Slashdot Mirror


US "the Enemy" Says Dotcom Judge

First time accepted submitter Flere Imsaho writes "During the NetHui Internet conference last week, the NZ judge to hear the Dotcom extradition case was speaking on the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement and how the U.S. entertainment industry is pushing to make region code hacking illegal, when he said 'Under TPP and the American Digital Millennium copyright provisions you will not be able to do that, that will be prohibited ... if you do you will be a criminal — that's what will happen. Even before the 2008 amendments it wasn't criminalized. There are all sorts of ways this whole thing is being ramped up and if I could use Russell [Brown's] tweet from earlier on: we have met the enemy and he is [the] U.S.'"

21 of 469 comments (clear)

  1. And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Funny

    And even if your country doesn't have a DMCA (and they WILL soon, if not already), don't think for a second that the U.S. can't extradite you here for punishment anyway, or that your government won't fall to its knees like a trained lapdog when the FBI snaps their fingers and says "Put him on a plane."

    The sooner you people accept that the U.S. is large and in-fucking-charge, the easier it will go for all of us.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      War is Peace
      Freedom is Slavery
      Ignorance is Strength
      Land of the Free
      Home of the Brave

      Repeat the phrase "Land of the free, home of the brave" with a straight face. Now, repeat until some one has to pick you up, off the floor with the laughter cramps preventing you from remaining upright.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too by beltsbear · · Score: 5, Informative

      US oil is harder to refine and will choke refinery that is not designed for it. That being said it is used in pretty much every purpose that middle east oil is used for, it is just refined in the US and used here. The US uses more gas then diesel so we also have refineries that crack down more of the diesel into gas (which is an inefficient process because diesel is more energy efficient to start out with).

    3. Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Those behemoth Ultra Large Container Vessels consume an enormous amount of fuel bringing their shit from Asia to the U.S., and short of discovering some huge untapped energy source, I don't see that being sustainable at all in the long term.

      The ultra-large container ships do consume ultra-large amounts of fuel, but they also transport ultra-large amounts of stuff. In fact, the bigger the ship, the less fuel is used proprtionally.

      It takes about 20 days to sail a container ship from the UK to China. Based the Wikipedia article for the Emma Maersk (new top of the line container vessel), that comes to about 57 to 123 gallons of fuel per 20 foot container.

      A 20 foot container holds a LOT of stuff. For most domestic manufactured goods, the amount of fuel used per item shipped from China is tiny: much much less than the amount of fuel you will use to drive to the store to buy the item, or the amount of fuel used to deliver it to your house.

      It's pretty safe to say that private use of cars will disappear long before high capacity long range shipping of goods.

      preceded by sanctions and ever-increasing limits on Chinese imports that will help to encourage domestic production.

      I expect the latter will happen very soon. I don't know why it hasn't already: China has effectively used government money to shut down the rest of the world's rare earth manufacturing. I'm not entirely sure why this didn't cause the introduction of tarriffs.

      I doubt war will happen. It would be much cheaper to build domestic factories and (NB) re-open domestic mines. Then use subsidies/import tariffs to protect an important strategic industry.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too by symbolset · · Score: 5, Interesting

      DMCA is for criminalizing the circumvention of DRM. The US Attorney prosecuting Kim Dotcom is Neil H. MacBride, former Microsoft meatpuppet as VP and chief counsel of the Business Software Alliance. Please do try to keep up.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
  2. The enemy among us. by Q-Hack! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know that this is normally a forum to bash **AA, but the fact still remains that Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content. Never did he even attempt to stop this illegal activity, and at times, promoted it. People like to talk about how the rich make there fortune off the backs of the working class... this guy is your poster child.

    --
    Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    1. Re:The enemy among us. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Certainly he's a shady character, but last time I checked, this guy actually wanted to pay the artists

      Dotcom described Megabox as Megaupload’s iTunes competitor, which would even eventually offer free premium movies via Megamovie, a site set to launch in 2012. This service would take Megaupload from being just a digital locker site to a full-fledged player in the digital content game.

      The kicker was Megabox would cater to unsigned artists and allow anyone to sell their creations while allowing the artist to retain 90% of the earnings. Or, artists could even giveaway their songs and would be paid through a service called Megakey. “Yes that’s right, we will pay artists even for free downloads.

    2. Re:The enemy among us. by jez9999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know it's popular to sound all level-headed and point out the law, but many of us think copyright law desperately needs an overhaul. I, for one, would like to see anything released over 10 years ago go into the public domain. Then, much of the Megaupload activity would've been legal.

    3. Re:The enemy among us. by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >>> Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content.

      If he's such a horrible person, why was he able to get ~50 top-of-the-charts singers (and musicians and audio engineers) to perform a Megaupload song for him? If he really was hurting these people, they would have refused to do the ad. But instead they helped write, sing, and produce it.

      I suspect your attack is without merit. Dotcom no more wanted to hurt people than does Googlemail or the Amazon Cloud (which is also used to share content w/o payment). If anybody is guilty here it's the U.S. government for overstepping its legal authority. Last I checked its juris diction ends at the border or the 14 mile oceanic limit.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    4. Re:The enemy among us. by Durrik · · Score: 5, Interesting

      10 years is probably too short, but you're right that copyright laws are broken. I do like 10 years as a good number to work from.

      I think copyright should be broken into personal and corporate copyright. Personal copyright is owned by the author. Corporate by a corporation.

      Personal copyright should have a maximum 10 year exclusive license limit, after ten years the license should be renegotiated, and perhaps transfered to another publisher. He time limit for personal copyright should be Death or twenty years whichever is longer.

      Corporate copyright should be free for 10 years. And then renewed in each country that the corporation wants to enforce it in for $10,000 for then next 10 years, then $100,000 for ten more years and so on. So:

      0-10 years free
      11-20 years $10,000 per country
      21-30 years $100,000 per country
      31-40 years $1,000,000 per country ...

      If a company wants to bankrupt itself to keep a copyright that's fine but it'll quickly become too expensive for companies not to let copyrit lapse.

      Breaking digital locks should not be illegal. You blame the lock if it gts broken, safes and locks are rated by how long it takes to break into them. Also you could look at it as a National Security question, if you my cryptography illegal, only crimals will be cryptologists. And then how are you going to secure your communications? Digital locks are a good way to train the next generation of cryptologists, and keep them practiced.

      --
      Software Engineer & Writer of Military Science Fiction and Fantasy Blog: petermwright.com Twitter: WrightPeterM
    5. Re:The enemy among us. by NotSanguine · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Certainly he's a shady character, but last time I checked, this guy actually wanted to pay the artists

      Dotcom described Megabox as Megaupload’s iTunes competitor, which would even eventually offer free premium movies via Megamovie, a site set to launch in 2012. This service would take Megaupload from being just a digital locker site to a full-fledged player in the digital content game.

      The kicker was Megabox would cater to unsigned artists and allow anyone to sell their creations while allowing the artist to retain 90% of the earnings. Or, artists could even giveaway their songs and would be paid through a service called Megakey. “Yes that’s right, we will pay artists even for free downloads.

      The above, if true, raises an interesting point. MegaUpload operated using the same model for years. Somehow, once they talked about creating a service that directly competed with iTunes -- and charging artists less for the privilege of selling their music via the MegaBox service, the FBI got quite frisky. Seizing servers, requesting arrest and extradition, freezing assets, etc. Now MegaUpload is no longer a threat to iTunes. I wonder what changed?

      [Removes tinfoil hat]

      I'm not saying that Apple owns the FBI, nor am I saying that these events weren't coincidental. It just gives you something to file away for future reference.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    6. Re:The enemy among us. by nashv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, I do think the US is falling apart. This is of course entirely subjective and based on my feeling of the trajectory of events in the last 20 years in the US. I don't live in the US, though I am 'involved' in the US being in a profession that is very international and am affected by US systems.

      From the outside, irrationality seems to dominate US public opinion. US laws and rhetoric seem to drift further and further from ground realities. Especially so when concerning the nature of digital information, environmental issues , issues on religion and so on. And if anything can be considered to be the major sociological topics of our generation, I think the internet, environment and religion are the top three.

      I may be - in fact hope to be, completely wrong in my pessimism.

      --
      Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
  3. Re:Then buy NZ music by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but do USA copyrigth laws cover every country on the planet? No, they do not, so people need to learn to deal with the fact that some countries take a different approach to promoting the distribution of science and art.

    Oh, what, you were hoping to turn music into a form of property? That's cute.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  4. Re:Easy solution for Australia (And NZ?) by Tastecicles · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the UK we have this thing called the Trade Descriptions Act 1968, which among other things prohibits misdescription of goods. A DVD-video must by definition comply with the DVD-video standard (Part 3, Book B and DVD Video Recording Book) or it CANNOT be referred to as a DVD video.

    Now, people do still have choice over whether or not to purchase a barcode for a particular title. If one does purchase a DVD video, then he has a statutory expectation that that is what he is getting. There is NOTHING in the standards to cover region locking, CSS encoding, or any other restrictive mechanism. ANY DVD that employs any of these mechanisms CANNOT claim to be a DVD-video.

    Having made the choice to purchase a barcode with the DVD-Video logo, if one then finds out that one cannot play that DVD in a standard, open-region player (lots of Chinese players are not region locked hence will play ANY otherwise compliant disc), then IMO there would be a case under 1968 (c. 29).

    My boggle with the region coding thing is the fact that unless specified on the box that a player is region-free*, there is no indication whatsoever on the hardware or the packaging (or the manual!) that the player is region locked and to what region. This is clearly a violation of 1968 (c.29)?

    *Since DVD-video units hit mainstream in around 1997, I've been aware of the region coding and studiously avoided region locked players, unless there was a clear-cut and simple way of jailbreaking them. The only player I ever had to jailbreak was a Meridian 586 (bought near the end of 1997 and cost a bloody fortune).

    --
    Operation Guillotine is in effect.
  5. Illegal but not necessarily wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You seem to be treating legality in the area of copyright as a natural law of physics and carved on tablets of stone. Well it's neither, and everything is in a state of flux..

    The law in this area was never subject to public approval in any country, and it runs totally contrary to how the VAST majority of people seem to feel about it when asked. Instead it was developed through intense lobbying of politicians by content creators in a completely one-sided manner. What's more, much of it was developed out of the public eye and turned into law through a process of direct bribery, particularly in the US where bribery is legal and called "campaign contributions".

    So while you're factually correct in calling it "illegal" by US law, it's only "illegal" because this totally corrupt and non-democratic system has defined "illegal" to suit itself. It may be illegal in your country, but it's not illegal everywhere, and it's regarded as "wrong" by only a small percentage of the world's population.

    Things aren't as clearcut as you make out.

  6. Re:With enemies like that... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People have a problem with the USA when we start applying our laws in other countries, and rightly so. New Zealand has a legitimate, democratic government that creates its laws, so what business do we have trying to extradite NZ citizens for violations of US law that did not occur in the US?

    Yeah, blah blah blah, he registered a US domain name. If we start using the Internet as a vehicle for applying our out-of-control legal code in other countries, we are just going to make more enemies.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  7. Re:Then buy NZ music by Antipater · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Funnily enough, NZ people don't have to look at the warships (or at least they didn't 10 years ago; this might have changed). NZ at some point declared themselves a "nuclear-free" zone, meaning not only no warheads but no vessels running on nuclear power are welcome there. And since that means the US Navy has to skirt waaaay around NZ to get to their Australian naval bases, it's actually been a major source of diplomatic tension between the two countries. But it also shows that the Kiwis have no qualms about giving America the middle finger, so don't expect them to cooperate with this copyright stuff all too quickly.

    --
    Everything is better with chainsaws.
  8. Re:remember that raise you didn't get? by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Show me SOMETHING that is made inthe USA.

    Ford? Nope China parts, Assembled in canada and mexico.
    GM? as china as you can get.

    Honda? Yes they are more american than any american car brand, but parts are still China
    Computer? China
    Beer? China... for the cans. Your all american Budwiser is in a China made aluminum.

    China, china, china. NOTHING you buy in a supermarket or big box store is made inthe USA.

    Want USA made? local small artisan or maker. is your only choice. What that does is makes my Coffee Cup go from $3.95 to $16.99. Any my glass drinking glasses, I cant get the $1.99 each china junk. I have to pay a glass artist $22.50 each for them.

    I am fine with it, but all the "BUY AMERICAN" morons dont walk the walk but they shoot off their mouths.

    BUY AMERICAN means you never set foot in ANY big box store. You buy your clothing from a local tailor. You ready to pay $35.00 for a t-shirt that a seamstress will make custom for you? Want new Silverware? $15.00 a piece from your local Metal Artist.

    The biggest problem is these BUY AMERICAN loudmouths also ride Harley Davidson bikes, which are mostly China parts. The Loudmouths wont do what they say. It's why Harley's are all china parts and soon to be BUILT in china. It's why Indian went out of business. Because these LOUDMOUTHS dont do what they say others should do.

    They wont pay the cost if buying all american.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  9. Re:Then buy NZ music by modecx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They say NZ's nuclear-free law extends only to their territorial waters--12 nautical miles from shore--not even out to the the 200 nautical mile "exclusive economic zone"; 12 NM hardly qualifies as a "long way" around NZ, particularly for a nuclear powered warship, which would typically not come that close to shore unless the ship was already going to port.

    So, like most blahblah-free zones, it's basically just a feel-good measure. It's almost certianly more of an negative economic cost to business in NZ than anything else, since even diesel-powered US warships won't be able to visit NZ ports for provisions or other economic purposes, as the US Navy will refuse to confirm or deny that they have nuclear weapons on board any particular ship. Also, in the event of a natural disaster, the people of NZ might be in for even more hurt. The US Navy, more than any other force on the globe, is a massive resource for quickly sending out a great deal of logistical support for disaster relief. I wonder if they would suspend that policy in the event of a disaster, even though I hope that need never arises.

    --
    Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  10. US Gov't + Entertainment Industry = team fail by solardiesel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wow does this sort of behavior by my government get me riled up.

    The whole system we have set up here where the Govt passes legislature helping out lobbyists (in this case is so broken it's not even funny. I wouldn't go so far to say we are the sole enemy, but we definitely are not helping the situation.

    I am 25, and the majority of my friends are way too busy trying to wiggle out from debt or job hunting in a stagnant environment to make their voices be heard (unless wikipedia shuts down). Seeing as it costs time and money to make sure you actually get a seat at the table, it seems to me that a huge number of our generation is grossly misrepresented.

    Is there someone/something out there that is working to involve our young adults in foreign and domestic politics... as opposed to telling them what to do/not to do? I cannot put it as eloquently as Jon Stewart did, but our problems are only going to expand if we let people who refer to our type as "nerds" run the country.

    We need to either a. Set up a strong lobby group to oppose heavy handed corporate driven legislature or b. change the system in it's entirety.

  11. re: Dotcom - a "shady character" by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You know something? The more I read about Kim Dotcom, the more I get the idea "shady character" doesn't really fit him neatly. He reminds me much more of some of the "old school" computer geeks I knew from back in the mid 1980's and still run into occasionally. Many of them have a burning desire to make something of their lives ... to do something memorable, within the realm of what their talents are. They're a little eccentric or "off beat" by mainstream society's standards, sure. And maybe some of them are a bit guilty of being a little too materialistic. (But some of that simply comes with the territory of being interested in technology, IMO. If you spend much of your time working with computers and tech. - you develop an appreciation for all of those physical gadgets and devices that other people may not really have. It extends out towards all manner of complex machines and devices, too. Lots of I.T. hardware guys I know also get very interested in sports cars, for example. Even though they're not "gear heads" in the sense of putting in thousands of hours in someone's garage taking apart engines and transmissions? They appreciate the work that goes into building such a machine, and desire one of their own -- the same way they want the fastest PC out there, even if they don't really have a NEED for one that performs quite that well.)

    Dotcom strikes me as all of the above, with a need to be recognized.... to be a "celebrity" of sorts, within his own circle of fellow geeks at least. (The fact he'd change his last name to Dotcom, alone, tells you how much he wants to be noticed as a "guru" in his field of interest.)

    He was recently seen in photos hanging out with Steve Wozniak ... with Woz having nothing but good things to say about him. That's not quite what I'd expect if the guy was just your run of the mill online scammer, trying to make his fortune at everyone else's expense.

    It's govt. and big media wanting you to think of this guy as something like a foreign leader of a drug cartel ....