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

Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

informationweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 63 posts

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#11

Post by firefoxman1 »

powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

We all know MegaUpload is the go-to place for pirated content. That's not really in question. The question here is: Is our government following the rules our founding fathers laid out, or do they believe they can cut straight to taking down a company 90% out of their jurisdiction without even following due process.

The whole reason it's a debate is because if we, as citizens, don't watch our government closely when they make controversial moves like this, it easily becomes a very slippery slope. If we let our government get away with something like this, where will it end? Soon, will unwarranted search and seizure will be OK for the FBI, so long as they're after "pirates?" Will we end up like Iran who can execute a programmer 'cause they said so?

Yeah, those are extreme examples, but the reason it is such a slippery slope is because our court's decisions are largely ruled by precedence. If the courts declare the actions taken against MegaUpload legal, it's pretty much "anything goes" for the FBI and DoJ to attack future, perhaps less piracy-oriented or even completely legitimate companies. All the DoJ or FBI has to say is "see, you let us do it last time with MegaUpload."

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#12

Post by learc83 »

powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

What's the cutoff? Is it a 50/50 thing? If my site makes 10% of it's revenue from pirates, should I go to jail? Google makes plenty of money from sites that host counterfeit goods and copyrighted material, should Larry Page go to jail?

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#13

Post by OpieCunningham »

powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

I still don't get what this fuss is about?

Your company looks very suspicious, just look at all these words I wrote down that show you just how suspicious it is.

The words I wrote down are so suspicious, I'm going to take your house and all your money. You can start issuing your own words to get it all back in a few months while I get paperwork ready to keep it from you permanently. Trust me, I'm going to win, I promise. If I didn't think so, would I have taken your house and all your money?

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#15

Post by res0nat0r »

firefoxman1 wrote: post #11
powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

We all know MegaUpload is the go-to place for pirated content. That's not really in question. The question here is: Is our government following the rules our founding fathers laid out, or do they believe they can cut straight to taking down a company 90% out of their jurisdiction without even following due process. The whole reason it's a debate is because if we, as citizens, don't watch our government closely when t…

The arrests overseas we executed in full cooperation with those local countries governments. Not via some rogue operation.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#16

Post by res0nat0r »

OpieCunningham wrote: post #13
powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Your company looks very suspicious, just look at all these words I wrote down that show you just how suspicious it is. The words I wrote down are so suspicious, I'm going to take your house and all your money. You can start issuing your own words to get it all back in a few months while I get paperwork ready to keep it from you permanently. Trust me, I'm going to win, I prom…

PayPal does this all the time.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#17

Post by powertower »

learc83 wrote: post #12
powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

What's the cutoff? Is it a 50/50 thing? If my site makes 10% of it's revenue from pirates, should I go to jail? Google makes plenty of money from sites that host counterfeit goods and copyrighted material, should Larry Page go to jail?

Does your business completely revolve around profiting from the illegal distribution of copyrighted works?

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#18

Post by mpyne »

nostromo wrote: post #3

I really liked this analysis in Salon: http://www.salon.com/2012/01/21/two_lessons_from_the_megaupl... Sorry for the extended quote, but it's a great article. > (1) It’s wildly under-appreciated how unrestrained is the Government’s power to do what it wants, and how little effect these debates over various proposed laws have on that power. Contrary to how it was portrayed, the Obama administration’s threatened veto o…

> And now here is Megaupload being completely destroyed — its website shuttered, its assets seized, ongoing business rendered impossible — based solely on the unproven accusation of Piracy.

It was proven to a grand jury -- that's why they (and not the government) handed down an indictment.

The treatment is actually similar to what would happen to the brick-and-mortar assets of an indicted meth distributor. Normally when a grand jury hands down an indictment then business functions that aid the alleged criminal activity also get shuttered. See http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/hammond/feds-e-c-com... for instance.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#19

Post by lawnchair_larry »

powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

> Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content.

When did we end up in a society where "Do you really think..." is sufficient for judge, jury, and execution?

The fuss is not about megaupload. The fuss is about the MPAA and the RIAA teaming up with law enforcement to make sites and businesses that they don't like disappear from the internet, without due process.

It's been said before, but your whole post describes pre-google youtube. The only difference is they didn't use ads. It's worth noting, the charges against megaupload have nothing to do with any dirty business using ads.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#20

Post by powertower »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #9
powertower wrote: post #7

I still don't get what this fuss is about? Do you really think that MegaUpload generated 175MM from a few users signing up to a paid account, and from ads and scams that were displayed on URLs with legit content. If 95% of their revenue came from copyrighted material being shared (without permission), then I'd say MU was a criminal enterprise and what happened was completely okay. If 5%, than not okay. The supporting…

At what percentage do you draw the line?

When that percentage is the primary driver of your business.
Post reply on HN