Slashdot Mirror


Kim Dotcom Sues New Zealand For $6.8 Billion In Damages Over Erroneous Arrest (torrentfreak.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: Kim Dotcom, the founder of file-sharing site Megaupload, is suing the New Zealand government for billions of dollars in damages over his arrest in 2012. The internet entrepreneur is fighting extradition to the U.S. to stand trial for copyright infringement and fraud. Mr Dotcom says an invalid arrest warrant negated all charges against him. He is seeking damages for destruction to his business and loss of reputation. Accountants calculate that the Megaupload group of companies would be worth $10 billion today, had it not been shut down during the raid. As he was a 68% shareholder in the business, Mr Dotcom has asked for damages going up to $6.8 billion. He is also considering taking similar action against the Hong Kong government. As stated in documents filed with the High Court, Mr Dotcom is also seeking damages for: all lost business opportunities since 2012, his legal costs, loss of investments he made to the mansion he was renting, his lost opportunity to purchase the mansion, and loss of reputation.

17 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. Can't but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't but wish him the best and hope he succeed. Not because of whom he is but to make sure government knows if it oversteps it's boundaries and relinquishes sovereignty to USA it would come with a high price. Hope they also jail every national traitor involved.

  2. Re:Kim Dotcom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Okay, so you don't like him. Neither do I, for that matter.

    But is that a reason to violate his rights like that? How'd you like it to have everything taken away from you just because some jerkface government took a disliking to you?

    And that really is the problem. "We don't like you" is not supposed to be a valid reason for the law. No matter how loathsome the defendant.

  3. How Much Was The Pirated Software Worth? by dryriver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Megaupload was a service (deliberately) overflowing with cracked copies of commercial software ranging in price from a few hundred Dollars to a few tens of thousands of Dollars - high end CAD software for example. THAT is largely what attracted millions of people to Megaupload - it was an online place where Kim Dotcom gave away thousands of software companies' products for free and people and also businesses in 196 countries could just "click and download for free". If you were to add together the monetary value of the software downloaded from Megaupload over the years and the financial damage caused, you might end up with far more than the "10 Billion Dollars" Kim claims Megaupload would have been worth today. Kim tried to make himself a billionaire businessmen by nonchalantly giving away other people's property without their permission. That does not excuse the nature of the police action against him, but I suspect that a strong message was intended to be sent to hundreds of other would-be-Kim-Dotcoms who wanted to hole themselves up in poorly governed countries with lax laws and build their very own "Megaupload". Kim Dotcom probably banked on the fact that if sued for piracy, he could claim "I just provide the servers - I'm not responsible for what people upload to them or download from them", and depending on the laws in New Zealand that might actually have worked for him. Kim was in New Zealand because there was no way his native Germany would have allowed the creation of something like Megaupload in the first place - German police would have shut the site down in weeks.

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:How Much Was The Pirated Software Worth? by Kabukiwookie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is bullshit.

      I don't like Kim Dotcom, but Megaupload is in principle nothing different than Dropbox or OneDrive and even though he did not have to comply with the US DMCA law, he actually facilitated the US govt and removed things for which a take-down notice was issued.

      At some point he was asked by the US government to retain files that were 'pirated' on Megaupload's servers, which was later used against him. Even though there is proof that this was done at the behest of the government.

      The reason why Dropbox and OneDrive can exist is the fact that these are US companies. The US, not just the corporations, but its legal enforcer, the US government, will attempt stamp out any competition.

      On top of that, sending a anti-terror squad to his house to arrest him, while a letter from the justice department telling him to come to the nearest police office, would have had a similar, but somewhat less dramatic effect.

      He was meant to be made an example, with John Key sucking up to Obama and his RIAA/MPAA masters.

      As a kiwi I hope he doesn't make progress with his damages suit, but if it does, they should present the bill to hair pulling, too sleazy to be a second card dealer, John Key.

      --
      The mountains of madness have many little plateaus of sanity - Terry Pratchett.
  4. Re:Kim Dotcom by youngone · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't like Kim Dotcom at all, and as I am a New Zealander, I will be helping to pay him if he wins.
    I really, really hope he does win. The New Zealand Police rolled over like a pack of craven lickspittles when the US government called despite the case being terrible (as subsequent court rulings have shown).

    The other thing that smells bad about the whole thing is the way they went in guns drawn as if he was some kind of threat. The police here do not routinely carry firearms, and that's the way we like it. If a couple of detectives had walked up to his front door and knocked, they would have achieved the same end.

    I have often wondered why the video of the armed arrest was shown on the TV news the very night of the raid. Is it appropriate for the police to conduct trial by media?

  5. Re:Bring it on big guy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He pissed off the wrong people. He is learning that justice is a farce. It doesn't matter how right he is, he will receive none, and will only delay the roasting they have every intention of giving him.

    This is how power actually works in the real world. You get pretensions of justice if you basically follow the rules and don't piss off any of the people who actually matter.

    Apart from that, you are cattle, and will be treated as such.

  6. Re:Bring it on big guy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    lol. great! let him get paid so he'll be forced to pay it all to microsoft, etc, when they sue him for damages for piracy that WE ALL KNOW he helped commit.

    Are you forgetting that he didn't violate the laws in his own country, or do you just not care?

  7. Re:Kim Dotcom by SpaceDave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Another Kiwi here in general agreement with you.

    On one hand Dotcom's last business plan was literally to steal revenue from websites like mine - the websites that feed my children. For that I wish a slow painful punishment on him.

    On the other hand I love my country and seeing our government and police roll over and behave like American thug cops was very disturbing.

    I honestly can't decide which is worse - Dotcom winning or the American bullies winning. It's a no-win situation from my perspective.

  8. Re:But we have had a change of government by ColaMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    his criminal activity
    Please define his criminal activity that he has committed under NZ law.

    While you're at it, mull over this hypothetical:

    Homosexuality and the depiction of such is illegal in some countries. If someone performs in and distributes gay porn on the internet, should they be summarily extradited to one of those countries and suffer the consequences if that country demands it?

    --

    You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
    There is a lot of hype here.
  9. Re:Kim Dotcom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which buildings/vaults did Kim break in to? Do you have security footage? How many literal dollars, Kiwi or otherwise, did he make off with? Did one of those cool exploding dye packs color him neon pink?

    FOR THE ONE THOUSANDTH TIME: Copyright infringement =/= Theft.

  10. Re: Bring it on big guy. by mSparks43 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You have the wrong folk hero. Kim Dotcom ran a competitor to dropbox, not thepiratebay.

  11. Re:Kim Dotcom by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Finally someone gets it.

    Just because a career criminal is in conflict with the US government he doesn't suddenly become a saint. When two bullies fight, the proper thing to do is not to root for one of them to win, but to hope they beat each other up badly. There can be two wrong sides to an argument.

    You don't need to decide which is worse - they are both terrible assholes.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  12. Kimmie, here's a tale for you by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Considering that the New Zealand authorities are the ONLY thing that keeps you from getting thrown to the wolves the US are...

    A mouse was fleeing from the cat and came to a cow. The mouse begged "hide me!", which prompted the cow to drop a huge, smelly big cow pat onto the mouse, covering it fully. The cat came along and didn't see the mouse, the mouse on the other hand squeaked and squeaked, happy to be safe from the cat.

    The cat heard the squeaking and picked up the mouse on its tail, cleaned the mouse of the manure and ate it.

    Moral of the story: Not everyone that shits on you is your enemy. Not everyone that pulls you out of the shit is your friend. And when you're up past your neck in manure, shut the fuck up!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  13. Re:Kim Dotcom by houghi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dotcom winning is better. Because than you can solve the problems that he caused. If the bully wins, you will be the bitch forever and for other things as well. Do you want to be a master over your own destiny or a slave to somebody elses?

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  14. Re:Bring it on big guy. by johanw · · Score: 1, Insightful

    And next time he will even more strictly assure he does not do buissiness with any company fro a shithole country like the US.

  15. Re:Kim Dotcom by Gr8Apes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I honestly can't decide which is worse - Dotcom winning or the American bullies winning. It's a no-win situation from my perspective.

    This isn't even in the same book. Kim should definitely win. The rule of law was abused and that should be corrected above all, even if a sleazebag like Kim walks away with lots of money. He'll lose it elsewhere soon enough or actually do something illegal, and then you can use rule of law as justified.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  16. Re:Kim Dotcom by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I honestly can't decide which is worse - Dotcom winning or the American bullies winning. It's a no-win situation from my perspective.

    How about: the Rule of Law winning? Documented norms that apply to everyone from the bum on the street corner to Bill Gates are a win for everyone.[1]

    In this particular case, it means that New Zealand should have followed its own laws, procedures and the treaties to which it is signatory without regard to political pressure brought by the United States. If those laws indicated that Dotcom should be arrested and extradited, well and good. If, as appears to be the case, New Zealand authorities violated their own laws, then Dotcom deserves compensation. I seriously doubt that he deserves 6.8B NZD. In an ideal outcome he ends up exactly where he would have without the illegal police action, which isn't "winning" it's "not losing".

    [1] Yeah, everyone knows that the bum on the street corner and Bill Gates do not get treated the same way, but that just means it's an aspirational goal toward which we should work, not something we should cynically laugh off. The further we are from it, the more seriously we need to take it and the more strongly we need to react when our appointed representatives fail to execute it.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.