Dotcom Alleges Megaupload Raid Was Part of Deal To Film The Hobbit

c0lo writes "Kim Dotcom alleges, in an 20 min interview with the Australian public television, that Megaupload was offered up by the New Zealand's PM 'on a silver platter' as part of negotiations with Warner Brothers executives for shooting The Hobbit in New Zealand. He promises that he'll substantiate the claims in court. He also says that the extradition case the U.S. government is weak and the reason behind the latest delay in extradition hearing (postponed from August this year to March next year) is an attempt to bleed Dotcom dry of his money. Also interesting, Dotcom says that the latest debacle of the massive scale online online surveillance by U.S. spy agencies has triggered an 'explosion' of interest in mega.co.nz, the 'cloud storage' site with user generated encryption."

Comments

Conspiracy theory?

[mitcheli]

Normally, I'm one who rails against conspiracy theories for being ridiculous, but somehow, this one, well... It deserves a listen to.

Re:Conspiracy theory?

[Mashiki]

Easy enough to look at the trends right? Just take a look at the current scandals going on from the IRS, to attacks on reporters, to silencing political opposition groups. And it's not that far of a stretch at all.

Re:Conspiracy theory?

[Anonymous Coward]

"conspiracy theories"

It think the concept of "conspiracy theories" died a few years ago, right about the time when it was confirmed beyond all doubt that our government had/has a torture program, has an assassination program, has secret prisons, has a mass surveillance system on innocent citizens, is actively lying to our allies, is actively lying to us, is actively lying to congress, etc. About the only conspiracy theories that are still on the books are the ones involving Aliens & UFOs, so far.

Not a surprise

[redmid17]

This is about as surprising as either Bush, Obama, or any future/past president violating some type of civil right in a severe fashion

Re:Not a surprise

[Anonymous Coward]

Civil rights, Hollywood movie. Most people chose the latter.

NZ's PM retiring to his Hawaiian mansion.

[Anonymous Coward]

When John Key is done with politics, he'll be packing his bags and leaving New Zealand for his very nice place in Hawaii. Right now he is finalising the deals selling off NZ's state-owned (ie taxpayer-owned) assets. He is guaranteed a knighthood, and several boardroom positions with the newly-privatised companies.

Not bad for a couple years in politics. Of course, he was previously a currency trader with the nickname "the smiling assassin" so it's no surprise to learn that he was already wealthy (NZ$50m +) before entering politics, but he's one hell of a lot richer now. Between the MPAA bribe money and the shares he gained in sweetheart deals from the state-asset firesales to friends, this guy will be sitting even prettier.

All I can say to the USA is "You're welcome to the cunt."

(Oh, and I forgot to mention that he only became Prime Minister of NZ as a result of his leaking to the media the sensitive private emails of his then-boss Don Brash, thus causing his resignation. Key grabbed that throne before the cushion even had time to cool.)

Re:NZ's PM retiring to his Hawaiian mansion.

[Anonymous Coward]

In 1995, he joined Merrill Lynch as head of Asian foreign exchange in Singapore. That same year he was promoted to Merrill's global head of foreign exchange, based in London, where he may have earned around US$2.25 million a year including bonuses, which is about NZ$5 million at 2001 exchange rates.Some co-workers called him "the smiling assassin" for maintaining his usual cheerfulness while sacking dozens (some say hundreds) of staff after heavy losses from the 1998 Russian financial crisis. He was a member of the Foreign Exchange Committee of the New York Federal Reserve Bank from 1999 to 2001.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Key

Hard to know who to believe here

[DeathToBill]

Kim Dotcom's main business seems to be publicity for Kim Dotcom, with the evidence postponed to a future date. On the other hand, somehow, in some way I can't quite put my finger on, this sort of thing is just that little bit more believable this week. Not sure why.

Re:Hard to know who to believe here

[Anonymous Coward]

> Kim Dotcom's main business seems to be publicity for Kim Dotcom

Yes, that has always been his thing.

Whom to believe? Both are equally morally broken and liars. They are in it for power and money.

Yet, Dotcom serves a purpose by undermining the much, much bigger evil so in this case I'm strongly for him. He is a horrible person and the world would be a much better place without such types, but if he's doing his part in bringing attention to the Real Evil the early 21th century faces, then... I am accepting this. Sometimes you need to fight fire with fire.

Re:Hard to know who to believe here

[AK Marc]

I had to sue someone once. If I told them what I was going to say in court, they'd have been able to manufacture evidence to contradict it. Waiting until court to state what my evidence was left them no time to cover-up (and yes, I followed all the rules of disclosure, it was something they provided to me but didn't expect me to be able to use to prove other of their statements false). But yes, I told them I thought they were lying before court, hoping they'd settle. They didn't. You can tell them you "know" without giving anything away, but telling them how you know would be giving something away.

Re:Hard to know who to believe here

[Tom]

What people mostly don't understand is that the world is not a Hollywood movie. Just because one side is the bad guys doesn't mean the other side is the good guy.

In this case, it's a power-greedy, corrupt government vs. a greedy, criminal egomaniac.

Let them tear each other apart and enjoy the show, because if you make the mistake of rooting with any of them, you're supporting the bad guys.

Kimble's business has always been himself. If the fact that he changed his last name to "Dotcom" didn't tell you as much, I'm not sure if a huge sign with neon letters will.

Why not? We used to do it for bananas

[Bearhouse]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company

So why not for protecting that other 'strategic' resource, films & music!

Easy Explanation

[maroberts]

The US believes Kim is a hobbit-ual criminal....

Re:Keep if simple, stupid.

[NonFerrousBueller]

The Hobbit films being filmed in NZ was not a foregone conclusion. The studios got the NZ government to change labour laws in their favour under the threat of filming somewhere else (Eastern Europe).

sounds like the man might have a point

[nimbius]

Megaupload was offered up by the New Zealand's PM 'on a silver platter' as part of negotiations with Warner Brothers executives for shooting The Hobbit in New Zealand.

seems plausible since there are few jobs in New Zealand, and KDC seemed like a rather small egg to break for the omelette. Del Toro even said in parting words the film was "economically and politically" complicated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hobbit_(film_series)#Del_Toro.27s_departure

the reason behind the latest delay in extradition hearing (postponed from August this year to March next year) is an attempt to bleed Dotcom dry of his money.

yes. yes it is. this is a very well documented business law tactic in which you leverage your significant legal and monitary resources against a competitor or target for acquisition and simply wait until they declare bankruptcy. in many cases the resulting acquisition (should someone decide to conveniently buy up kim dot coms holdings) can even be written off ones taxes.

the latest debacle of the massive scale online online surveillance by U.S. spy agencies has triggered an 'explosion' of interest in mega.co.nz, the 'cloud storage' site with user generated encryption.

here we see Kim jumping the deliniation between government and studio, and thats appropriate for a number of reasons. although the US government is by and for the poeple it rarely listens to anything but the most powerful lobbying groups. Hollywood lobbies through a number of channels. for example, it doles out cash to the department of defense in order to secure $war_devices for its latest blockbuster, and in return enjoys closer access to government foreign policy than had it simply made a sequel to waynes world. perhaps it kills a documentary on marijuana and gets cozier with the DOJ, it doesnt matter. these side-channel efforts are a caustic means of jack-booting the US government into wasting time and resources in bullying its NATO allies into violating the soverign rights of their citizens for the sole good of one industry. its not even our largest industry, but it serves a very important role in government and society. the TV series '24' for example is conjectured to have existed solely to acclimate the american public to the idea that torture was entirely acceptable and effective in the last-minute prevention of a terrorist attack. it makes, or was supposed to have made, the entire 'guantanamo' thing go down easier.

what Kim notes of particular importance in the last quote is particularly critical to the course of american democracy as a whole. We've known for quite some time the american system has problems, but the government has always controlled the message and the people in turn have largely chosen to move on with their 3 sick days per year and sufficient paycheck. When an individual or group 'leaks' a particular piece of information publically, in a means that cant be controlled or filtered, it breeds dissent and unrest in groups it should not. to confirm american warcrimes for example in afghanistan and iraq serves to undermine the united states authority in conducting our 'freedom wars' guaranteed each 4 years. Leaking a domestic spy program serves to underscore the fact that the government understands the only means to prevent dissent and control information is to prevent 'leaks' at their source. Terrorism is the reason, but only so far as terrorism is a definition of the challenge to a governments authority or the ability to directly undermine it. I believe Kim is correct in saying the US government has an undisclosed vested interest in precluding american citizens from gaining access to an offshore, cryptographically secured resource to which they have no access.

Re:what was the law change?

[Inda]

It affected everyone. It was something about being declared a contractor or an employee. One enjoyed sick pay and annual leave, the other not. A figure of over $30m was touted as a tax break too.

It was all a bit underhanded, from what I remember.