Slashdot Mirror


Megaupload User Data Could Be Destroyed Soon

New submitter advid.net writes "According to the Associated Press, user data from the recently-closed file-hosting site Megaupload could be destroyed as soon as Thursday. Apparently Megaupload paid another company to actually store the data. 'But Megaupload attorney Ira Rothken said Sunday that the government has frozen its money. A letter filed in the case Friday by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia said storage companies Carpathia Hosting Inc. and Cogent Communications Group Inc. may begin deleting data Thursday. ... The letter said the government copied some data from the servers but did not physically take them. It said that now that it has executed its search warrants, it has no right to access the data. The servers are controlled by Carpathia and Cogent and issues about the future of the data must be resolved with them, prosecutors said." There's also been talk of a lawsuit against the FBI over users' lost files.

74 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. As Obi Wan once said by mseeger · · Score: 2, Funny

    Archives for As if millions of MP3s cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced....

    1. Re:As Obi Wan once said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      What is the over under on how many human lifetimes worth of porn are about to disappear?

    2. Re:As Obi Wan once said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Quit playing games with my heart.

    3. Re:As Obi Wan once said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      9000 seems like a reasonable guess

  2. Re:c:\ erase /S *.* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Absolutely nothing ... I don't think there was any question of "how" to do it. RTFA

  3. Right to Forget comment by pointless_hack · · Score: 2

    Now if only my old embarrassing you tube vids would disappear the same way!

    --
    Doubt is a fickle ally!
  4. Can they simply delete it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wouldn't that be destruction of evidence?

    Captcha: retrieve

    1. Re:Can they simply delete it? by what2123 · · Score: 3

      They seized everything based on unlawful means. Why would they need evidence? The "Anti-Rights" has won this battle and the only way to ensure their victory is to erase every file that was legitimate.

    2. Re:Can they simply delete it? by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The short answer is no. "They" (by which I assume you mean the US govt) cannot delete the data. What they *can* do is take steps which will almost certainly result in the data being deleted by the third parties hosting it.

      The result is something like an extrajudicial execution. They've ensured Megaupload will die, even if the company is exonerated in the courts.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Can they simply delete it? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By unlawful you mean by lawful methods you disagree with.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:Can they simply delete it? by Forever+Wondering · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Wouldn't that be destruction of evidence?

      Captcha: retrieve

      It is also destruction of exculpatory evidence. If Megaupload makes the claim [true or not] that the majority of the content was non-infringing, how will they be able to prove/disprove this? Or, the reverse argument as well.

      Imagine if this was done to YouTube. YouTube has at least one infringing clip, but it also has a lot of original content that would be lost.

      --
      Like a good neighbor, fsck is there ...
    5. Re:Can they simply delete it? by _KiTA_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Imagine if this was done to YouTube. YouTube has at least one infringing clip, but it also has a lot of original content that would be lost.

      Believe you me, if YouTube hadn't been bought by Google, this would have happened to them. The various Copyright Cartels would still love to do this to them, but can't because Google is too big.

    6. Re:Can they simply delete it? by _KiTA_ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It doesn't matter. The business, "Megaupload", is gone, the guys running it have spent time in jail. Even if the FBI drops the charges, Megaupload is screwed.

      More importantly, the business, "MegaBox" (one of the main reasons MegaUpload was targeted) is also dead, meaning the first real challenge to the RIAA is stillborn.

      Just as planned, Mission accomplished, etc etc.

    7. Re:Can they simply delete it? by del_diablo · · Score: 2

      Its the US goverments job to ensure that if they arrest somebody, they don't starve to death waiting for trial.
      By the same principle: If I accuse somebody of a crime, to harm their corporation, I must be fully liable for all damage, and the prosecturs must be fully liable for all damage they cause.
      -QED.

    8. Re:Can they simply delete it? by mr1911 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      By unlawful you mean by lawful methods you disagree with.

      That is absolutely true, but isn't is strange how when the RIAA or other well funded trade group doesn't like something they line a few pockets and get it made illegal, but when the population doesn't like it there is nothing to be done?

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    9. Re:Can they simply delete it? by TFAFalcon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But do other corporations get treated in the same way? When they are sued, do they get shut down before the verdict?

    10. Re:Can they simply delete it? by TFAFalcon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's kind of like the police busting into you apartment and finding a body. They remove the body, but don't look at anything else. Then arrest you and prevent you from paying your rent.

      As a result, your landlord throws everything out, cleans the apartment and re-rents it.

      The only problem with that is there could have been tracks that the real murderer left there, a suicide note or a confession written by someone else.

    11. Re:Can they simply delete it? by JackDW · · Score: 4, Informative

      No. See the indictment. Very interesting document. The real evidence against these guys is not on Megaupload at all. It is in the emails they sent to each other and to outsiders.

      The Feds' case hangs on the allegation that these guys formed a criminal conspiracy, i.e. that they knew that they were breaking laws and that they conspired to hide this because of the vast profitability of their operation. The evidence is all email records, bank statements, and Kim Dotcom's fleet of luxury cars.

      --
      You're an immobile computer, remember?
    12. Re:Can they simply delete it? by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nothing to be done except, of course, for calling representatives and writing letters until a suitable about of attention is garnered to show that them opposition to a law is greater than what the RIAA/MPAA claims its support is.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    13. Re:Can they simply delete it? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Counter-lawsuit? Against what?

      The government is the perfect example of 'not my department.' The government doesn't have to care what gets crushed under the wheels of 'justice'. The people who are supposed to care were the ones who pointed the government in that direction and said 'GO'.

      ie: the government has the excuse in the form of: The people told me to go do this, it's not my job to question, it's my job to do. They told me to do this by passing the laws that gave me the power to do this. I must assume that they factored in the costs and potential outcome when they granted this power in the first place.

      This is why your first worry shouldn't be 'Will this give the government the power to solve problem xyz' but 'How is it possible for this power to be abused? And when it is inevitably abused in that manner, is it worth the cost?"

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    14. Re:Can they simply delete it? by TFAFalcon · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're driving up the hill in your car, which you use to deliver parcels. The police drag you out and confiscate a parcel that they say proves you are involved in drug trafficing. They then leave the car alone without using the parking brake. The car rolls downhill, crashes into a tree and bursts into flame, destroying the parcels left inside.

    15. Re:Can they simply delete it? by ravenshrike · · Score: 2

      This is only true in cases where money laundering charges are not brought. In that case all finances are frozen specifically so that the dirty money cannot be moved

    16. Re:Can they simply delete it? by ravenshrike · · Score: 2

      Was Megabox planned since prior to 2007, which is how long the investigation has been going?

  5. Re:c:\ erase /S *.* by xcfmx · · Score: 5, Funny

    problem #1.. not hosted on DOS.
    problem #2.. see problem #1

  6. Re:c:\ erase /S *.* by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hey! Let's sue the Gestappo!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  7. Re:Suing the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, it's like the FBI impounding all the units in a storage facility because some of them hold illegal contraband.

  8. Re:Suing the FBI? by L3370 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    how about legit files of your own creation that you had complete ownership of and decided to put on a cloud service?

  9. Oh no!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    not my porn, my precious porn!

    does rule 34 apply here? Is there porn involving porn being deleted?

    1. Re:Oh no!! by Anarchduke · · Score: 2

      its called snuff snuff

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    2. Re:Oh no!! by Lord_Alex · · Score: 2

      Certainly. Guy alone in room weeping softly at computer desk. Girl comes in...
      Girl: What's wrong Mr. Awesome?
      Guy: My porn cloud got deleted by the Feds!
      Girl: That sucks! Damn feds, we better make our own faster than they can delete it!!

      And I'm spent.

      --
      How much work could a network work if a network could net work?
  10. Re:Suing the FBI? by Aryden · · Score: 3, Interesting

    not quite. Its like the FBI seizing all units of a storage facility where the storage facility itself is believed to be storing illegal materials on the premises. The case about them isn't about users storing illegal materials, its about them knowingly allowing it, hindering the ability for the rights holders to remove it and building their entire business based on those illegal materials.

  11. I don't understand the problem by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did the users upload to MU and delete their local copy? If not, they still have their data.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  12. Re:Suing the FBI? by BitterOak · · Score: 2

    how about legit files of your own creation that you had complete ownership of and decided to put on a cloud service?

    Still, I don't think you can sue the FBI for executing a warrant, unless they have gone beyond the scope of what was permitted in the warrant.

    And as I understand, it isn't the FBI that is deleting the data, but rather a subcontractor whose bills have not been paid since Megaupload's assets have been frozen. I really don't see grounds for suing the FBI here.

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
  13. Re:Suing the FBI? by gorzek · · Score: 2

    Exactly. Some people paid for this service and used it to store legitimate files. From what I've read, there's little question that MU employees and management knew their service was being used to trade a lot of infringing material, and even went so far as to play shell games with download links to avoid complying with the DMCA, but what of the people who used it legitimately, paid for the privilege, and are now going to have their files wiped? It's not like MU will have any assets to go after once this whole mess shakes out.

  14. !Safe in Cloud by Barondude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And this is why you should never trust anything you can't afford to lose to the cloud. You lose control and have no idea what is really going on with your data under the hood.

    --
    "That's the sort of blinkered, philistine pig ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage."-Monty Python
    1. Re:!Safe in Cloud by theNAM666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Kinda like... trusting anything you can't afford to loose to a hard drive.

      Remember when IBM moved its production facilities from San Jose to Hungary? I heard they had a 60%+ return rate on those first batches of drives-- I lost two years of grad school research.

      Cloud= redundancy, man. Didn't you watch the Steve Jobs presentation at WDDC, when he said HE NEVER LOST ANYTHING? That's the idea.

    2. Re:!Safe in Cloud by Qzukk · · Score: 2

      "backups" mean you use multiple companies.

      Like filesonic, fileserve...

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  15. A polar bear walks into the White Star office... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Carpathia Hosting

    Well, choosing them was a titanic mistake.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  16. How fitting... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If we are to have a 'war on piracy', I suppose it is only to be expected that we should soon enough have some of what some elegant coiner of dispassion euphemism though to refer to as "collateral damage"...

    Selfishly, I'm inclined to be pleased, in a way. As long as it is possible for people to think that it is 'just about the pirates' or 'the innocent have nothing to fear', acquiescence will be the order of the day. Wholesale and flagrant destruction of bystanders' property should provide a valuable example of how false that thinking is.

  17. Nuke 'em from orbit. by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The FBI is using the "Nuke 'em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure", offense.

    The article says 50,000,000 users, it doesn't say how many files each might have.

    If they keep any of them, there might be embarrassing disclosures like un-owned MP3's downloaded by congresspeople and their kids. There might be department of Justice employees with unlicensed software. Even White House staffers might have kinky files.

    It would take every FBI agent several years to comb through all that data. It's better for them to just destroy it all.

    --
    All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    1. Re:Nuke 'em from orbit. by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The downloaders that downloaded copyright infringing material can re-download somewhere else.

      Customers that downloaded original stuff are screwed if they can't find a copy.

      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    2. Re:Nuke 'em from orbit. by Algae_94 · · Score: 2

      You bring up an interesting point, but the FBI is not deleting any data. They have frozen Megauploads assets, so they can't pay to keep the data hosted. Therefore the 3rd party hosting will delete the data. I assume the FBI has grabbed all the data they want to try and make their case, and left everything else to be thrown out.

    3. Re:Nuke 'em from orbit. by sonicmerlin · · Score: 2

      Do you realize how many rare anime series or games were on megaupload? Do you understand how impossible it is to find out of print manga, or how insanely expensive it is to buy rare material from overseas if you can even find it?

  18. Re:Suing the FBI? by kiwimate · · Score: 2

    Close, but not entirely. But you do raise an interesting point.

    Users who signed up agreed that they had no combacks if they lost data. Users bear all risks of data loss. It gets hairy because this isn't Megaupload deciding to stop operating (as described in that TOS); rather, it's someone else deciding on their behalf. But you're still on a sticky wicket if you already agreed that you shouldn't keep your sole copy on Megaupload and it's your fault if something happens to your data.

    But I think that suing the FBI because you claim collateral damage as the result of a criminal investigation isn't likely to find much sympathy.

    Besides which, as everyone on Slashdot knows, nothing "real" has been lost.

  19. Re:Suing the FBI? by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Informative
    Still, I don't think you can sue the FBI for executing a warrant, unless they have gone beyond the scope of what was permitted in the warrant.

    They froze the assets of a company that hasn't been found guilty of anything yet? Why are they allowed to do that? There is certainly a possibility that MegaUpload will be found not guilty and then who's going to refund the costs, recover the data and refund the lost user fees??

  20. Re:A polar bear walks into the White Star office.. by theNAM666 · · Score: 2

    N.B. The Carpathia _saved_ the Titanic survivors.

  21. Re:Suing the FBI? by localman57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Welcome to the cloud. If your data is more valuable than the storage space it's written to, then keep your own copy. In this case, it was the government that precipitated the shutdown of a service provider, so everybody's looking to blame them. Who are you going to blame when market dynamics cause a company to just go bankrupt? This reminds me of the outcry that happened when they finally put a bullet in (I believe it was) GeoCities.

  22. Re:Suing the FBI? by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    not quite. Its like the FBI seizing all units of a storage facility where the storage facility itself is believed to be storing illegal materials on the premises.

    Having destroyed the material, how do they prove it was illegal? Even if they can point to a few files, how do they show that the majority of files are infringing (which will be required under US law)?

    No, the objective here is simple: put Megaupload out of business, irrespective of what is legal or not. This deletion will put them out of business.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  23. Re:Suing the FBI? by sjames · · Score: 2

    Not for executing the warrant, no. For then destroying the business and causing the destruction of legally stored files before even bothering with a formality of a trial. There is an ethical responsibility to not cause irreparable harm unless/until a guilty verdict is returned. There is also an ethical duty not to cause harm to innocent 3rd parties.

    The correct answer is to give everyone a chance to download their data before it is erased.

  24. Re:Suing the FBI? by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, it's like the FBI showing up with the CEO's of walmart in tow, prying the lock off a couple of the storage units and the CO's pointing at random objects and yelling "They stole that, and that, and that..." meanwhile the renters of the storage locker are in China, and the owner of the storage company says "Well they could have gotten that at Target you know... also, how do you know they stole this and didn't actually pay for it? Have you even asked them?" The FBI then arrests the Owner of the storage unit, who now can't pay its utility bills... water, sewer and power are cut off... the buildings catch fire and the FBI tells the fire department "no need to put that out... we have the truth, let the lies burn."

    When they come to take your rights away, they start with the people that clearly don't deserve them. When they come for yours, well... it's a little too late then isn't it?

  25. Re:Suing the FBI? by Artraze · · Score: 2

    I've run into all of the following in the days since MegaUpload has been down:

    Stepmania files for public domain, CC, etc. compositions
    Podcast
    Video coverage of an event
    Rip of (public) art/drawing stream

    There would also be quite a bit of original as-seen-on-youtube music, but thankfully that usually ends up on Mediafire. Quite frankly I can't imagine the last time I downloaded something not CC, public domain, or clearly free use from such a service. While I won't pretend that sites like MegaUpload don't have pirated content or that it's not some of the most popular stuff on them, suggesting they don't have plenty of legitimate files is extremely ignorant.

  26. Re:Suing the FBI? by qbast · · Score: 2

    They typically start with making sure that defendant cannot afford a lawyer? I guess this is a good way to ensure guilty verdict.

  27. Destruction of fledgling cloud storage industry by Forever+Wondering · · Score: 2
    This action will destroy the cloud storage/computing industry before it gets off the ground. Who will be able to trust their data to any cloud storage provider [used for disaster backup] that can be subject to such seizures/destruction?

    ---

    If you use a provider to archive old data to free up some space, how would you get it back if it's destroyed?

    So, bye bye, iCloud et. al. ...

    --
    Like a good neighbor, fsck is there ...
    1. Re:Destruction of fledgling cloud storage industry by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "This action will destroy the cloud storage/computing industry before it gets off the ground."

      You say that as though it's a bad thing.

      If you give your data to someone else, it's no longer your data and there's no guarantee you'll get it back. Either deal with that, or keep your data locally.

  28. Re:Suing the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    They froze the assets of a company that hasn't been found guilty of anything yet? Why are they allowed to do that?

    That's RICO for ya, baby.

    When the U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone under RICO, he or she has the option of seeking a pre-trial restraining order or injunction to temporarily seize a defendant's assets and prevent the transfer of potentially forfeitable property, as well as require the defendant to put up a performance bond. This provision was placed in the law because the owners of Mafia-related shell corporations often absconded with the assets. An injunction and/or performance bond ensures that there is something to seize in the event of a guilty verdict.

  29. Re:Suing the FBI? by Aryden · · Score: 2

    Don't get me wrong, I am of the opinion that the government is in the wrong here. I merely pointed out an inaccuracy in an analogy. This is commonplace here you know...

    I fight for my rights, I don't see many that do. I wore a uniform, I shipped overseas, I operated on behalf of our government thinking that I was defending the rights of U.S. citizens. Today i fight with my signature, my vote and my sway with others. The U.S. government or any government can come after me and try to take my rights, but they won't get them without a fight.

  30. Re:A polar bear walks into the White Star office.. by LordLucless · · Score: 2

    Yeah, but then it decided to go up against the Romans...

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  31. Re:I think there's a difference. by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

    Companies go bankrupt overnight routinely.

    It's a typical endgame of a grift.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  32. Re:Suing the FBI? by Artraze · · Score: 2

    The trouble is that regardless of whether or not the uploader has a copy, losing the cloud copy is still a loss to the people it was intended for. Perhaps it could be replaced by the uploader or someone who downloaded it previously, but there is no guarantee of this... People move on, forget that email's password, die, etc. While this loss may not be _actionable_ (e.g. a by a lawsuit), it's foolish to pretend it's not a loss all the same.
    (And that's not even covering all the effort lost to simply reupoading and correcting the links for all the files you already had uploaded.)

    Geocities is actually a perfect example. We had notice and special effort was made to preserve the data being lost:
    http://www.archive.org/web/geocities.php

  33. Re:Suing the FBI? by Swampash · · Score: 2

    And then coming to your house, fucking your wife in the butt

    Well, someone's gotta do it.

  34. Re:Suing the FBI? by Mashiki · · Score: 2

    Except when it impacts customers in other countries where the laws are different. See, in Canada the FBI doing this falls under the clause of causing mischief. Regardless of whether or not there's an ongoing criminal investigation. This is one of the reasons why if your data is taken in canada, your data is safe in canada. If the US government wants to play the 'we can reach across the border and do shit'

    Per 430CC

    Mischief in relation to data

    (1.1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

            (a) destroys or alters data;

            (b) renders data meaningless, useless or ineffective;

            (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use of data; or

            (d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use of data or denies access to data to any person who is entitled to access thereto.

    Well...they might get a nasty surprise. Since our extradition treaty covers mischief, and the arrest and deportation of individuals back to canada to stand trial. In Canada mischief can be carried into IO(that's felony for americans)territory regarding the rendering of data being unusable.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  35. All this does is say- Don't do business in the US by undeadbill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Megaupload is a Hong Kong based company. The only reason they were charged in the US was because they used servers for hosting in the US. This pretty much sends a message to anyone who might do business in the States that they are not welcome, and that justice is pretty much bought and sold by how much money and influence you have. This is not a good message to be sending out to businesses overseas, looking to invest here. Freezing a foreign company's assets worldwide over what is a domestic issue is going to give a lot of international entrepreneurs reasons to look elsewhere.

    Kim Dotcom did the smart thing- he made sure there was a time limit set on his user's data if someone bigger than his company came along and tried to forcibly take it. By the time someone shutting down his operations finally figured out where the real data was held, all of it is going to be deleted- unless they return his funds and let him continue to operate. Damned if they do shut him down, because now he and his company are a damaged party and the US takes a hit in the international markets, damned if they don't shut him down completely, because then the Feds look weak and ineffectual.

    Exculpatory evidence and discovery for the trial are irreparably damaged by the Prosecution, the Defendants can now sue in civil and international court for damages (whether they see them or not), and Kim Dotcom may even become a cause celebre. That is, if the US doesn't hold him indefinitely under the NDAA...

  36. Well. by symbolset · · Score: 2

    There goes the cloud industry.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  37. If you want foolproof safety for your data. . . by PeanutButterBreath · · Score: 2

    . . .use steganography to embed the data in a compromising picture of yourself and then upload it to Facebook. Presto -- it will be there forever.

  38. This is the stuff of movies and the constitution by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The A-team had stories like this all time, small nice family company being muscled out of business by big evil company.

    The US constitution provisions for protection of the individual are NOT as many think to get the guilty off but to protect the average innocent citizen from being bullied into submission.

    The principle is simple, if I want to stop you, I can have you arrested and your crops will rot on your farm, your will unable to supply your customers, you will run out of cash and bam, I can buy your farm cheap... I don't need to have you found guilty as long as I can keep you under arrest for long enough. There are plenty of variants on this, in corrupt countriest the way to get a bribe as a custom officer is to hold up the goods of a company for inspection until they either pay or go out of business for being unable to deliver.

    This is even done on a country scale. Romania did not like that The Netherlands is blocking Romania becoming part of the EU free labor traffic, they claim this is racist (Romania is one of the worsed human rights abusers in the EU with their treatment of gypsies) and so they blocked dutch product at the border trying to put pressure on the Dutch government. Didn't really work since it only re-inforced the view that Romania is not yet ready to fully join the EU.

    But the tactic itself remains, get the police to smash your opponents goods during a search and force them out of business.

    Megaupload itself is shady enough but then the content industry has many accusations against it as well, just that he who pays the piper determines who ends up in court or not. How many settlements has the content industry agreed to to avoid being found guilty in open court? Quite a few in the last couple of decades.

    There are lots of filesharing methods, the error Megaupload made was trying to go semi-legit... artists had publicly voiced their support for a new scheme Megaupload wanted to introduce... coincidence that the very next week they are put out of operation by the rent-a-cop FBI? Maybe and Saddam considering selling oil in Euro's just a bit before being removed from power had nothing to do with it... first Iraq war was over the conquering and subjegation of another nation and he was left in power unharmed. He considers undermining the dollar and BAM, he swings.

    And gosh, all the oil nations that consider dealing in euro's are on the danger list to... how amazing a coincidence.

    You can destroy someone in the courts without ever needing to find them guilty. But if history has shown us anything, their will be 10 megauploads to take this ones place and they will be harder to take down. And they will not bother trying to go legit or try to work with artists. They will just copy all and damn the rest. Want to download files right now and not deal with filetubes with endless vapor ware? Go russian. I tried to find some old ebooks, go west and it all leads to overpriced book sellers, go russian and you find entire libraries with no popups, no spam, no search bars, just simple downloads. Because nobody in Russia gives a fuck. If the FBI tried the same as they did in New Zealand their officers would come back in body bags and asking the former KGB to investigate would be very ironic indeed.

    They took down napster which led to the demise of cutemx on which anime was shared... and all that happened is that you now got anime torrent sites that are run so smoothly they release automatic updates and actually have an rating system telling if there is a better version out there for series 10-20 years old (torrents for new stuff are easy but finding a very old series with 20-30+ seeders and only leeching... that is class).

    It is like stomping ants, only these don't just come back in greater number, they come back stronger and fiercer... and if I am a typical person, their users come back a little bit more reluctant to buy from the RIAA/MPAA every again. It ain't just being cheap anymore, now it is a case of principle!

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

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

  39. Re:Suing the FBI? by PRMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, let's play this game.

    Let's say that U2 has a new song that's almost out. It gets leaked (somehow) to the internet. Bono sends a copy to Edge on MegaUpload so that he can play it for a performer from their opening act so that they can hear it and end their act with a song that's not too similar. U2's manager sends a copy to an advertising agency to use in a commercial. The band sends a copy to the execs at Island Records so that they can send it to radio stations. Also, a pirate makes it and the Megaupload link available for download.

    The lawyers for U2's label (rightfully) demand immediate takedown for the pirate link, because it's being used for piracy. How many of the 4 copies are illegal?

    The answer is probably one. MegaUpload would be right to leave the other 3 identical copies alone. This is the problem with copyright infringement claims. The files don't come with dossiers explaining who is and is not allowed to listen to it. That's why copyright and fair use must be decided in a court of law.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  40. Re:c:\ erase /S *.* by Culture20 · · Score: 2

    And neither one actually erases anything. foremost or some other data recovery tool could find a lot of files.

  41. Re:Suing the FBI? by TFAFalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Innocent until PROVEN guilty? Why can the money (and the lawyers it could buy) be taken away before the trial even begins?

  42. I see a big problem with this by viperidaenz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Megaupload hasn't been proven guilty yet. If they are not allowed to pay their creditors to stop their users data being deleted it is effectively destroying the company beyond repair based on an opinion since there has been no trial yet.

  43. Re:c:\ erase /S *.* by chromas · · Score: 2

    So we just need Anonymous to DoS their servers first?

  44. Re:c:\ erase /S *.* by gman003 · · Score: 2

    Sure. The Nazis had funnier accents (citation: Hogan's Heroes).

  45. Re:Suing the FBI? by Mashiki · · Score: 2

    Not really true. Canada law looks at the full chain of events along with the aggravating and mitigating circumstances of the charge. If a case is before the courts, but there isn't enough prohibitive cause in our system to keep something offline. Then you're denying the right of paid customers to access their data. Which means you're denying access. You're welcome to believe whatever you want, but US law != law everywhere. And Canadian law says not legal, until it goes through the courts.

    The laws in other places do not allow you to arbitrarily to do something without considering the full actions. This is why here, you can't simply walk up and seize the assets of someone even if they're convicted of running a drug operation. You need to prove to the crown that, those assets were purchased and profited by the proceeds of crime, and you must prove it to the judge as well.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  46. Re:Suing the FBI? by shiftless · · Score: 3, Funny

    Except nobody in your country's leadership has the balls to do any of that, so this is all a moot point

  47. Most important video by Old+Wolf · · Score: 2

    Megaupload was the only known location of the videos accompanying http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54/poker-beats-brags-variance/bbv-grossest-craziest-night-my-life-very-graphic-tl-mr-240866/

    It would be a travesty if these were lost!