices. There are plenty of legitimate uses for sites like these. These bastards should be forced to go after the uploaders. But they are too damn lazy, and know damn well there is no payday at the end, and not from common sense, but from EXPERIENCE.

    10. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by hawks5999 · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you are going to be accused of piracy, hope that you live in one of these non-extradition treaty countries: Bhutan Botswana Brunei Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad China Comoros Djibouti Equatorial Guinea Ethiopia Gabon Guinea Guinea Bissau Indonesia Iran Ivory Coast Jordan Kuwait Laos Lebanon Libya Madagascar Mali Maldives Mauritania Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Nepal Niger Oman Qatar Russia Rwanda Samoa Sao Tome e Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Somalia Sudan Syria Togo Tunisia Uganda United Arab Emirates Vanuatu Vietnam Yemen Yemen South Zaire

    11. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by tmosley · · Score: 2

      No, I don't think they would. They might demand that MEXICAN authorities go after you, and failure to do so would cause an international incident, but they can't come after you directly. This action is outrageous.

    12. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, this is a good argument for why we don't need SOPA/PIPA.

      My thinking exactly.

      Present laws should be shown to fail before new laws, which are effectively wrecking balls to swat mosquitos, are enacted.

      Timing is certainly insteresting. Is this meant to underscore that point? Could be...

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    13. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by VAElynx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A man that made his money off "piracy" is any day more likeable than those who make equivalent sums by exploiting workers. Nobody seems to complain in those cases, though.

    14. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Funny

      Before anyone gets voted up to the stratosphere or down to oblivion here, we should remind ourselves that there is no way to tell how legitimately or illegitimately he made his money until a breakdown of his income is published.

      And we'll probably be a lot older and following other stories by the time that comes out...

      In today's news, aliens land in Los Angeles ans proclaim L. Ron Hubbard totally slanders them in his Church of Scientology writings and they plan to sue. Tom Cruise was unavailable for comment as he was squashed flat by the alien ship landing.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    15. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by mister_playboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's also been "industry" standard to know that Megaupload is very nice for piracy uploaders.

      Megaupload is very nice for downloaders. Unlike most other sites, you were not able to make money by uploading to MU. It was the generous downloading limts that made the site popular.

      MU had unrivalled file retention for a free service. Even when uploading as a free user, files were retained for years, even without any downloads. It's fully possible to find working MU links posted in 2005. The only thing they removed files for was a DMCA takedown. If there was a limit or the files you could upload to a free account, I never hit it. Other sites did not offer anything similar unless you paid for preimum membership.

      Kim make have been a crook, but MU itself was the bastion of free filesharing in the P2P mould from a user standpoint, whereas nearly every other site except Mediafire is based on commerical (payouts to uploaders) filesharing.

      A sad day. Back to the torrents!

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    16. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Texas law only requires that you shoot him in season and buy a tag.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    17. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by poity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not calling for his income to be published. I'm saying in the absence of their site statistics and their income breakdown, neither FightFreedomOfSpeach nor the AC who responded to his post can prove their assertions. One claims his money is made illegitimately, the other claims the opposite. What I'm seeing is moderator reaction favoring the AC and punishing FightFreedomOfSpeach in an instance where all we have is speculation. I'm for a neutral stance until facts emerge, and because of that I'm against this one sided moderation. Why are you so defensive?

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    18. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by the_saint1138 · · Score: 2

      Ugh, where us the "-1 shhhh" option when I need it.

    19. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Megaupload is also a very good way to share large files that you have created with others, without setting up your own website. An entirely legitimate and legal use.

      What's the balance between the two? Was there a better way to reduce piracy? What unintended effects are present?

      I have downloaded many files from Megaupload and MediaFire - always files uploaded and released by the original authors, who don't want to pay to host files of multi-megabyte (often 10's of mbegabyte or more) size. I know it's an easy target, but I fail to see why this business model is necessarily 'piracy'.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    20. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is no god, and Ron Paul would not tolerate piracy any more than any other crime.

      What we're talking about is a new way of life for the human race, where IP is actually open and accessible for all, at very little cost, if not free of any cost.

      Rapid duplication of digital content, easily shared, for free, for the benefit of humanity... this is the future, and no law will stop it, and if it ever does, we have stopped the evolutionary process of our species.

      Our way of lives have to change. Capitalism has no place in the future. Do you think aliens will respect our dollar? :P Our species knows where it has to go... Its a wonder why we fight against progress for selfish needs.

    21. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by turkeyfeathers · · Score: 2

      Julius Bencko, 35, a citizen and resident of Slovakia, who is the graphic designer;

      Dotcom, Batato, Ortmann and van der Kolk were arrested today in Auckland, New Zealand, by New Zealand authorities, who executed provisional arrest warrants requested by the United States. Bencko, Echternach and Nomm remain at large.

      A graphics designer remains at large? Presumed armed and dangerous, I hope.

    22. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by DinDaddy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Tom Cruise was unavailable for comment as he was squashed flat by the alien ship landing.

      Rendering him several inches shorter.

    23. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by future+assassin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >It's also been "industry" standard to know that Megaupload is very nice for piracy uploaders.

      From the same industry that says every download is a lost sale?
      From the same industry that pirated and sold works they didn't have rights to? http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4596/135/

      > It's only good - criminals are taken to court and jail

      Alleged criminals....

      >so companies can again produce goods and software and they don't have to see the widespread piracy that is going on.

      Strange so are you saying movies, music and software would be that much more creative and better quality if there was no piracy? I mean all movies and music albums should reap in millions from every release. If they don't apparently its because the companies can't make good works because piracy is holding them back.

      --
      by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    24. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nowhere! The survivors are still alive!

      Wait, what was the joke?

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    25. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's what they did. They asked New Zealand to arrest the men involved, and New Zealand police arrested them. Perhaps reading is not your strong suit?

      There are plenty of reasons to be unhappy with this that are based in fact. You should try one of those.

    26. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 3, Funny

      Iran is. Remaining under debate is how many Yemens there are.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    27. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ironjaw33 · · Score: 2

      So they drag these guys from halfway around the world to try them in my backyard (I live 30 miles from Norfolk, where the Eastern District court is). The Eastern District is also notorious for patent suits. In that article, the newspaper claims it's the speediness that attracts these cases, but I'm guessing it's the likelihood of getting a jury packed with current and former military members who favor harsh punishments for trivial infractions.

      We've also had our share of Somali pirates and a few Guantanamo prisoners tried here.

    28. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sure, except then you get to experience extraordinary rendition instead of extradition.

    29. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by tmosley · · Score: 2

      Yes, and it was an international incident. Look at the consequences of that action. They cut off our supply lines into Afghanistan.

    30. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by SomePgmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It'll all be in the spin.

      Murdoch* et al. will point at it as, "See! This kind of thing is killing American business!"

      The other side will say, "Doh. You used what legal muscle you already had, which is already abusive."

      * If you didn't see him squirm on Twitter yesterday, you're missing out.

    31. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Sancho · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the "failure" is that the shutdown and arrest couldn't be done without due process. SOPA/PIPA eliminates a great deal of due process for the initial shutdown.

      Just consider how long megaupload's been around. If one could just mail a letter to their DNS provider to get it shut down, you can bet it would have happened long ago.

    32. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by tmosley · · Score: 2

      Apparently it isn't yours, as I was talking about geekoid's post, not the article. But thanks for taking the time to post an insult.

    33. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by JustSomeProgrammer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is a man who makes money off of "piracy" not also someone who exploits workers since he doesn't give money to anyone who worked to make that content?

    34. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Baloroth · · Score: 2, Informative

      Aaand they didn't go after the MegaUpload guys directly either. They asked the New Zealand authorities (which is where they were living) to do it for them, presumably under the US-NZ extradition treaty.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    35. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, we think Ron Paul is crazy for believing in intelligent design, for voting to defund Planned Parenthood, for supporting a Constitutional Amendment defining a fetus as a human being, and many other things; none of which involve fingers or pies.

    36. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by jamstar7 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You have not the slightest idea what the power of a fully funded bought and paid for Congress is. 'El Presidente' is supposed to be the figurehead of the government, not the Supreme Dictator. If by some chance Ron Paul does scam up the presidency, expect Congress to beat him senseless like a rented mule.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    37. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It'll all be in the spin.

      Murdoch* et al. will point at it as, "See! This kind of thing is killing American business!"

      The other side will say, "Doh. You used what legal muscle you already had, which is already abusive."

      * If you didn't see him squirm on Twitter yesterday, you're missing out.

      Rupert says you should check your voicemail more often. Texts, too.

      Really, not an ounce of sympathy for a man who made his fortune ruining people.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    38. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Princeofcups · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Before anyone gets voted up to the stratosphere or down to oblivion here, we should remind ourselves that there is no way to tell how legitimately or illegitimately he made his money until a breakdown of his income is published.

      Illegally as defined by whom exactly? Printing an image of Mohamed is illegal in Iran. Should we extradite all US offenders to Iran? Most people outside of the US don't see sharing files as illegal in the same way. As a US citizen, I'm appalled and disgusted. How many people were killed by Megaupload? How many made to starve? This is a sickening abuse of power in the name of corporate profits.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    39. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by PRMan · · Score: 3, Funny

      There's a brief article about him...

      Interesting...with a name like 'Kim', I'd assumed it was a chick....

      And with a name like 'Dotcom', I expected him to be a website...

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    40. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Hentes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is a very good argument why people outside the US should still care about SOPA/PIPA.

    41. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Bucky24 · · Score: 2

      You seem to have misread the post you were replying to. GP is talking about a website, something you can ssh or ftp into. The swastikas could be placed from anywhere in the world. The server however would reside in Germany.

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    42. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      I hope they weren't important files... you were basically trusting your data to a guy who has been convicted of credit card fraud, insider trading, and embezzlement.

      He has been going around spending craploads of money on parties, cars, etc, for years before Megaupload, etc, were every founded. Wonder where that money came from...

    43. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Bucky24 · · Score: 2

      But will he stick to that platform if elected? Most elected officials don't, afaik.

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    44. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by jd2112 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It'll all be in the spin.

      Murdoch* et al. will point at it as, "See! This kind of thing is killing American business!"

      The other side will say, "Doh. You used what legal muscle you already had, which is already abusive."

      * If you didn't see him squirm on Twitter yesterday, you're missing out.

      I first saw this on fox news (link from google news, I wouldn't normally go there.) The article had so much pro-SOPA spin on it I got dizzy just reading it.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    45. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm still too afraid to post this pseudonymously, but if they're extraditing these people I can't be much further down the list :-( I figure they already have their sights on me if they're hunting down MegaUpload's graphic designer.

    46. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by znrt · · Score: 2

      we should remind ourselves that there is no way to tell how legitimately or illegitimately he made his money until a breakdown of his income is published.

      likewise there is no way to tell how legitimately or illegitimately his shop was shut down.

      i can accuse you of causing me $500 million in lost revenue, just as easily. shouldn't I prove it? should a breakdown of your income be published in the meantime?

    47. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by jamstar7 · · Score: 2

      All that with the money he made from piracy.

      All with that money he made from advertising clickthroughs and membership fees. God bless NoScript...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    48. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a better argument for why we don't need the USA.

    49. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Informative

      I hope they weren't important files... you were basically trusting your data to a guy who has been convicted of credit card fraud, insider trading, and embezzlement.

      Have you never heard of encryption?

    50. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ilsaloving · · Score: 4, Funny

      *raises hand*

      Anyone else hear the voice of Yakko Warner (from the Animaniacs cartoon) as they read that?

    51. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by makomk · · Score: 2

      Not even then. Even if the records of his site did record which files made him the most money, it's kind of hard to tell the difference between a cryptically named encrypted RAR containing pirated video and a cryptically named encrypted RAR containing internal documents from some small company whose employees are using it as a cheap way to pass files around.

    52. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Nyder · · Score: 2

      Tom Cruise was unavailable for comment as he was squashed flat by the alien ship landing.

      Rendering him several inches shorter.

      Tom Cruise is rendered? I knew a real person couldn't be as stupid as he is.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    53. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by genjix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do not stand for this flagrant abuse of our farcical democracy!

      Megaupload has been forcibly closed by the FBI. In a sickening undermining of the people’s will, they are making an example out of an historic, legitimate, useful and well-known website. This is a prophetic glimmer of the coming war against pure free speech- the internet.

      This happened once before. Here in the UK, the IWF (Internet Watch Foundation) is a censoring system for the internet. In 1996, the Metropolitan Police started requesting the banning of illegal content by ISPs in the UK. With veiled sly threats they asked that ISPs engage in ‘self-enforcement’ rather than forcing them to enforce the law on them.

      Most of the ISPs complied except Demon internet. Demon was a British ISP that contributed to the Open Source community, ran several IRC servers and were pioneers of their time. They objected on the grounds of it being “unacceptable censorship”. A few days later, a tabloid expose appeared in the Observer newspaper alleging that the director of Demon was supplying paedophiles with photographs of children being sexually abused.

      Then the police let it be known that during that summer, they were planning a crack-down on an unspecified ISP as a test-case (translation: making an example of them). Between the threats and pressure, the IWF was formed- a supposedly voluntary organisation but in fact a fake-charity and a quango. The IWF is a disgraceful secretive group with an awful corrupt history and no public oversight.

      Now we see the same tactic has been used against Megaupload. They are using the threat of violence to coerce companies, how the British police did to create their own laws. The SOPA legislation did not go their way, so they have resulted to immoral tactics of repression.

      From ACTA which is decided behind closed European chambers, the DEA which was pushed through undemocratically at alarming speed before elections, evil La Hadopi and now SOPA/PIPA in the US, there is nowhere to run. The nepotists are determined to push through these legislation. At all costs. This is not about piracy- it never was and will not do a thing. It is about control.

      We have built a tool. For all their false talk of democracy we have for the first time in history reached this epochal moment. Self determination. If they truly believed in democracy, we could have a direct-democracy tomorrow. The tools exist. Instead we see this flagrant deception. It has become acceptable for politicians to cater to the greatest common denominator. We let them off the hook on the truth like Cameron pretending to be pro-NHS or Obama pretending to be Christian because it is for voters. Since when did it become acceptable to lie! Now today we see this limp-wristed hand wringing by the US president about how he will veto SOPA. Oh shut up.

      Was it Gordan Brown who said that voting levels were dangerously low in the below-30s because youngsters today are apolitical. He wanted mandatory attendance for voters. No, we are not apolitical, we are sick of your lies and deceit. This generation is probably more political than any generation in history. In the 80s, only 5% of people in the US were members of organisations. In the 90s, 70% of Americans belonged to some kind of organisation. People are mobilising and prescient of issues.

      Libel law is atrociously bad in the UK. Payouts are 10 times greater than in main-land Europe and you get a situation where billionaires use law firms like Carter-Ruck to keep news publishers (which are poor) in court and bleed them dry. Time magazine did an undercover piece of reporting and was sued for libel. They won the case but it ended up costing them $1 million. That’s effectively a fine of $1 million for undercover journalism.

      Of course when the law is broken, what do we do? Make more laws! That is why California has brought in anti-SLAPP legislation.

      Patent law is so stupid and I won’t even go there.

      Copyright is fascist. I find it revolting that

    54. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Synerg1y · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd love to hear how megaupload made money from piracy when uploading / downloading from the site has always been free. Only thing you'd have to pay for is if you wanted faster download speeds, irrelevant to the user generated content on the site. Megaupload couldn't exist under SOPA / PIPA laws irregardless for that reason.

      Also, I am very curious as to what they (the arrested) can / will argue. A lot of lesser arguments have been shut down by courts (ex. I didn't know it was on my server), but megaupload is a little different and unique of a RIAA/MPAA victim isn't it?

      If the above can get the US government to consider SOPA though, I don't like their chances considering lobbyists trying to buy a guilty verdict from the judge.

    55. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      I feel ashamed to be a New Zealand citizen right now.

    56. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by viperidaenz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If no one can prove either way, isn't he innocent until proven guilty?

    57. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Patch86 · · Score: 2

      Not usually, no. Usually the mitigator is that you're only supposed to sign extradition treaties with countries who's legal system you trust. So the UK has an extradition treaty with the US on the basis that US law is supposed to be of a shared level of quality as our own.

      Vaguely relevant is the Julian Assange extradition case (from the UK to Sweden). Even though some of the offences he is charged with in Sweden aren't covered by UK law, the treaty works on the basis that the Swedish legal system is generally close enough to our that we'll trust their national laws are just.

    58. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Previous similar sites (Napster, Kazaa) have been handled through civil cases. Why a criminal case for this one? Megaupload was a very different site than Napster/Kazaa/mp3.com, and it is not at all clear under current law that megaupload is illegal.

      Megaupload is a file locker service that has many legal uses purposes. Should a landlord be liable when a tenant infringes copyrights? Then why should a file locker provider be liable when a user uses the service to infringe copyright?

      If this is the law of the land, then the founders of the next youtube will be locked up and thrown in jail before their site can ever take off. Of course, that may be what the RIAA/MPAA are shooting for.

    59. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the timing had less to do with SOPA, and more to do with last month's brou-haha over Megaupload's yanked video on youtube.

      After the judge slapped down Universal Music(?) and said they can't censor ads just because they don't like them, the lawyers probably called the politicians and threatened not to fund their upcoming 2012 campaigns. The politicians called Justice Department and demanded action.

      Thus action happened. And megaupload was shutdown. And now Universal is celebrating with glee because they' lost the initial battle, but won the war.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    60. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by geekoid · · Score: 4, Funny

      I, for one, welcome our new Tom Cruise smashing alien overlords.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    61. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

      I think the whole thing is ridiculous.

      I was in the middle of downloading old Alphas and One Tree Hill episodes, when megaupload got yanked. Will I suddenly go out and buy the DVDs??? Ha! Not likely. The shows were fun to watch when free, but I'm sure as hell not going to pay for them.

      I'll go find a different form of entertainment, like watch Free TV over my antenna, goof-off on youtube, or go read a book.

      The RIAA/MPAA just doesn't get it.
      They are NOT losing money because
      ost of us never had any intent of buying their shit in the first place

      .

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    62. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Kenshin · · Score: 2

      Let's think about this for a sec.

      Random account holder uploads large encrypted file with relatively meaningless name. They don't know who the uploader is and they don't have any sort of clue about what's in the file. Let's assume files like this get uploaded by countless users all the time, every day.

      Do they waste their time and resources attempting to decrypt it? Possible, but very, very unlikely.

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    63. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by geekoid · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's funny, with a name like Dotcom, I expect him to be a douche.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    64. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Cederic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure that this wasn't simply a case of the United States throwing it's weight around.

      I'm pretty sure it was.

      (Slashdot: It's 13 seconds since you hit reply. Yes, that's because I'm not typing out an entire fucking essay and even after a bottle of vodka I can type five fucking words in under a minute. Come on Slashdot editors, fix this shit.)

    65. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by dotgain · · Score: 2

      While you can't be extradited from NZ to US for copyright infringement, you can for "sodomy"

    66. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by geekoid · · Score: 2

      Presumed indecent and sans Comic.
      ***NOTICE****

      Suspect was alerted by our presence by a Courier.

      If this Graphic designer appears on your porch, simply pay for your pizza and he will leave.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    67. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I strongly agree, that, if especially, megauploads owners have been arrested due to material that users of the site had uploaded, this is a very ominous sign, really. If this is so, it will mean that it will be basically impossible to run a user generated content service such as youtube in the USA. it is impossible for site owners to police their sites, to arrest people for what others out of their control have done really brings us to a new letter of fascist insanity and is deeplyu worrying and concerning, it is clearly an outright attack on free speech in the US and will make operating any kind of site that allows for free speech, legitimate content, virtually impossible, as it would take only one illegal post which site owners have no way of being able to prevent, to give the feds a pretext to carry out their gestapo type sweep.

      We should all be very concerned and worried about this ominous and dark development.

      It seems like they are already trying to enforce SOPA before it has even been passed.

    68. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by fishbowl · · Score: 5, Informative

      They didn't just want to shut down the site! They wanted to prove that the operators knew that what they were doing was illegal, and that they were taking deliberate steps to hide the money! That is central to the indictment, that they knew (because they were told!) that they hosted infringing content, and that they did not comply with removing (very specific) items from a (very specific) server. There's a lot more to the indictment, which I encourage everyone to read before they take an activist position.

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204616504577171180266957116.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    69. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by symbolset · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It should be pointed out that this was a business, with servers in the US - presumably with staff who had jobs. So if it turns out that this was not illegal, that's going to blow up in their face. Not everyone who is accused is actually convicted.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    70. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      And that has little to do with the indictment. It's way more significant what they did with the money (how and for what reasons they paid people cash rewards, how and from whom they took payments, the steps they took to move cash into and out of US banks, etc.) The "piracy" aspect is not the most serious of the charges.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    71. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Airline_Sickness_Bag · · Score: 2

      An article from The Wall Street Journal. Now, who owns the wsj? Good old Rupert.

    72. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not everyone who is accused is actually convicted.

      True, but this is all about PR, about intimidation, about inducing fear, not about redress of any specific grievance. Everyone will remember that Megaupload got raided and their staff arrested. Nobody will remember that they got acquitted (if they do) and in any event, they're out of business for the time being.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    73. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Speaking of one of those "people" I can say that it isn't so much a matter of not "caring" about SOPA/PIPA, it's more a matter of having not a whole lot we can do about it. Seriously, what is the advice given to US citizens who care? "Contact your congresscritter". Unfortunately, those of us in the Rest Of The World don't get to have one of those. We *could* bitch to our own government about how we disapprove of some not-yet-passed legislation that's being debated by a foreign government, but I'll let you take a guess how much effect that's going to have.

      Actually, there's nothing preventing you from sending emails, written letters or phoning our Congresspeople. It's apparent to me (as an American) that Congress still has this U.S.-centric attitude towards the Internet, and I believe that needs to change, quickly. Hearing from a fifty or sixty million thoroughly incensed foreigners might very well be a good first step. Yeah, okay, we started the Internet ball rolling almost forty years ago, but this baby has gone global now. Time for Congress to accept that fact, and stop threatening to corrupt a piece of Internet infrastructure (e.g., the DNS root servers) that the economies of many other nations are now dependent.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    74. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a better argument for why we don't need the USA.

      Comments like that serve no purpose. Citizens of this country are up in arms about what our government (at the behest of certain large foreign corporations, I might add: Sony and several European media outfits can take most of the heat for SOPA, after all, they paid for it.) wants to do with these stupid laws. If you want us to continue to fight to respect you and the freedoms you currently enjoy on the Internet (whatever your own government permits you in that regard, if anything) you should show a little respect in return.

      And you got a +5 Insightful for that. Remarkable.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    75. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by epyT-R · · Score: 2

      or they could charge sane prices and mitigate piracy instead of demanding the government bail them out.

    76. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by tarlong · · Score: 3, Interesting

      See this is where i hit a wall. I'm from Puerto Rico, a wholly owned pawnshop of the United States of America, i mean ... a territory or colony as you will. Even after 100+ years of occupation, we still use Spanish as our main language and English as a badly spoken/written second language. I don't pirate as a rule but the media outlets seem to think that EVERYONE here speaks and understands English fluently and that our preferred second and third languages are French and Mandarin. Go figure. What happens when me and my wife wanna watch a movie or a show? To me there is no problem, i sometimes forget what language i am listening to. My wife? she could not do English even if her son's life depended on it. Zilch, zero, nada. So, I'm forced to go out to the internet and get them freaking movies or shows in Spanish, or at least have them with captions.

      You know what? I've been a customer of mega upload/video/whatever since last year and use show and movie lists sites (that direct you to uploaded stuff at megaupload/video) to see or download the movies or shows we wanna watch. She could very well learn English, yes, but that is not the point. If they have the translations done for other countries, why wont they make them available for our zone too? What, suddenly there are no Spanish only paying legal customers in the US? Come on, puertorricans living in the one of the fifty states hit the mark of around 4 million people, about half of which do not speak English as a first language and are not required to learn it due to the fact that we were born US citizens and dod not need to take an exam to make the citizenship.

      Freaking absurd. I am a criminal cuz the basically have forced me to. Yeah, i know, her not knowing English is not their fault but it is their fault that, having the freaking translations already (they translate for Spain and South America), that i need to pirate them to enjoy the show. I can also stop watching the shows, but that wont stop piracy.

      There are many who pirate just because, but many more do so because they need to or are left with unacceptable choices. I would love to pay, if i could have use for the product.

      One last thought, the USA used to be a nice place to be and live but is turning so fast into another neonazy state that I have renounced all my annexionist views and want now independence for our Island. The US federal government has run amok and is trampling everything the bill of rights and the declaration of independence have stood for these past centuries.

      --
      What? A beutiful butterfly you say? And how exactly are you going to turn into a beutiful butterfly then?
    77. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Xyrus · · Score: 2

      And with a name like Kim DotCom, I expected him to be a Korean porn site.

      --
      ~X~
    78. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by BrianH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The position of the U.S. government is that these are foreign nationals operating a criminal enterprise within the United States. From a legal standpoint, it's no different than issuing warrants for foreign drug kingpins who ship drugs to the United States. They're not prosecuting foreigners for their actions overseas, but they are charging foreigners for the actions they are initiating within the borders of the United States itself.

      Osama bin Laden never set foot in the U.S. either. We still had arrest warrants out for him, even before 9/11, for acts of terrorism he initiated on U.S. soil (the '93 WTC attack) and on foreign U.S. locations (embassies, Khobar, etc). While we're talking about two vastly different types of crime, the legal principle behind the charges is the same. If you direct criminal actions within the United States from a foreign location, you become subject to U.S. law because you are committing activities within the country.

      By placing a datacenter within the borders of the United States, MegaUpload's management placed itself within the jurisdiction of U.S. law for any actions occurring within that datacenter. This isn't a purely U.S. thing either...pretty much every country on the planet recognizes this same legal principle. When you choose to operate a business within a nation, you are also making a choice to subject yourself to that nations laws.

      There's only one way around this that I know of, and that's to insulate via foreign subsidiaries. Many multinational corps use subsidiaries to avoid this exact problem. In Megaupload's case, I don't see how they could have fit that into their business model.

      If there's one lesson to take away from all of this, it's simply that you should check a nations laws before opening up a business there. If something is legal in your home country, and illegal in the country next door, it's probably a BAD IDEA to start opening offices in the neighboring country. MegaUpload was stupid to open a datacenter in the United States, the MPAA/RIAA's home turf.

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
    79. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2

      I honestly don't care if you lose all respect for my countrymen. Since I'm a US citizen, that would be Americans, like you.

      Sorry ... the knee-jerk anti-Americanism that floats around social networks irritates me sometimes, especially when dealing with copyright abuse since it's foreign outfits that are mostly responsible for the likes of the AHRA, Sonny Bonehead Copyright Extension Act, the DMCA, and now SOPA/PIPA. Congress isn't smart enough to come up with this on their own: they need someone else to give them these bad ideas and then pay them for the privilege of turning the things into law.

      And then they go vote for the same sociopaths they've always been voting for. As usual, people exactly get the government they deserve.

      Sure. Just like they do the world 'round. The human race has been doing that for ten thousand years, and until we figure out that you don't put people in power who actually want to be there (or who, in the worst cases, are fucking insane) it's not going to change.

      Personally, I believe that we should come up with a profile of what kind of person would be required to properly serve in the office of Senator, Representative or, for that matter, President. I mean, we do that for every other kind of job, don't we? Why is high political office an exception? Shouldn't we know if a candidate is actually qualified, rather than his just saying he knows what he's doing?

      Then we search for those people, and when we find a bunch of them, we let the people vote on which ones we think will best serve the country. Just like being picked for jury duty, which is actually not far from what the Founders wanted Congressmen to be. That is, civic-minded individuals who would serve their term, and then go back to their regular lives and live under the laws they had made.

      ... and then, if they do a good job, we let them out when their term is up. As of right now, the system selects for people who are good at acquiring the job (e.g., getting elected) and maintaining the position (e.g, getting re-elected.) It does not properly select for individuals who are actually good at the job itself.

      Alternatively, we could require that several detailed psychological profiles be taken of every candidate running for the Presidency or Congressional office. Then we post those profiles conveniently online at www.psychoswhackjobsandheadcases.gov for every voter to see in blazing red, white and blue. That might help keep the obvious low-hanging-fruitcakes out of the system anyway.

      There are a few people running for President right now whose psychological makeup I would dearly love to know more about.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    80. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by BrianH · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It occurred to me that demonstrating the NEED for SOPA might be the point of this entire exercise. Megaupload unquestionably aided piracy, but it was also a legitimate business that had millions of legitimate users. The owner and operators of the site may be able to convince a judge or jury that the primary purpose of the site was NOT piracy, but was simply incidental to the operation of that type of service. If they can convince the judges in their home countries of that, they won't be extradited. If they can convince U.S. juries of that, they won't be convicted. In order to prosecute these guys, the U.S. will have to prove that piracy was the primary reason for the sites existence, and that could be tough to do. They still have a pretty decent shot at walking away from this.

      And if they get off, you can bet the halls of Congress will echo with, "See, we DO NEED SOPA! Our laws are obviously inadequate if we can't even shut down a pirate site like Megaupload!"

      That may the plan, after all.

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
    81. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Zibodiz · · Score: 2

      If downloading child pornography supports child pornographers how can downloading music destroy the music industry?

      That, my friend, is the best comment regarding filesharing I think I've ever seen.

    82. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by symbolset · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And in the meantime they won't be competing with the record labels, connecting direct to artists and paying 90% like they proposed. Which is what this seems to be about.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    83. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Kalriath · · Score: 5, Informative

      Then read the actual Indictment. It looks pretty bad for MU. Especially since the government keeps calling Megaupload "The Conspiracy". You can't support a Conspiracy can you? That's just downright criminal!

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    84. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a US citizen you are responsible for your country's actions. You need to fix your democracy. The US is a haven for these scum because you let them buy your politicians.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    85. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by rust627 · · Score: 2

      Making Money from exploiting workers is the backbone of our capitalist system.

      --
      da da da dum indeed.
    86. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why a criminal case?

      he pissed off the media mafia. And was going to work to directly connect artists with their customers. cutting the media mafia out of their cut.

      that's a big deal. can't be allowed to happen. so the media dons got their buttbuddies in the department of justice and law enforcement to go after him directly.

      Problem solved.

    87. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by hitmark · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hiding money, eh? Reminds me that a certain actor has not been payed for a couple of movies because the studio is using accounting tricks to hide their profits. Sometimes i wonder if not organized crime is the more honest of the bunch.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    88. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by spectro · · Score: 2

      Indictments are one-sided towards the prosecution distorting everything and bending facts to make it look way worse than it really is. That is why you need a good lawyer if indicted.

      Did you believe everything SCO claimed in their lawsuit against IBM?

      --
      HTML is obsolete. It's time for a new, simpler and richer markup language.
    89. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by hitmark · · Score: 2

      It is the great ironies of all this. If two kids fight over a toy, they are told to share. But if two adults share a computer file, it is prison time for both.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    90. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Xest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I strongly agree, that, if especially, megauploads owners have been arrested due to material that users of the site had uploaded, this is a very ominous sign"

      It's worse than this, this is a bunch of non-US citizens, situated outside America, running a business from Hong Kong, having their international domain names hijacked.

      Worse, MegaUpload is even used by some businesses, I know a handful of companies first hand, but I suspect there are thousands, who use it as a method to distribute large, legitimate files.

      This goes beyond any US action that has ever happened before as the US in this case has effectively just shut down a legitimate foreign business that it simply does not like, and has had arrested everyone who works at that business.

      This can now only be resolved by the following two things:
      - Countries must start ignoring US requests for arrest of their citizens where the crime has happened outside the US and/or is not illegal in the country of arrest

      - The US must lose all control of the internet, it must now be internationally controlled by something like the ITU where majority consensus is needed globally for this kind of thing to be possible such that no single country or small group of countries can impose their will on the rest of the internet

      America is now effectively just unilaterally deciding which businesses are allowed to do business on the internet, and the worst part, foreign sovereign nations are allowing it to happen.

    91. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Shut down by the FBI for breaking a law, with court orders and due process.

      Do you think it's somehow anti-democratic to have a police force?

      Is your advocacy of mob rule so hard-line that you actually want mob rule, with no laws at all other than the "law" of superior strength?

      The self-determination of the Internet is /b/ and 4chan. It is Anonymous, DDOSing websites of people they do not like. It is the nihilist philosophy of "teh lulz".
      This is what you ask for; you are fortunate that other, more grown-up people still think that this sort of lynch mob is a bad idea, and will fight it on your behalf. Though you may call them fascists, it is thanks to them that you even have an Internet with which to read this.

      By the way, I think you'd make a great politician. You obviously prioritise pleasing a crowd over telling the truth, hence the love you are getting from everybody else on this site. Your secret, like that of all the worst politicians, is that everything is true within your head. You're not actually lying about anything - you really believe this rubbish. Alas that is not going to cause the under 30s to re-engage with voting. If we gave up because of New Labour, we're not going to get back into it for you.

    92. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Blahah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If I could mod this up, I would. The indictment claims that the Mega sites (which they call the "Mega Conspiracy") is a group of sites designed to profit from the sharing of content. They they go on to say that each named "conspirator" has knowingly used the network for copyright infringement, and after being told about specific infringing files, failed to remove them. The case they are trying to establish is that the MU staff allowed infringement to continue because it profited them.

      Everyone should read the indictment summary before knee-jerking in defence of the site, it does actually look quite bad for them.

    93. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Old+Wolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a New Zealander I'd really like to know why our taxpayer money is being spent on enforcing U.S. laws

    94. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Megaupload executive team went ahead and referred to itself as The Mega Conspiracy. An incredibly ironic (and foolish) nickname in the end.

    95. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by misexistentialist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      An indictment that makes up a sensational name for the defendant is a joke. Proving that the operators made money and knew that there were illegal uses of the service is like proving gun manufacturers make money and know that guns are used in stickups.

    96. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you think it's somehow anti-democratic to have a police force?

      It shouldn't be, but it is. Break in to a tavern and steal a few cartons of cigarettes and some booze, and it's almost certain that they'll track you down somehow. But break into my house and you're almost certain to get away scott free. How is that democratic?

      When I was young, somewhere between 25 and 30, my home was broken into and my killer stereo I brought back from Asia when I was in the USAF was stolen, along with all my records. I found out later from a cop I knew that they caught the guy, but let him go when he Judased on a dope dealer, and they even let him keep my stuff!! That''s democracy? If you're not a businessman, the police will NOT help you. And I say that as someone who has been a crime victim many times in my six decades; not once has the perp ever paid, and not once have I ever gotten any stolen goods back.

      Having a police force shouldn't be anti-democratic, but it is. It's not that mob rule is good, it's that classism is bad. When they start writing respectable laws, I'll respect the law (I used to in my naive youth).

      This is what you ask for; you are fortunate that other, more grown-up people still think that this sort of lynch mob is a bad idea, and will fight it on your behalf.

      I think someone said that to George Washington and Ben Franklin, too.

      Alas that is not going to cause the under 30s to re-engage with voting.

      You can vote for a Republican who is for the marijuana laws, PIPA, DMCA, long copyrights, and Gitmo, or you can vote for a Democrat who is for the marijuana laws, PIPA, DMCA, long copyrights, and Gitmo, or you can vote for someone the media refuses to discuss, making it impossible for them to win. And you think we have a democracy? Our two party system is twice as good as the communist one party system! Or... actually, we only have the Republicrats. Or is it the Demublicans? Not much difference between either one. Both are corrupt to the core.

      Ah, youth... if there's one thing I miss about being young, it's being naive.

    97. Re:U.S. law is the new international law by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Google "getting away with it" is the only non-evil part of the DMCA. You, sir, are unfortunately misguided. It's understandabe from your user name, which RIAA abel do you work for?

  2. File Lockers don't work... by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anybody surprised by this story must be new here. File Lockers like MP3.com have been shut down regularly for ages now. You can't have an online database of content that isn't secured right...

  3. right. by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "holders including record labels and movie studios more than $500 million in lost revenue."
    my ass.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:right. by Anrego · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was actually surprised by that figure. It actually seems low given the people who came up with it.

      Considering the past history of ludicrously high damage claims and the huge amount of infringing content they probably actually have, I figured they'd be making up new words to describe the number they came up with...

    2. Re:right. by Jawnn · · Score: 2, Informative

      You bet your ass they make sure that the lamestream media parrots those numbers as often as possible. Never mind that they've been proven, over and over again, to be utter bullshit. And notice how Chris Dodd et al keep referring to it as "theft"? Heaven forbid that CBS, or CNN suddenly grasp the real issue is an industry that is genuinely threatened by advancing technology and that industry's choice to pursue legal measures to prop up their outmoded business model instead of actually competing.

    3. Re:right. by Oakey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well this is the same industry that can't even make a profit from massive Blockbusters like Star Wars and Forrest Gump. I mean, every film released is just a huge unprofitable loss after unprofitable loss which is why people like David Prowse and Winston Groom have yet to see their share of the profits. It honestly makes you wonder why Hollywood bothers making films when a film that costs £55million to make and takes in $657million in sales still makes a $64million loss.

      I think Hollywood has bigger things to worry about than piracy, like maximising profits as any legitimate business would.

      --
      "Dre don't get as high as me.... I'm Cheech and Chong" - Snoop Dogg
    4. Re:right. by Chewbacon · · Score: 3, Funny

      So that's about 5 Metallica songs?

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  4. Dick Morris by bonch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It almost comes off as intentional that this occurred the day after the SOPA protests. It looks like the battles over copyright infringement are finally coming to a head. This will all get resolved one way or another.

    Dick Morris is a former Clinton advisor and a regular Fox News commentator, but he actually wrote what I think is a rational, well-worded message about everything that's been happening:

    ---

    Dear Friend,

    The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is just the kind of bill that could cripple Internet freedom in the name of a good cause. Everybody agrees that we need to battle online piracy of movies, books, TV shows and such. If piracy spreads, nobody will create anything because their work will be pirated as soon as it is finished.

    But...this legislation, with its draconian enforcement powers, uses an atomic bomb to solve a problem best left to educated action by responsible individuals and normal litigation. The collateral damage from this bill could destroy Internet freedom.

    The bill would let the Justice Department and copyright holders to get court orders against websites they accuse of enabling or encouraging copyright infringement. It could stop search engines from linking to such sites and require service providers to block access to them.

    It should be called the Camel's Nose In the Tent Act (CNITA). It would criminalize the Internet and make search engines the enforcers of copyright laws. It opens the tent to federal regulation and judicial activism that could drive search engines and internet service providers into bankruptcy through excessive court judgments and liability.

    There is a remedy: Public education. None of us wants to kill off artistic creation. Each of us realizes that by abusing the system to get the goodies for free, we risk eliminating the goodies. We don't litter because we don't want to ruin our environment. We don't run red lights because we don't want traffic chaos. We wear seatbelts because we want to live. Law enforcement plays a role, but the greater influence is an educated public.

    Copyright infringers can't make it if we don't buy it. Consumers need to realize that we will kill the golden goose if we steal his eggs! The way to regulate the internet is to use it sensibly and wisely and not to let Congress and the Justice Department in the door.

    Thanks,

    Dick Morris

    1. Re:Dick Morris by Shakrai · · Score: 2

      It almost comes off as intentional that this occurred the day after the SOPA protests

      I highly doubt one had to do with the other. The Feds don't casually put together a criminal case; they take their time and line up all the ducks before they pull the trigger. That's one of the reasons why Federal cases have a substantially higher conviction rate than State ones. One of the lawyers around here could provide an exact number but if I recall correctly >90% of Federal indictments wind up with either a conviction or guilty plea.

      This investigation was in the pipeline for months. The indictment was likely handed down by a Grand Jury some time ago.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:Dick Morris by icebraining · · Score: 2

      Everybody agrees that we need to battle online piracy of movies, books, TV shows and such.

      I'd like to know how they propose to "battle online piracy" without draconian laws.

    3. Re:Dick Morris by SirGarlon · · Score: 2

      Law enforcement plays a role, but the greater influence is an educated public.

      This is the most impressively rational thing I have read in relation to public policy in a long time.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    4. Re:Dick Morris by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If piracy spreads, nobody will create anything because their work will be pirated as soon as it is finished.

      I don't find the support of figures who say things like this entirely welcome. It shows a great ignorance of history. Copyright is a fairly recent concept, popping up only 500 years ago and mainly limited to the West. So much of the Western canon -- the Greek and Latin classics, Dante, Chaucer, even Shakespeare, arose in a time when content creators were not compensated for each and every copy (and non-Western traditions contain further riches).

      And there was a lot of copying going on. In ancient Rome, it was common for audience members to transcribe poetry recitals, have many copies generated by amanuenses, and then sold in the marketplace with no money going back to the original author. As far as I know, the sole example of someone complaining about this was Martial in one of his epigrams, and he only had a problem with people passing off his work as their own -- so plagiarism, not "copyright infringement". Content creation flourished without copyright, and even in recent times, when copyright was in full force, so many classic films and musical compositions were produced with a boatload of private patronage or state arts subsidies, so the ability to be paid royalties for each copy made didn't really factor into their creation.

      In order to quicken the rise of an inevitable new economy, it's better that people just say straight out that copyright is an untenable concept and not a moral universal. No more of this wishy-washy "Piracy should be fought, but this law goes too far."

    5. Re:Dick Morris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If piracy spreads, nobody will create anything because their work will be pirated as soon as it is finished.

      OK, so how about we all agree we will only "pirate" it 20 years after it's released? Might as well make that the legal limit, too instead of "add 2 decades, every 1.9 decades, rinse, repeat".

    6. Re:Dick Morris by shaitand · · Score: 2

      "Everybody agrees that we need to battle online piracy of movies, books, TV shows and such"

      Since when? Most of us don't agree with this at all.

    7. Re:Dick Morris by Fned · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Everybody agrees that we need to battle online piracy of movies, books, TV shows and such. If piracy spreads, nobody will create anything because their work will be pirated as soon as it is finished.

      That's rational and well-worded? I disagree. It's boldly irrational, arrogant, and false.

      Movies, books, TV shows, and music all are still operating on a business model that depends wholly on copies being worth something. But copies of data inside computers AREN'T worth something. They are worth nothing, they have no intrinsic value at all.

      Access to the work has value. The creation of the work has value. But copies no longer have value. So bascially we have whole industries that are trying to pay for valuable things by selling their customers something valueless. Econ 101: this is a stupid idea.

      Don't get me wrong, it didn't used to be a stupid idea. It used to be a GREAT idea. But then computers got smart enough and connected enough to make copies of common media worthless, and as if by magic it became a stupid idea, almost overnight. It will remain a stupid idea until the computers aren't smart enough and aren't connected enough.

      Shit like SOPA is not some sort of accident on the road to trying to prop up this broken business model; it's an inevitable side effect of trying to create a chimeric beast called "intellectual property". It's what happens when you try to force the limitations of physical copies onto a virtual object, inevitably fail to do so in a technical way, and are left with no recourse but draconian measures to prevent people from doing the obvious. It's what happens when you try to apply copright-as-written to computers: it breaks the computers.

      Copyright needs to change. Business models need to change. If they don't, running arbitrary code will become a crime, and countries with digital freedom will leave the rest of us scrabbling in the dust.

    8. Re:Dick Morris by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      They did one in the UK called Knock-Off Nigel. It backfired a bit. Far from making the guy down the pub into a social outcast rejected for his cheapskate ways, it just reminded everyone that their workplace likely has a pirate who will give away movies.

    9. Re:Dick Morris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > If piracy spreads, nobody will create anything because their work will be pirated as soon as it is finished.

      Good lord I am so sick of this kind of statement. I have spent the last 15 years putting original and substantial works of art, prose, music, film and code on the internet intentionally for it to be stolen, kept, traded, shared and enjoyed. I have a day job programming so I don't care about the money. I am happy to make stuff for the people, have an audience, and get feedback on my work and see it used in contexts I could not dream of.

      And I am not alone.

  5. Who needs SOPA/PIPA? America, F**K YEAH by dkathrens77 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The timing of this move is surely intended to send a message to anyone who opposes SOPA/PIPA. And that light to the free world, the USA has made it clear "we don't need no steenkin laws"

    1. Re:Who needs SOPA/PIPA? America, F**K YEAH by icebraining · · Score: 2

      Megaupload has servers in the US. SOPA/PIPA are supposed to block US clients from accessing international servers.

  6. The Government responds... by JaZz0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The People expressed their opinion about SOPA/PIPA. The Government responds with a resounding, "We don't give a shit."

    --
    "Careful! We don't want to learn from this!" -Calvin & Hobbes
    1. Re:The Government responds... by demonbug · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The People expressed their opinion about SOPA/PIPA. The Government responds with a resounding, "We don't give a shit."

      This has nothing to do with SOPA, beyond showing that the government doesn't need it in order to take down (alleged) pirates in other countries. If anything this is the government throwing a bone to the (pissed off) media industry, saying look - we can get these guys without crippling the internet.

    2. Re:The Government responds... by shentino · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "We don't give a shit" would be them passing it anyway.

      This is far closer to "how DARE you stand up to us!"

      This is not apathy, this is retaliation for contempt of our corporate overlords.

  7. Looks something like.. by iONiUM · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Looks strangely familiar.

    In seriousness, why isn't this all over the news? Why just SOPA?

    1. Re:Looks something like.. by b0bby · · Score: 3, Informative

      Looks strangely familiar.

      In seriousness, why isn't this all over the news? Why just SOPA?

      Because this just happened today. For once, /. is pretty up to date!

  8. Wow, what amazing timing! by kheldan · · Score: 5, Funny

    The very day after uncounted internet sites shut down to protest SOPA/PIPA (which had a profound effect), and some website gets shut down for piracy on the order of a half billion dollars? Darn, if I would've known, I would've had my popcorn and soda ready. Such theatre!

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:Wow, what amazing timing! by antdude · · Score: 2

      Where can we download that move? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  9. Fuck RIAA/MPAA by esocid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The $500 million figure is based on speculation by the MAFIAA. Looks like we didn't even have to wait for SOPA/PIPA. It's already here.

    I also don't understand how they got the Netherlands to raid their servers...

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
    1. Re:Fuck RIAA/MPAA by icebraining · · Score: 2

      They are accused of crimes which are illegal in the Netherlands too (including racketeering and money laundering, according to Computer World).

  10. This is what happens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...when corrupt laws don't get passed, or even do get passed.
    Not as if they care, they will deal with the backlash later.
    This will get worse if SOPA or anything like it passes.

    I can't wait for the media industry to collapse. Maybe then content creators will realize they don't need the shit labels.

    See you on Tor everybody. It is the only safe place now, but only if everyone gets in on it.
    Hope the media companies love helping terrorism get even more secure, because that is all this will do as they push more and more people to encrypted networks.
    Oh, wait, that won't be a problem, FBI will just get those backdoors and have control of millions of nodes for free.
    Time to blackhole America. Bye.

    1. Re:This is what happens... by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      The Chinese have shown the capability to shut down connections within Tor.

  11. Something fishy by shentino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Interesting that megaupload got nailed so soon after they tried to fight back against UMG's frivolous youtube takedown.

    I smell a rat and suspect someone's trying to avoid giving megaupload an edge in their lawsuit.

  12. The Internet should be P2P by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There should not be "sites" to shut down; the Internet was designed to be P2P and should be P2P. Unfortunately, we failed to develop P2P networking to the same extent that we developed the web, so now we are vulnerable to this sort of thing.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:The Internet should be P2P by sirlark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tell that to my ISP, who won't let me run a 'server' as part of my terms and conditions...

    2. Re:The Internet should be P2P by icebraining · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Such software exists: it's called Bittorrent.

  13. Why do they need SOPA again? by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they can shut down Megaupload without SOPA, then why do they need SOPA again?

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    1. Re:Why do they need SOPA again? by Bovius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With SOPA, they can take your site down if you link to (or, presumably, mention) megaupload.com. Think about that one for a minute.

    2. Re:Why do they need SOPA again? by Dan+East · · Score: 2

      Mod parent up. My thoughts exactly. If they can already reach out and both prosecute and shut down sites located in other countries, then why do they need even more power? Less judicial oversight? More power and control to the "copyright holders"?

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    3. Re:Why do they need SOPA again? by parlancex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The goal of SOPA is to make everyone guilty. Not everyone will be prosecuted, but once everyone is guilty selective prosecution can be used at the discretion of those who wish to silence any unwanted criticism, opposing viewpoints, etc.

    4. Re:Why do they need SOPA again? by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With SOPA, they can take your site down if you link to (or, presumably, mention) megaupload.com. Think about that one for a minute.

      Exactly, or even worse, SOPA lets them take your site down if one of your user-generated comments mentions of links to megaupload.com. Remember when it was popular to post the bluray key (if I'm remembering this correctly) on slashdot to spite Sony? Those posts are still accessible. There's no reason Sony couldn't or wouldn't use SOPA to shut down Slashdot. And hey, Google caches those posts, too!

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    5. Re:Why do they need SOPA again? by Bishop923 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MPAA Parenting Tip:

      If your dog makes a mess on the floor, remember to punish your children for feeding him.

    6. Re:Why do they need SOPA again? by nurb432 · · Score: 2

      SOPA is far more reaching and lets them shut stuff down without any due process, and can easily be extend to squelch citizens rights.

      Need is relative

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  14. SOPA RTM coming soon by Greg2k · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, this SOPA Release Candidate seems pretty polished...I guess I'll downlo- oh wait.

  15. We need some people to check on this stuff by P-niiice · · Score: 2

    Wouldn't it be great to have this army of people who reported on news stories and debunked claims and checked facts and stuff? They could learn to write real well and provide us news that we could use to decide on issues in a fair manner. Ideally they wouldn't totally swallow ludicrous claims like this 500 gazillion loss due to Megaupload for example. One man can dream I guess.

  16. This is a bummer. by MrCrassic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    On one hand, these kinds of sites have made it stupidly easy to host and download all sorts of different data, legal and illegal. It's funny how the powers that be think that shutting these guys down will curb piracy when (a) there are so many ways people can get illegal data and (b) new and more anonymous ones will pop up as the older ones fall.

    On the other hand, it's not a terribly huge loss on the material scheme of things. There are still plenty of other sites that people can use to host data, including wider-range services like Dropbox and Sugarsync. The other funny thing is that Megaupload et. al. did shut down links to any media that infringed on copyright policies, so it's scary to see how far these laws will go. I'm hoping that Dropbox and partners will not start telling people what can/can't be backed up.

  17. $500 million for bad movies? by RobertRCleveland · · Score: 2

    Exactly. I think you describe where they pulled that number from. No way $500 million. Megaupload was a warez and porn locker. It's the torrent hosters who have the movies and music.

  18. Ban the use of faucets! by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How dare people drink their tap water! After all, how are bottled water companies expected to turn a profit when people can just turn a knob on their faucet and get water on their own?

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by shentino · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sadly, if bottled water companies had enough lobbying power this would probably be a viable reality.

      Time and time again big business has proven that it will do whatever it can get away with to make money, and ethical and sometimes even legal impediments prove to be no real obstacle.

    2. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by sadness203 · · Score: 2

      Well actually, a lot of them use tap water.

    3. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by bonch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not a valid comparison, as bottled water companies can't claim ownership over tap water coming out of your faucet, and in fact, you pay the water company for that service.

    4. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 2

      Water the New Oil, look it up.

      It is already happening :(

    5. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We pay for Internet service, and the RIAA/MPAA do not claim ownership over your bandwidth. We do not punish people for drinking their tap water, even though bottled water companies exist specifically to sell drinking water. Every fluid ounce of tap water that you drink is a fluid ounce you did not pay a bottled water company to drink.

      The only difference is that right now, nobody has a concept of "drinkingrights" but we do have a concept of "copyrights."

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    6. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by twotacocombo · · Score: 3, Funny

      How dare people drink their tap water!

      You mean like in the toilet?

    7. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by niado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Illegally copying/viewing/enjoying copyrighted content is not stealing, by any widely accepted definition of "stealing". Violating copyright is illegal in many jurisdictions, and it could very well be considered wrong (depending on your personal morals) but it is not theft.

    8. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by hedwards · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's already happened in Bolivia. The IMF insisted that they privatize their water supply and eventually it got to the point where no water in the country was legal to collect or drink unless it had been bought from the cartel that controlled it.

    9. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by artor3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apples and oranges. The bottled water companies didn't invent water. The media companies did make the media you're pirating. If you don't want to buy their product, there are plenty of alternatives. You can buy indie music, some of which is freely distributed. You can watch free OTA television. You can read a book from the library. And so on.

      Taking something without paying just because you can is selfish and wrong.

    10. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by gnick · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do those taps run directly into the bottling plants tanks?

      For about 1 bottle in 4, yes. Yes they do.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    11. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In parts of the US, it is illegal to own a water butt. States sell exclusive water catchment rights to various water companies.

    12. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by bws111 · · Score: 2

      Of course nobody would be sued if the download Debian ISOs - they have authorization to do so, granted by the copyright holders. They do not have authorization to download MPAA movies. It has nothing to do with bandwidth - where did that come from?

    13. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by bws111 · · Score: 2

      Nope, not the same thing at all. If a bottling plant pays for and uses tap water, that is OK. If I pay for and use tap water, that is OK. If I use the bottling plants water (which is not mine), that is NOT OK, it is theft.

    14. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

      When you use tap water, you are getting that water from an authorized source

      Just like my Internet service is from an authorized source.

      The fact that a bottling company exists is immaterial - you are not taking their water

      Was someone using the RIAA's Internet service without permission?

      If you tapped into your neighbors pipes you would probably consider that an 'alternate source',

      Sounds like using an open wifi network.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    15. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

      The bottled water companies didn't invent water

      Nor did the RIAA or MPAA invent the Internet.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    16. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by misexistentialist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Taking something without paying just because you can is selfish and wrong.

      Once again: copying isn't "taking".

    17. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by JonySuede · · Score: 3, Funny

      My fines Scotch bottles have drinkingrights !
      for the Aberlour Abund'ha #30 and the Lagavulin single malt 16y, the drinkingrights are a limit of 2 oz every 1 month,
      for the Aberlour Abund'ha #35 and the Aberlour single malt 16y, the limit is 2 oz every 2 week,
      for the Aberlour single malt 6y and the Glenmorangie, it is 2 oz every 1 week,
      the cheap blend are drinkinglefts.

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    18. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by gnick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hardly a fair comparison - Stealing water from the bottling company deprives the company of water that they paid for. This is more like a canned air company that pulls air (in this case literally) out of the air and cans it. And then suing you for breathing what they could have otherwise canned and sold to you resulting in a "lost sale."

      The only real difference (albeit a big one) is that music/movies/games have to be created before being distributed. It's illegal copying or piracy, not theft as the company is deprived of nothing other than a potential or more likely imaginary lost sale.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    19. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by artor3 · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's a non-sequitur and you know it. You're not pirating "an internet". You're pirating a song or a movie or whatever.

    20. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by mrbester · · Score: 2

      ... thus depriving the owner of that property" F(inished)TFY

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    21. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by Fned · · Score: 5, Informative

      Megaupload have no system in place to stop people uploading material they don't own. Simple as that.

      There is no such system.

      Simple as that.

    22. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by niado · · Score: 2

      I did not say that it was perfectly fine.

      The discussion of whether or not a violation of intellectual property is morally wrong (regardless of laws put in place) is rather complicated and many people have differing viewpoints on the subject. It irritates me when the issue is muddied when so many people cry 'thief!' when no theft has taken place.

      Sneaking into a local movie theater without paying would also not be stealing. I suspect it would be some form of trespassing.

    23. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by slippyblade · · Score: 2

      What do you mean, "next?" There are already publishers arguing against libraries.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/business/for-libraries-and-publishers-an-e-book-tug-of-war.html

    24. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Funny

      Im British. Over here, it's a water butt.

    25. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Informative
      A little googling, and.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainwater_tank

      In the State of Colorado, USA, the installation of rainwater collection barrels is subject to ... state statutes. The movement and holding of rainwater is inextricably linked with ownership of water rights and is enshrined in the constitution of the State of Colorado. The use of water in Colorado and other western states is governed by what is known as the prior appropriation doctrine. Since all water arriving in Colorado has been allocated to "senior water right holders" since the 1850s, rainwater prevented from running downstream may not be available to its rightful owner. In 2009, legislation in Colorado was enacted that permits capture of rain water for residential use subject to strong limitations and conditions.[14] To be permitted, a residence may not be connected to a domestic water supply system serving more than 3 single-family dwellings. The permit must be purchased from the State Engineer's office and is subject to water usage restrictions.

      Or, more briefly: The state already sold that rain to the water company while it was still in the air. If it falls on your land and you collect some for yourself, you are stealing water from that company.

    26. Re:Ban the use of faucets! by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      I grew up on a farm with well water. We now sell our groundwater to the county. Because of the perpetual contract, drinking our free well water would be a crime. You make your choices.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  19. Rationale from the article by kiwimate · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The indictment was returned in the Eastern District of Virginia, which claimed jurisdiction in part because some of the alleged pirated materials were hosted on leased servers in Ashburn, Va.

    To play devil's advocate here: most Slashdot readers contend that music and movie industries should stop complaining and instead "adapt their business models", because their world has been irrevocably changed by technology. You could also say that that same technology has very much changed the way criminals do their dirty work, by allowing a person in one country to administer a server or hack a system on the other side of the world, and law enforcement officials need to adapt accordingly.

  20. ONLY 500 Million? by DarthVain · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why not 500 Trillion? They're not even trying hard enough anymore...

  21. Only $500M in damages? by Gavin+Scott · · Score: 4, Insightful

    $500M? That's like, what, one .mp3 file these days?

    G.

    1. Re:Only $500M in damages? by shaitand · · Score: 2

      But they were sharing it at the equivalent speed of 7000 computers! See a normal dial-up connection is 14.4kbps and they had 100mbps which is 100000kbps! That is 6944.44 14.4kbps connections, round that up to 7000 because there is at least one number over 5 there and it suits our agenda and you have the equivalent to 7000 normal computers!

  22. Good by ugen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Megaupload was one of a few (3-4) sites where a cracked copy of my software product was uploaded. They were extremely slow in responding to DMCA request and clearly had interest in continuously providing an obviously illegally obtained copy of the software (because they make money from download fees, essentially re-selling content without paying me). I don't care much for Hollywood, but I do care about software I spend 24/7/365 writing and supporting.

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      what's the name of your software?

    2. Re:Good by raynet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How long it took for them to respond to your DMCA takedown letter and was the response time within what the DMCA specifies?

      --
      - Raynet --> .
    3. Re:Good by microbee · · Score: 5, Funny

      Apparently not 24/7/365 since you are posting on slashdot

    4. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So a useful service was destroyed, several peoples lives have been shackled, and you software is still available on the net freely somewhere. What was good about this again?

    5. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, but it's a leap year. He's allocated the extra 24 hours to posting on /.

    6. Re:Good by future+assassin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >Would you be content if your labors were simply taken with no recompense or permission from you?

      If it was making my software the de-facto software and piracy gave me a market penetration I'd write it off as advertising. Just like Photoshop and Windows.

      --
      by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    7. Re:Good by HeckRuler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This.

      Plus, how long did megaupload take to respond to your DMCA requests on average?
      How long have other sites taken to respond?

    8. Re:Good by QuasiSteve · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I, too, would like to know - but I can understand why he wouldn't want to reveal that (in any of his posts to date).

      I don't think he would be branded an 'enemy of the people', however.

      It's just that any follow-up discussion is far more likely to be used to attack him in these comments than it is to sympathize or offer genuine assistance.

      Let's say he did mention the product's name and its name was NetCommand (if a product with that name exists it's coincidental.. he has mention his product has to do with IP (the networking variant) and server vs desktop stuff, and the name works).

      The very first thing people will do is figure out what NetCommand is, and suggest that it's not worth the money he's asking anyway. Whether that's $1 or $100.
      Next come alternatives that are free (as in beer and/or speech).
      Next come links to other sites where the cracked copy is and telling him "See how much good your DMCA request has done in curtailing its piracy? Doing it is just a waste of your time and money".
      Then come the friendly suggestions on how he should just offer incentives to those who do buy it. Features not available to the pirates (at least until a few days later when the new pirated copy is released). Access to a support forum (which he probably can't staff and personally I know I get more support from random forums than official forums any time of day - so that's pointless anyway). Make his money instead with contract work and charge big for that (but maybe there's very little interest in that). Make his money by selling merchandise (because who doesn't want the NetCommand mug, right?). Suggest that he needs to find something else to do if he wants money because clearly his trade is dead and he needs to just accept it.

      That of course alongside out-of-the-behind figures on how much money he has already made and that he shouldn't whine and moan about supposedly 'lost' sales - he's rich already. And the pirates wouldn't have purchased anyway.

      etc. etc.

      Unfortunately, the flip side is that he doesn't mention the name of the product and so he gets modded down (because hey, where's the proof?) and the AC who wants to know the name (whether genuinely curious or just looking to incite exactly the kind of 'debate' I sketched above) gets modded up.

      All in all, however, he stands far more to lose in revealing the name than in not revealing it. So his karma may get dented - big deal, better than people parading around after pummeling his product into the ground.

  23. ACTA/TPP, SOPA/PIPA, SCOTUS killing the PD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When is enough enough? How much more are WE going to take from "OUR" GOVERNMENT, and its agents, who are no more than sock puppets for the entertainment INDUSTRY?

    Here are the facts:
    1. Copyright is eternal
    2. There is no Public Domain except some old books
    3. No one is allowed to do anything with copyrighted works
    4. This applies world-wide (or else...)

    The Entertainment INDUSTRY can easily be put in its corner by bringing copyright terms (and all related rights) down to 20 years.

    1. Re:ACTA/TPP, SOPA/PIPA, SCOTUS killing the PD by shaitand · · Score: 2

      Development cost would be expense. There is no reason LOTR NEEDED to cost hundreds of millions of dollars to produce. You are talking about the collective result of hundreds if not thousands of ridiculously overpaid individuals. With sane salaries and sane special effects and equipment costs (which would happen the minute the demand for these products wasn't driven by hundred million dollar budgets) this becomes a couple million dollar project. They had a system for this sort of thing before copyright called patronage. Under patronage one rich guy pays all these people a reasonable SALARY or lump sum for their work because he wants to see it and enjoy it. The rich guy can still recoup his costs by providing public performances (think movie theater).

      Sorry, I don't see any reason for the movie industry to be a multi-billion dollar one. I don't see any reason for movies to cost what they do and as awesome as truly epic movies like LOTR are I find the amount of additional enjoyment that one gets out of them amounts to no more than the additional running time of the film. That is simply completely out of proportion to the resources spent on them. A MMORPG like WOW, a paintball arena, MMA competition, laser tag, real jousting tourney, Golden Dawn temple experience, or table top gaming tourney are all examples of things that provide at least as much enjoyment as watching LOTR. And they cost far far less than LOTR and they aren't one trick ponies, you can actually enjoy them more than once. There is even less justification for the music industry costs.

      We can spend most of that portion of our nations wealth on something that retains inherent value rather than something that depends on us enforcing draconian monopolies and doing our best to strong arm the rest of the world into enforcing those monopolies as well. Even going as far to directly enforce the monopolies in other nations.

  24. And now everybody's crying by TheTruthIs · · Score: 2

    Because a dude who made 43 millions of $ with mostly illegal content got caught and his business have been taken down.

    1. Re:And now everybody's crying by shaitand · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which would be fine. If it were the result of a CIVIL suit by the people who claimed to lose money and occurred AFTER they won in court.

      I had files on this service and can no longer access them. This hurt more than just one guy.

    2. Re:And now everybody's crying by cbhacking · · Score: 2

      I suspect that if they are found guilty, you (and anybody else with legit files lost) could build a class-action suit against the owners of the site for endangering the service they provided (which you may even have paid for) through intentional failure to comply with the law and their own stated policies.

      That said, if this was your only copy of those files, I'm surprised you managed to build a coherent sentence in English. That's just insanely poor judgement.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  25. Begun, the Piracy Wars have by future+assassin · · Score: 2

    Now lets get those p2pdns technologies to lay waste to copyright laws.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  26. Re:Then... who needs SOPA? by Issarlk · · Score: 2

    Because it was so hard! They needed to use justice and all.
    Imagine tomorrow with SOPA: all of the hundred of file sharing sites like megaupload could be shut down before the ink on the signature at the bottom of SOPA is dry.

  27. Safe Harbor by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is there some reason why the DMCA's safe harbor provisions don't apply to Megaupload, or has the Federal Government decided those provisions are too inconvenient and therefore do not apply? Will Dropbox become the US Government's next target?

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    1. Re:Safe Harbor by vonshavingcream · · Score: 2

      dropbox is different than mega upload. in just about every way possible. first off they market themselves as data backup system not a file locker. second they don't show up in the search engines when you look for illegal content. third most people see them as a business to business company not a front for serving illegal content. I"m not saying people don't use drop box for that purpose, but you gotta admit they have a much cleaner rep than the mega sites.

    2. Re:Safe Harbor by MobyDisk · · Score: 2

      I hope that is a key question in the trial. In short, I think the answer is that the DOJ and the courts made up their own rules and the only good provision in the DMCA is selectively ignored.

      I suspect that the case will mention that MegaUpload has ads, which means it profits from pirate downloads. This argument was made in cases against other file sharing sites. The argument should fail as irrelevant, but in the past it has not. Many things profit indirectly from piracy, but that is not enough of a reason to deny them safe harbor. But the DMCA is poorly worded and even more poorly interpreted so that the DOJ and the courts can shut down whoever they want.

      Youtube profits from piracy (ads). So does Google, and taxicabs, and restaurants.

      In reality, I suspect that anyone who actively polices their content for piracy, or signs deals with the MPAA/RIAA, will not be prosecuted. While pure file sharing companies will be. In theory, it should not matter if they actively police their files or not since the DMCA does not require them to do so in order to keep safe harbor.

    3. Re:Safe Harbor by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Informative

      The FBI charges cite examples where Megaupload was informed of infringing files that Megaupload did not remove.

      If they can prove that, no safe harbor and Megaupload is toast.

    4. Re:Safe Harbor by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 2

      wrong. There is nothing illegal about a file locker. What if I made a painting that I own and simply wanted to upload a copy of it via megaupload, to share it? That megaupload has legal uses shows that the safe harbor provisions do apply. And the search engines, megaupload cannot control what google indexes, so thats not under MUs control. Clearly the safe harbor seems to have been violated here. This should be a very ominous sign. this will result in making it imopossible to run any kind of user contributed content site at all in the US, they might as well arrest google execs for accidently indexing illegal material and for users uploading pirated videos to youtube.

      so what megaupload "looks like" is not a valid legal determination here.

      With these actions it will become impossible for people to share their own content that they made on the internet. It will give the FBI carte blanche pretext to carry out arrests for things they didnt even do, to punish site owners from what users outside of their control have done. This has chilling effects, it will destroy free speech and web services in the US and make it impossible to run community sites in the country.

  28. Ashamed to Be a Kiwi Today by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 2

    Our PM, John Key, will roll over and take it up the ass from the U.S all day long in the hope he'll get a free-trade deal one day.
    I sure didn't vote for the Smiling Assassin.

    --
    It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
  29. Wait, what did megaupload do wrong? by BlueRaja · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought there were laws protecting content distributers from being prosecuted, like why Google can't be held responsible if you email a confidential document, or if their webcrawler links to child porn; or why the phone company can't be held liable if you discuss a terrorist attack over the phone.

    Megaupload isn't required to filter the content they share unless a takedown request is made; in fact, they *can't*, since a lot of it was zip-file password-encrypted.

    What did megaupload actually do wrong here?

    1. Re:Wait, what did megaupload do wrong? by KhabaLox · · Score: 2

      From the FBI press release (linked to be debork below):
      "The indictment states that the conspirators conducted their illegal operation using a business model expressly designed to promote uploading of the most popular copyrighted works for many millions of users to download. The indictment alleges that the site was structured to discourage the vast majority of its users from using Megaupload for long-term or personal storage by automatically deleting content that was not regularly downloaded. The conspirators further allegedly offered a rewards program that would provide users with financial incentives to upload popular content and drive web traffic to the site, often through user-generated websites known as linking sites. The conspirators allegedly paid users whom they specifically knew uploaded infringing content and publicized their links to users throughout the world."

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  30. Next, YouTube by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Youtube may be next. Once they started putting ads on pirated content, they became an active participant.

  31. Actual FBI press release by debork · · Score: 2

    http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/justice-department-charges-leaders-of-megaupload-with-widespread-online-copyright-infringement This is a bit more informative vs the dozen-odd news sites I've seen so far which do nothing to explain what really tipped the hand of the feds in the case of this file locker vs any other. Reading the official allegations though, most of them seem fairly weak.

  32. And what about the legitmate content? by tekrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And what about the legitmate content that Megaupload was holding? No mention of that by the media... Nope, shut down, no trial, no jury, just executioner.

    Isn't that nice?

    That's like taking down Flickr because some of the photos are copyrighted... Of course, those photos are worth a billion dollars (wink,wink), so it's perfectly OK then to inconvenience the other 34 million people who had legitimate stuff on the site.

    If any of you were hosting legitimate material on Megaupload, and you've now lost access, I suggest immediately filing class action against the government.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  33. "Megaupload is very nice for piracy uploaders" by unity100 · · Score: 2

    And who defines what is the level of that 'nice' .......... a lot of the videos i checked around up till this point, were removed due to dmca claims. so, they were removing a lot of videos.

    They just shut down it due to its size. period. ah, and he sponsored a few songs in usa about how piracy is not so bad compared to what the content industry was doing - probably that causes the attack on him and his assets - its ok when content industry brainwashes everyone, but if someone opposing them does the SAME thing, its a crime !

    It's only good - criminals are taken to court and jail so companies can again produce goods and software and they don't have to see the widespread piracy that is going on

    excuse me guy, but that stupid thinking is why we are having all of this shit in the first place - the REAL pirates have persecuted someone challenging their rule and you are clapping for it :

    how music labels avoid paying artists : http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/07/13/1737224/riaa-accounting-how-labels-avoid-paying-musicians how music labels screw aspiring artists and bands to neverending debt : http://www.negativland.com/albini.html how labels avoid paying royalties to artists even if they earned the right to it : http://gizmodo.com/5417318/my-6247-royalty-statement-how-major-labels-cook-the-books-with-digital-downloads

    ANY cent you pay to buy music so not to 'steal' from a big label, goes NOT to the artist - but to the pocket of an intermediary called the label and pocketed to an extent of 95%. you pay 15 bucks to an album, your artist gets a few cents, and the label gets almost entirety of 15 bucks. then they force the artist to go on concerts worldwide, to make money. it is taxing, and most artists and bands break down, and resort to drugs or excess to relieve stress. radiohead released one of their albums for FREE without a label, told people to pay however much they want, even take it for free. 80% of people who got it, did not pay. however, the rest 20% caused radiohead to make MORE money in just 4 hours than they would make in a whole year of touring if they gave the album to a record label. and that album, is still selling over the internet since a year or so now. so go figure................ in short, ANYone who supports this scheme that sucks artists dry, and screws customers up, is either a very very dumb, ignorant person, or a hapless idiot. there is no way to explain someone supporting a scheme that screws him/her over, otherwise.

  34. And in related news by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Funny

    The United States Department of Justice also filed indictments against Western Digital and Seagate for making hard drives that are capable of holding everything from copyrighted works to child porn. "They should have some mechanism in place to make sure illegal content isn't stored on these devices," an agent representing the DOJ said in a prepared statement today.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  35. Do you now see that these people are your enemy ? by unity100 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Megaupload was not violating any copyright laws - they had a pretty solid dmca takedown procedure that was quite fast. Most of the 'pirated' stuff you would see that were uploaded were users, you wouldnt be able to see a few days later. They were good at taking down stuff.

    But they were also the biggest. this meant that for every dmca takedown, a few went unnoticed or slowly processed. aaaaaaand fast forward to this - they shut it down and charged for piracy.

    This should tell you EXACTLY what will happen when sopa passes - imagine the sheer violations of sopa law, when entire user generated content, including comments and links have to be reviewed. NO outfit on the internet will be able to do that. NO outfit. if google, microsoft, apple, rackspace, softlayer, verizon, at&t came together to do it, set up facilities covering half of texas for it and in addition and threw the echelon listening array (belongs to nato) and all its worldwide facilities at it, still they wouldnt be able to manage an effective removal of such 'infringing' stuff in acceptable time.

    even china is not able to do it with a huge budget spent on surveillance farms and - mark that - 240,000 employees employed for censoring - quite a lot of them embedded as 'users' in internet cafes and whatnot, to snitch on the users even.

    so it is certain that there is no way in hell any outfit on this planet will be able to NOT violate sopa. every outfit will live in a constant state of varying level if infringement as per sopa.

    what does that mean ? it is a sword of Damocles, hanging over the head of EVERY internet outfit and website out there. if you go out of line in ANY way against the interests of any established private party, - whoa - a sopa complaint. MUCH more effective than suing for endless durations.

    now you see why this sopa thing is useful for censorship, and why it was intended in the first place ?

    these people do not seek to profit over anything. they are making sufficient profits. they know they can make even more profits if they adapted to the internet.

    the problem of these people is CONTROL. internet is uncontrolled. it bothers them. they need the same kind of control they exercise over cable news channels, radios and whatnot. and all these shit are intended precisely for that duration.

    these people want to control you for their own minority's profit. it is no different than dictatorship or enslavement - just the facade in front is different. they are NO longer your compatriots, they are no longer your countrymen, they are no longer your country's citizens. they are your enemies. even if you dont see them as your enemy, they DO see you as their enemy and act accordingly.

    and you are playing in their home ground - as long as you keep all the game rules that allow them to control, ranging from copyright to patents, they will keep being in the advantage - for you will be playing in THEIR home.

  36. Research Works Act by Guppy · · Score: 2

    How dare people drink their tap water! After all, how are bottled water companies expected to turn a profit when people can just turn a knob on their faucet and get water on their own?

    Acutally, this is pretty much what is happening with the Research Works Act working its way through Congress.

    Currently, publications resulting from Federally funded research must be available to the public, but the journal industry is trying to end free access -- despite the fact that publicly funded research isn't paid for by the journals, written by the journals, or peer reviewed by them.

  37. Longer story: "actual knowledge of infringement" by michaelmalak · · Score: 2

    One would think that MegaUpload could hide behind their DMCA takedown policy, but this Hollywood Reporter story -- much more informative than the ABC one -- quotes the feds

    they are willfully infringing copyrights themselves on these systems, have actual knowledge that the materials on their systems are infringing (or alternatively know facts or circumstances that would make infringing material apparent); receive a financial benefit directly attributable to copyright-infringing activity where the provider can control that activity; and have not removed, or disabled access to known copyright infringing material from servers they control.

    And perhaps most damning of all was their sting, quoting the Hollywood Reporter itself:

    The government says it contacted Megaupload on June 24, 2010 to inform the company that 39 infringing motion pictures were on the website. As of November 18, 2011, 36 of those films were still on the site, the government says.

  38. Be hosted from the 53th state of the USA by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2

    Rapidshare is from Germany and the krauts have other issues to fry as well as feeling very uncomfortable about anything that even reeks of censorship. They currently have an issue with the president having apparently tried to supress an article about an illicit loan. The loan isn't the real issue but the mere idea that the president who is supposed to guard the democracy tried to supress the press... OOPS.

    Attempts have been made against Rapidshare but the german courts have better things to do, the german police have repeatedly said that they will flat out refuse to go after filesharers unless all other crimes are solved and the german politicians got other headaches then to worry about what Hollywood thinks of them.

    New Zealand on the other hand is a vasal state of the US of A in all but name.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  39. Safe harbor? by nurb432 · · Score: 2

    So, i guess that theory is out the window. You listening, Google? You are next.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  40. What this is really about by symbolset · · Score: 5, Informative

    Found an interview. Apparently Mega was looking to go head-to-head with the big record labels, and give artists 90%. And pay them for free downloads too.

    It's here.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  41. WW3 by FreedomStriker · · Score: 2

    So, this is how World War III will play. Net freedom citizens of the world vs evil tyrants. But this time, America, you will fight inside your borders...