Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 357 posts

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#101

Post by rquantz »

I'm interested in the relationship between this argument and the one going on elsewhere on HN today concerning 37signals' looking up the name of their 100 millionth file in their logs. For MegaUpload, the implication seems to be (from the government if not from commenters here) that, on top of complying with DMCA requests (obviously there are also questions about whether they did even that), MegaUpload should be monitoring files that its users upload, looking for copyrighted content. On the other hand, some people reacting to the 37signals incident seem to think that they should not even have access to the names of files, let alone the actual content.

I'm not sure where I stand on this, and forgive me if I've mischaracterized anyone's arguments, but I do think these two discussion have bearing on each other, and I want to hear what others think about it.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#103

Post by davorak »

AlexMuir wrote: post #39

At the risk of megadownvoting here... Megaupload never complied with DMCA requests - I made several as part of some research and never received any response. The site charged for access to, and provided advertising around, pirated content. The site paid people (users/staff - it's a fine line) to provide popular content. It went to extraordinary lengths to hide the identity of its operators. Now if people believe that…

Your argument blurs distinction between users submitting pirated content and employees at the request of management. They are two very different cases if you have evidence that was not in article please share, otherwise the amount of revulsion in your post seems out of proportion with the current evidence.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#104

Post by RandallBrown »

The_Sponge wrote: post #59
AlexMuir wrote: post #39

At the risk of megadownvoting here... Megaupload never complied with DMCA requests - I made several as part of some research and never received any response. The site charged for access to, and provided advertising around, pirated content. The site paid people (users/staff - it's a fine line) to provide popular content. It went to extraordinary lengths to hide the identity of its operators. Now if people believe that…

1GB per file of reliable, fast storage. You can bet we passed larger files over it.

you weren't annoyed by all the spammy advertising?

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#105

Post by rbanffy »

cyanbane wrote: post #22

From DOJ Presser: For example, when notified by a rights holder that a file contained infringing content, the indictment alleges that the conspirators would disable only a single link to the file, deliberately and deceptively leaving the infringing content in place to make it seamlessly available to millions of users to access through any one of the many duplicate links available for that file. I assume the DMCA spec…

More interestingly, if I host a lot of files on a file-deduped storage system, where there is only a single copy to any given file with many different directory entries pointing to it, if user A has a movie he hold rights to and user B hosts the same file (ending up on the same physical file connected to a different directory entry) without having the right to do it and user A sends me a takedown notice, will I really be forced to remove the file A had because I have to actually remove the file, not only the means of accessing it?

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#106

Post by iamandrus »

muuh-gnu wrote: post #82
surement wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Megaupload is Swizz based, and it went down.

> Megaupload is Swizz based No, they were Hong Kong based. Rapidshare (Switzerland/Germany) has already been sued there, and won, so their (current) business model, for the time being, is not accessible for american "shock and awe" justice.

No, I think he was joking because Swizz Beats is/was the CEO of MU.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#108

Post by davorak »

rbanffy wrote: post #73
AlexMuir wrote: post #39

At the risk of megadownvoting here... Megaupload never complied with DMCA requests - I made several as part of some research and never received any response. The site charged for access to, and provided advertising around, pirated content. The site paid people (users/staff - it's a fine line) to provide popular content. It went to extraordinary lengths to hide the identity of its operators. Now if people believe that…

> It is, pure and simple, a piracy site full of pirated material. Yes, but it was also full of absolutely legal content uploaded by law-abiding users. Many people don't have the expertise needed to set up a file server and not everything is small enough to be attached to an e-mail. > I am also astounded that people on HN are calling this a legitimate business. As I understand, they had problems of DMCA compliance. If…

Unless they were paying their employees to knowingly submit pirated content, however I unaware evidence in support of this.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#109

Post by kahirsch »

sophacles wrote: post #83
earbitscom wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is pirates in quotes? The article says these guys made over $150M in half a dozen years breaking international treaties and operating illegally. Stopping them is exactly what the FBI's job is. It's not like they're going after jay walkers.

Probably because: pi·ra·cy/ˈpīrəsē/ Noun: 1. The practice of attacking and robbing ships at sea. 2. A similar practice in other contexts, esp. hijacking. Is not the same as "making a copy of something in violation of copyright rules".

The word "piracy" has been used for "unauthorized reproduction or use of an invention or work of another" since the 1650s, according to the OED.
Post reply on HN