Slashdot Mirror


Kim Dotcom Demands Access To Seized Property To Defend Himself

redletterdave writes "On Wednesday, Kim 'Dotcom' Schmitz and his legal team visited the High Court in Auckland, New Zealand, to demand access to the data stored on his computers and hard drives that were confiscated during the police raid, and also requested a judicial review of the general legality of the search warrants police used to raid his mansion. Dotcom's lawyer, Paul Davison, argued that his client needs the data for a few reasons: To mount a 'proper defense' case, to fight possibly being extradited to the U.S., and also to show that 'excessive police action' was used during the raid. Dotcom could prove this in court because the entire raid was recorded by CCTV data, which is stored on Dotcom's confiscated computers. Even though the FBI demanded Dotcom turn over the passwords for Megaupload's encrypted data, he refuses to give up any passwords until he can regain access to his seized property."

54 of 236 comments (clear)

  1. How does it taste? by DigMarx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's the German word for "the boner you get from too much Schadenfreude"? Speaking as an American expat living in NZ: fuck the US government and its thuggish international corporate rent-a-cop policies.

    1. Re:How does it taste? by Eristone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Well, when you steal $600, you can just disappear. When you steal 600 million, they will find you, unless they think you're already dead." -- Hans Gruber

    2. Re:How does it taste? by LordLucless · · Score: 4, Funny

      And therefore, we shouldn't complain about it when people with guns and money come after people who upset them? After all, if you upset them, you deserve it. They have more guns and money than you do, therefore they are right, and you are wrong.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    3. Re:How does it taste? by TFAFalcon · · Score: 4, Informative

      When you steal 600 million you can give back 100 mill as a settlement and keep the rest.

    4. Re:How does it taste? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because Kim Dotcom is an innocent angel, right? When you upset people with guns and money, they will come after you. Its not uniquely American in any way.

      America is supposed to be unique in being a country where that is not how things work.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    5. Re:How does it taste? by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >>>Because Kim Dotcom is an innocent angel, right?

      As a matter of fact YES he is innocent in the eyes of the law. It is now the job of the government to demonstrate why he is not inocent (which the judge overseeing the case says is unlikely, because they did not have authority to seize the items).

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    6. Re:How does it taste? by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The claim is he 'sold' advertising space based upon allowing others to copy and distribute copyrighted content, not theft involved, no armed smugglers, no gang of armed criminals and, no pirates on the high seas. A straight up civil matter that was totally abused by a twisted by a demented and distorted Barack Obama/RIAA/MPAA Department of in-Justice, flooded with lawyers fresh out of the RIAA/MPAA(who dont give a crap about justice just how much money they are going to make screwing it over for as long as they can get away with it). That sucked in another country to do it's dirty work for them, a big Hollywood show. Now comes the collapsing court case and the massive civil suit not against megaupload but against the New Zealand government. New Zealand was the sheep and the US was wearing the gumboots. It is pretty obvious the current US administration does not give a crap about justice, the law courts are just something to be abused for their financial advantage. They just write up any old crap and say the most obscene abuses of justice are now legal. Barack Obama has betrayed every principle of progressive justice.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    7. Re:How does it taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wikipedia:
      "In January 2002, Dotcom was arrested in Bangkok, Thailand, deported to Germany, and subsequently sentenced to a probationary sentence of one year and eight months, and a €100,000 fine, the largest insider-trading case in Germany at the time.[30] Dotcom also pleaded guilty to embezzlement in November 2003 and received a two-year probation sentence"

    8. Re:How does it taste? by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They take the rights of the unscrupulous first. Then they change their definition of unscrupulous slightly to include more of the population. Once rights only belong to a limited set of people, that limited set tends to shrink until those rights apply to no one but the ruling class. The beginning of this century is being marked by the same gradual slide into totalitarianism that the last century was. Do you really think the federal government cares about pirated movies? This is about power, and control.

    9. Re:How does it taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope. Before:
      "In 1998, Dotcom was convicted of computer fraud and handling stolen goods, and sentenced to two years of prison on probation.[20] According to a report by News & Record, he had traded stolen calling card numbers he bought from hackers in the United States.[21] "
      He still likes easy money...

    10. Re:How does it taste? by LordLucless · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Either you really do have the morality of a particularly sociopathic cockroach, or you're shilling for the mafia.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    11. Re:How does it taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That has nothing to do with this. As in, it doesn't prove he's guilty.

    12. Re:How does it taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You missing something here?

      He's not American, he doesn't live in America, American laws don't directly apply to him, He's about to be extradited for a case based half on speculation and half on accusation and assumption that a data provider is somehow responsible for the content of the users (which, either in the US OR NZ is NOT THE CASE), he's had his doors kicked in, had it all recorded on video, and then effectively been denied access to the evidence that will be used against him in a criminal court for an alleged civil crime.

      Enjoy your freedom :(

    13. Re:How does it taste? by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 5, Funny

      What's the German word for "the boner you get from too much Schadenfreude"?

      "Schadenfrisky".

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    14. Re:How does it taste? by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sure, okay. He's making easy money in a legal grey area. Just like loads of bankers and businessmen have done in the United States and all over the world.

      His only "crime" is not "contributing" to the war chests of politicians.

    15. Re:How does it taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      What's the German word for "the boner you get from too much Schadenfreude"?

      Duh: "zebonerjugetvontoomuchSchadenfreude"

    16. Re:How does it taste? by blackfireuponus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      News at 12 - Philistine idiot defends IP, thinks his "ideas" will soon make him perpetual money for finite work.

    17. Re:How does it taste? by fnj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You really think he had anything to do with it? You think that things would have been different no matter who else but him was in office?

      He's the chief executive. It's his Jutice Department. Where do you think the buck stops? As to whether I think things would be different if someone else was President - that depends on the someone else. The last half dozen or so Presidents - probably not. Certain other people I can imagine as President? You bet your life thing would be different.

    18. Re:How does it taste? by itmanCH · · Score: 2

      Schadenlatte

    19. Re:How does it taste? by Tom · · Score: 2

      No, his crime was evading justice for a decade of con-jobs and borderline psychopathic behaviour. He's not a native New Zealander, did you know that? Do you know why he's no longer in Germany? Might be because everyone in the tech scene here despises him.

      Justice hates it when known crooks keep running around because they manage to keep away from the stuff you can prove. Then, when they finally find something to nail you with, they come after you with vengeance. Sure, on paper the legal system works differently - but on paper you can't get away with being a criminal for a decade, either.

      The guy is a crook, and everyone here who roots for him is a stupid idiot.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    20. Re:How does it taste? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 2

      Do you think anyone capable of getting themselves selected as the republican or democrat candidate and so being even likely to be president would not have done exactly the same ....?

      If you don't you are sadly deluded, you have a two party system where the two parties by necessity are very similar, and on many policies are exactly the same

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    21. Re:How does it taste? by BlueStrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But are they not in the position of a bank laundering money for gangsters?

      No more than Google/Youtube, hard drive makers, creators of encryption algorithms, or any other hosting/storage or ISP related businesses are.

      Is the phone company liable for things like ransom/extortion demands, violent threats, or drug transactions made over their systems? Auto makers liable for transporting criminals committing crimes, illegal drug transportation, or for 14-YO Suzy illegally consuming alcohol and losing her virginity in the back seat to an 18-YO? Is the water company liable for someone drowning in their bathtub?

      So, no. They are not in that position at all.

      It's a ridiculous, facetious, ingenuous, illogical, and baseless bit of convoluted logic being used to end-run around established law, legal rights, protections, and legal procedures in order to step on someone doing something in another country where it's legal that powerful interests in the US don't like while simultaneously establishing and expanding the precedent for more and more-egregious end-runs around "inconvenient" laws, individual rights, and legal restrictions on government power.

      But hey, let's give government more power to fix the problem of...having and abusing too much power? Hmm. Can't quite put my finger on it, but something doesn't make sense with that plan. I'll ask my Congressman.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  2. Another key disclosure case by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We need to settle this issue, so that people at least know where they stand when it comes to key disclosure in the United States.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  3. Hypocritical much? by Mysteryprize · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The US government has illegally copied his data, in the hope of extraditing him of charges of illegally copying other peoples data.

    1. Re:Hypocritical much? by kiwirob · · Score: 5, Funny

      Tell me it's not so!!! Can we now please indite the FBI on charges of copyright infringement please. A story in the NZ papers said that have taken copies of storage devices that contain home movies and other personal items. Will the FBI now have to pay $150,000 for each file they have illegally made copies of? It would seem that the FBI have been working with the NZ Police on getting copies of this private data, would't that mean the FBI are now a party to "conspiracy to commit copyright infringement"!

      As a New Zealander I'd like to send a message to the USA Government, "please get the fuck off my front lawn!".

    2. Re:Hypocritical much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In this case, they physically STOLE his data because his company made it easy for other people to INFRINGE on copyrights. This might be the first time that anybody has ever been able to correctly use the words "steal" and "theft" in talking about a copyright case.

    3. Re:Hypocritical much? by wbr1 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and the government murders people too, to say that murder is wrong.
      Looking for sanity in all the wrong places my friend.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    4. Re:Hypocritical much? by C_amiga_fan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sadly the government also kills innocent people, not just criminals. Typically it happens after knocking-open the door, and shooting the pet dog, or a little boy, or a daughter, or an Iraq veteran, or a grandmother (all documented cases published in the news). Then they call this an "accident" instead of what it really is: Murder.

      --
      FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
    5. Re:Hypocritical much? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Usually people making copies for criminal investigations have immunity from that sort of copyright claim.

      In US law it's worded like this:

      Law Enforcement, Intelligence, and Other Government Activities. â" This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, information security, or intelligence activity of an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, or a person acting pursuant to a contract with the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State. For purposes of this subsection, the term âoeinformation securityâ means activities carried out in order to identify and address the vulnerabilities of a government computer, computer system, or computer network.

    6. Re:Hypocritical much? by hot+soldering+iron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sadly, you are very correct.
      Back in Dallas, in the 90's, I personally knew people that had their door kicked in by the "Drug Task Force", teargas thrown, and the husband was thrown out of his wheelchair, which was then roughly dismantled/broken in front of him while they "searched it for weapons". What were they guilty of? Living at the house when the police went to the WRONG ADDRESS. A similar incident resulted in a newborn baby's lungs being permanently scarred by tear gas.

      The police started curbing their actions when they started getting shot going into houses that were supposed to be easy pickings. The drug dealers had started buying "look-alike" uniforms via mail-order, and pulling raids on rival dealers using the same tactics of the police. When someone steals a dealers drugs and money, the dealer is still on the hook to his supplier. When they heard, "Dallas PD! Open up!" all they could think of was "Those bastards are back! Eat hot lead!"

      The lesson here? Poor, honest, people can't afford lawyers to sue city hall to behave correctly, but drug dealers willing to kill a cop will make them watch themselves very carefully.

      --
      When you want something built, come see me. If you want correct grammar and spelling, get a F*ing liberal arts student.
    7. Re:Hypocritical much? by datavirtue · · Score: 3, Funny

      Shut up! You're spoiling our fun!

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    8. Re:Hypocritical much? by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Informative

      "High Court chief judge Helen Winkelmann has told the Attorney-General's lawyer, Mike Ruffin, he has until Monday to explain why FBI agents were allowed to take 135 cloned computer and data storage devices to the United States."

      that's from an article dated 24th of may(today). it seems indeed the action wasn't legal.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    9. Re:Hypocritical much? by smash · · Score: 2

      Actually, its worse. They illegally took it from him, not a copy of it.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  4. NZ Police has handed them over already by evanh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was on the local news last night. The FBI are confirmed to now have a copy of the personal HDDs.

    It's causing a bit of a stink as it looks like the Police have done it illegally given they had previously agreed to return them first.

    1. Re:NZ Police has handed them over already by Mysteryprize · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's all a bit of a mess really. Here's an article giving a few more details: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10808032

    2. Re:NZ Police has handed them over already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's causing a bit of a stink as it looks like the Police have done it illegally given they had previously agreed to return them first.

      All the NZ police need to do to get out of hot water and keep from providing evidence of the crime they allegedly committed, is say they don't know how the FBI got the data.

      The FBI must have broken into their data store.

      Which means we have no reason to suspect any of the evidence is authentic.

      Which means there is no evidence, either for Dotcom's defense or to prosecute him.

      If they want Dotcom, some NZ cop needs to take the fall and go to jail, admitting the evidence wasn't compromised by the FBI but rather, the NZ police department simply doesn't obey laws.

      And yet somehow they need to do this and still have enough credibility to take down Dotcom. That sounds like a tall order. It's starting to look to me like they've really let him go. So there's not even going to be any serious pretense that whatever they did and all the damage they caused, was somehow in the service to law enforcement.

      This is a total clusterfuck.

  5. Dotcom should be freed even if ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... he's guilty as hell of violating US law. Writing as a non-American living outside US territory who has never set foot inside US territory, I hope that Kim Dotcom succeeds in stopping the US extradition request. Extradition should be reserved for those who committed crimes in the country that is requesting extradition or for war criminals. A case might be made for "hackers" (security breakers) that plant malware that destroys another country's computer systems, but not for people whose crime involves not destruction but the "creation" of more data.

    1. Re:Dotcom should be freed even if ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, no. [1] Physical presence of the perpetrator should not be required -- if the crime causes damage in that country, then that's real presence. [2] Why war criminals? Don't forget they're _accused_ war criminals for starters, and wtf not have the country hosting them deal with them? If they're willing to extradite, then they're friendly to the accused, so can get on with themselves. [3] Creation of data, or anything else, can wipe out jobs -- real damage. Loss of food, health care, infrastructure, homes. Have you never seen real destitution? You can't just say 'creation is always good'. It's nowhere near that simple.

      Not saying this whole business isn't full of dubious crap, or that copyright doesn't need a serious overhaul, just that you've got to give this more thought.

    2. Re:Dotcom should be freed even if ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, why not?

      George Bush hired people to commit crimes in Iraq and the USA still haven't extradited him to face justice from his victims. Or is extradition something that should only happen to non-US citizens?

    3. Re:Dotcom should be freed even if ... by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      He should not be extraditable if the crimes are petty or if what Mr X did is legal in his country.

    4. Re:Dotcom should be freed even if ... by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [1] Physical presence of the perpetrator should not be required -- if the crime causes damage in that country, then that's real presence.

      Copied files! Oh, the horror! That's almost as bad as a kid selling lemonade without a permit!

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    5. Re:Dotcom should be freed even if ... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There was no declaration of war. There should have been. Generally speaking, leaders of countries are not subject to legal action in other countries, even if they visit that country. Otherwise, Castro would be in a US jail today, following his arrest decades ago when he came to NYC.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    6. Re:Dotcom should be freed even if ... by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, I just honestly don't see this as anything more than a petty matter. Copyright infringement. So what? People are treating it as if it's some sort of national security emergency that we must extradite people in other countries for. Wow, files were copied! That's just terrible.

      What a waste of taxpayer dollars.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    7. Re:Dotcom should be freed even if ... by codegen · · Score: 2

      Did you just try to compare dealing drugs such as cocaine and heroin to copyright infringment? Seriously?

      I'll turn your own question back on you:

      Are you trying to look stupid, or just REALLY good at it?

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
  6. Steve Jackson Games all over again by bzipitidoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One of the principles to come out of the Steve Jackson Games case is that the accused can't be deprived of their computer equipment and data. Law enforcement may only make copies of data.

    --
    Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    1. Re:Steve Jackson Games all over again by twistofsin · · Score: 3, Informative

      The previous post is missing a disclaimer:

      *If you can afford to lawyer up and get your shit back. Otherwise they'll gladly keep it until you drag them to court.

    2. Re:Steve Jackson Games all over again by djlowe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The previous post is missing a disclaimer:

      *If you can afford to lawyer up and get your shit back. Otherwise they'll gladly keep it until you drag them to court."

      The previous post is missing a disclaimer:

      Today, in the United Fascist States of America (UFSA for short, spread it around!), you're more likely to be branded a cyberterrorist, and then you'll be in a world of shit: You won't get any due process, because you are, after all, a terrorist. Hell, if you're overseas, President Obama might just authorize your assassination, because obviously the US Constitution doesn't apply in foreign lands, right?

      Regards,

      dj

      P.S. I had an account on the Illuminati BBS when it was seized (had to call long distance from NY to get to it), and I was shocked, appalled and angered when I learned of the raid.

      Although it worked out in the end, and Steve Jackson Games won, doing so was an enormous hardship for the company at the time. It was, in addition to the fact that they make great games, another reason that I bought as many of their games as I could at the time, and continue to do so to this day.

  7. Re:would someone beam this guy out of my country by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Er, he did not (well he definitely does not have to) bribe his way into NZ. NZ like most other countries, has investors visa. He only had to invest 1 million USD, which is not much at all (his mansion it worth much much more). Well, he did pay taxes in NZ, and NZ govt better bear the costs of taking him to court. I would not be surprised if he paid more as taxes in NZ, than the govt ever had to spend on him. The SWAT team, and the helicopters to raid his mansion, must have cost a pretty penny I admit, but it was unnecessary, and its the NZ govt that has to blamed for this expenditure.

  8. Re:would someone beam this guy out of my country by itslifejimbutnotaswe · · Score: 2

    Don't blame Kim DotCom for the idiots that are the NZ police, or NZ politicians. They all need taken down a notch or two for not only illegal behaviour, but for idiotic behaviour. That we get to enjoy the show while it all goes down just adds to the amusement. Kim Dotcom will no doubt milk it for all it's worth, and so should he!

  9. Re:No, read the indictment by X.25 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously go read the indictment, it has money laundering, it has fraudulent take down procedures, it have fictitious users. Copyright infringement was just an underlying thing, they have him banged to rights which is why he's trying for the "excessive force" side defense.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/78786408/Mega-Indictment

    Hahaha. Did you actually read this whole document? You really should.

    It also has child pornography, terrorism propaganda, and many other neat things.

    It also has things taken out of context, examples of Kim uploading his legally purchased songs to his private account on Megaupload (which is perfectly legal, but presented as if he was distributing the music by uploading 2 songs to his own account).

    It has many many assumptions. Assumptions that Megaupload was a 'personal cyberlocker service', then 2 paragraphs later DoJ complains that Megaupload did not have a search function - therefore, they were up to something.

    No, you really should read the document. It is not an indictment, it is a propaganda document.

  10. This situation sucks. by Trilkin · · Score: 2

    There's no one worth rooting for here. Governments FAR overstepping their bounds primarily at the will of big business or a money laundering scumbag? Who do you root for here? This isn't even just a matter of the lesser of two evils - it's just a matter of size. IMO, this looks more like clan warfare, but instead of spears and AK-47s, they use money and men in suits.

    --
    Nobody cares what the CAPTCHA for your post was.
  11. Re:Read item 24 again by X.25 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, you need to read it again. Megaupload said that they can hash cp images and automatically block them from being uploaded again. They flip this claim against them for none CP files.

    Read item 24 carefully.

    "Members of the Conspiracy have indicated to each other that they can automatically identify and delete such materials on all of their servers by calculating MD5 hash values of known child pornography or other illicit content, searching the system for these values, and eliminating them; in fact, such files with matching hash values have been deleted from the Mega Conspiracyâ(TM)s servers. Members of the Mega Conspiracy have failed to implement a similarprogram to actually delete or terminate access to copyright infringing content."

    How can you be so stupid?

    I am pretty sure that it is illegal in all jurisdictions to even store child pornography. Preventing it from being uploaded is a no-brainer, since there are no cases where it could be legal.

    However, it not illegal for me to upload a copy of an album that I own, to my private Megaupload account.

    Why should Megaupload automatically prevent me from uploading a backup of a song (or album) that I legally purchased, and which shares MD5 hash with the exact same copy which someone else uploaded and shared with others?

    You seem to think that you are not able to make a copy of purchased song/album onto external hard disk (which is what Megaupload really is).

    That is really sad.

  12. Re:Read item 24 again by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think a more valid question is why should MegaUpload be expected to prevent you from doing anything illegal? We don't require manufactures of other products to do that.

    How come GM is not required to have cars verify all passengers are willing in some way to prevent kidnapping and human trafficking? How come nobody is prosecuting the guys who painted John Edward's house for not verify they were not being paid with illegally converted campaign contributions?

    I think setting the precedent that service providers or manufactures are responsible for the actions of their users is wrong.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  13. Re:Stole? by Unkyjar · · Score: 2

    No, there's no question. Hans Gruber definitely stole the money, there were guns and everything.