Live data from Hacker News

Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

online.wsj.com

241–250 of 357 posts

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My thoughts exactly. And, the day after SOPA/PIPA blackouts feds take down a site some were using as a SOPA/PIPA poster child, that generates headlines on FOX like this: Feds say 7 from Megaupload.com ran massive worldwide piracy website http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/01/19/feds-shut-down-fil...

Yeah, its the "day after the blackout" which I think is a favor to the MPAA/RIAA folks. "Let's erase these 'sopa is bad' stories from the nightly news and replace them with a good evil pirates tale."

I "like" how the news is plastered all over the Internet that the "government" has taken down Megaupload. Like small children, fascinated by the sock puppet, forgetting the hand that actually moves it.

It's very clear now, we live in a plutocracy. Big corporations are above the law in every single way that matters.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's disgusting that you chose to reappropriate that quote in this context. If you read the indictment, it's clear that this was the purposeful monetization of pirated material. It wasn't a few users who uploaded some things. It was a criminal site, operating in bad faith, committing a multitude of crimes. You should seriously be ashamed of yourself for comparing those famous words to seven criminals (who have strong…

I think you don't realize that my comment was a response to noonespecial: First they come for the sites that are 90/10 pirate to legit. ... When will it be too much? When does it become unreasonable? So, I think the quotation was very fitting for the occasion, because it means exactly that. They may start taking people in custody because of a seemingly legit reason (in this case, copyright infringement, in the case o…

[deleted]

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#243

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…

>I am also astounded that people on HN are calling this a legitimate business. What was its business? Was it being used to distribute Wikipedia archives? To host videos of people's kids singing? No - it was hosting pirated content. Not torrents, not links. AVI files of films. AND THEN CHARGING FOR ACCESS. So by your definition, Dropbox is an illegitimate business because I stuck my (purchased) copy of The Dark Knight…

Android ROMs from XDA-developers are often distributed there.

E.g. http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=957652

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#245
post #229

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…

Let's analyze the propaganda speak here: > Megaupload never complied with DMCA requests Based on not only the experience of others, but the claims of the DoJ itself, this is clearly false. > The site charged for access to, and provided advertising around, pirated content. This is true in the same way YouTube provides advertising around, and your friendly local ISP provides access to, pirated content. > The site paid…

>> It went to extraordinary lengths to hide the identity of its operators.

> How many legitimate business don't have their owners wrapped in layers of corporations strewn around the globe? Nothing particularly unique or illegal here.

I might be slightly off-topic here, but I think this is a good opportunity to point out the danger of falling for a "Halo or Horns" fallacy.

Wikipedia doesn't compare the Halo effect with the Horns effect but it does have an article about the Halo effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect

Simply put, if you believe one aspect of a person (or thing) to be bad, you're more likely to judge its other aspects in a negative light. Similarly, one good characteristic can make you more likely to judge the other aspects in a better light.

You can see examples of Halo vs Horns all the time if you look for it. It's very common when mob psychology comes into play, and often causes a change in the status quo.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#246
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm more upset with the precedent than I am with the particular site. I've never made a DMCA request against them, but my understanding from the DoJ presser was that they did comply with the letter- They removed the links that were sent. They just didn't necessarily remove all other links to the same file. When you filed yours, did you follow legal procedure, and go through their registered DMCA agent with paper mail…

This sounds like a somewhat clever loophole around DMCA requirements. Host the same/duplicate file at an approximately infinite number of different URLs and take them down one by one as DMCA requests come in for specific links. This seems like a someone complicated loophole to write around because even if the DMCA was changed to allow takedowns of media and it's duplicates (if it doesn't already) you could combinator…

DMAA safe harbor only applies if you are not aware of the infringing content. If you have a bunch of links to the same file and only take down one then you have no protection under DMCA and the standard 'greater-than $3k damages then go to jail' applies.

There is also a red flags test. If a reasonable person would be aware that the site is hosting files that infringe then it's not protected. And also you can't get direct financial benefit from it, you have to close accounts of repeat offenders, and some other restrictions.

Basically everybody knew Megaupload hosted warez, there were red flags, megaupload didn't take down links they knew were warez, and they made money off of it. Case closed. There may have also been legitimate use of megaupload, but they weren't covered by safe harbor and them being shut down is the law working as intended.

> you could combinatorially add random junk into the stream and circumvent that as well.

One could, like how people flip/speed up/record tv to get around youtube blocking, but it would take a lot of work and dedication to keep uploading your 500+ MiB movie rips over and over again.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#247
There's a lot to untangle here. The most important question raised by this is "So why is SOPA/PIPA necessary again?".

It's pretty clear that the main use for MegaUpload is for distributing pirated works. The site is essentially the equivalent of Box.net except instead of storing your company business plan in word format everyone puts up the newest movies, music, etc.

But they're based in Homg Kong so where does the US get off shutting it down? Maybe it was a coordinated effort between governments in which case you don't have to agree with it but you can't say it wasn't legal. But then we have to ask if the US is abusing their "power" by pressuring other nations to bend to their will in cases like this.

Whether you're pro-piracy, anti-piracy, pro-copyright or anti-copyright the fact is that it's still the law and it's really hard to believe that MegaUpload is really on the up and up. The only thing they have is a disclaimer that gives them plausible deniability. Other than that they're basically a version of the pirate bay except they actually host the infringing files.

Defending MegaUpload is like a bunch of pot-heads who read a story about how a weed dealer gets arrested for selling pot. Their stance on the legality of marijuana is irrelevant because it's currently illegal and the authorities were within their rights. Even if you throw a wrinkle into the story wherein the hypothetical dealer is arrested at a border crossing in a foreign nation, the point still stands as the odds are that selling pot is illegal in most other countries too save for some exceptions but let's not be pedantic about it.

It's the same here in this case. Whatever your position on copyright and piracy is, it's irrelevant because it's been the law for a long time now.

But everything I just said is completely beside the point we should be really focusing on which is, if the authorities are able to shut down infringing sites already then why do we need more laws like SOPA? They already have the power to go after the major pains in their collective sides so more laws are totally unnecessary. SOPA-like laws may make it more convenient for them to do this sort of thing but we can't let that happen. They just want a system where they don't have to go through the "inconvenience" of actually gathering evidence and building a case. That's the long and short of it.

I'd also like to note how extremely biased this article was. They took a shot at Google and implied that our side of the debate is in favor of piracy. I think a lot of us are but we need to get off that because it's hurting our argument. I personally and against piracy and for copyright to a certain extent (I think copyright extends too far as it is but support the idea of it if it were implemented better) but I'm also absolutely against SOPA and PIPA. A person can hold those two views.

So let's put aside our piracy/copyright stances for now because we're totally playng into their game and they're using it against us. Instead we should be asking why we need SOPA if the Feds can already adequately shut down "pirate sites" and talking more about how these laws do away with due process and articulate it in a way that relates to non-techies.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#248

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…

Add me to the list of people who used the site for legitimate purposes only. I used it to send things that wouldn't fit on my VPS's storage, and were too big for any of the other digital lockers.

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#249

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's better to allow these sites to continue to exist and demand that they comply with the requests than take them down with the FBI or whatever law enforcement agency. The precedent is far too dangerous. It's so dangerous that it could make PIPA / SOPA look like little cute puppies. The moral issues of being a pirate or not being a pirate and of allowing or not allowing piracy to exist are more of a "feel good, don'…

It's funny how people are raging against the "government" who shut down Megaupload, when really the feds were merely the instrument.

The real decision was made in some corporate office somewhere - the real owners of the weak little puppet called "government".

Re: Megaupload down, FBI Charges Seven With Online Piracy

#250
post #229

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…

Let's analyze the propaganda speak here: > Megaupload never complied with DMCA requests Based on not only the experience of others, but the claims of the DoJ itself, this is clearly false. > The site charged for access to, and provided advertising around, pirated content. This is true in the same way YouTube provides advertising around, and your friendly local ISP provides access to, pirated content. > The site paid…

The other side of this SOPA battle is playing us like a fiddle. This WSJ article took our stance (it's not my stance but the majority here's stance) and attacked us with it by saying we're pro-piracy. That doesn't go over well outside this community. If we just got off the copyright/privacy topic for a minute and focused on the big picture we could fight more effectively.

Point out that SOPA/PIPA are unnecessary because the Feds are shutting down sites just fine without it. Point out that due process is done away with by SOPA. Etc.

They want us to be talking about copyright and piracy but this isn't about those things at all! This is total misdirection by the other side and we all just played into it. What this is really about is the government and entertainment industry trying to grab the power to do the things they've already been doing without having to go do all that annoying stuff like gathering evidence, building a case, or holding a trial. For being such a big group of smart people I'm surprised I haven't heard anyone else point this out before.

Post reply on HN