Live data from Hacker News

Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

informationweek.com

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#31

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 think the point of this post is that we don't have any reason to believe that the Megaupload takedown is sinister. I happen to agree and don't think it should be downvoted.

The Internet's reaction to these events seems really knee-jerk. Okay, the Megaupload case might have been a horrible abuse of government power. But right now it seems like a routine takedown of a business that supported itself mostly through illegal activity. This is standard operating practice from long before Internet piracy was a thing.

So let's not make a big deal about something which might have been bad, but we have no reason to believe it actually was. If Megaupload turns out to be completely innocent, I'll join the bandwagon. But the grand jury indictment is so damning, it would really have to turn out to be mostly lies.

Meanwhile there are real government abuses, such as the indefinite detention of terror suspects. Can we talk about those instead?

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#32

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…

Hi, Indeed your quick analysis is true: MegaUpload was a platform to download copyrighted things over the internet. But there is a greater principle at play: when should action be taken? The way it is done in democracy and countries where liberty is valued is that the action taken is done after due process. Also and I think this is pretty damn important there are international rules in terms of law and what can be do…

I have only been skimming the MegaUpload discussion and articles, so please understand that I am asking an honest question: in what was was due process not followed?

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#33
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 w…

It is offensive to compare a youtube/dropbox hybrid to a meth distributor. That smells of appeal to emotion.

[deleted]

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#34
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, Indeed your quick analysis is true: MegaUpload was a platform to download copyrighted things over the internet. But there is a greater principle at play: when should action be taken? The way it is done in democracy and countries where liberty is valued is that the action taken is done after due process. Also and I think this is pretty damn important there are international rules in terms of law and what can be do…

I have only been skimming the MegaUpload discussion and articles, so please understand that I am asking an honest question: in what was was due process not followed?

-Megaupload never got to state their case

-There was no trial (and probably will not matter because their site has already lost all its traffic and revenue)

-It is not a US based site

-The majority of its traffic did not come from the US

-There is not much evidence that that they were doing anything illegal by US law. They had a system in place (such as youtube) to remove copyright infringing content if found.

The fact that the majority of their traffic came from pirated content (I am just assuming, no facts) is irrelevant. I am pretty sure that if the media companies put as much effort into reporting copyright violating content on Megaupload as they do on youtube, it would have none.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#35
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 w…

It is offensive to compare a youtube/dropbox hybrid to a meth distributor. That smells of appeal to emotion.

If he wanted to appeal to emotion he'd use murder or child molesting.

When the police decide to arrest someone it's commonplace for all evidence related to the crime to be taken in as well. The fact that said evidence is needed for continued operation of your business is, sorry life's not fair, sucks to be you.

If you're a kinkos accused of committing a heinous crime with your copy machines and they need to take the copy machines as evidence oh well sucks to be you.

If you're a baker accused to knocking people on the head with your rolling pins, oh well no more rolling pins until case is resolved.

If you're an internet company accused of massive piracy and they take the servers, oh well sucks to be you.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I did read that. The police in the respective countries carried out the actual arrests. But since when did the U.S. see themselves the official justice department for the entire world? (I guess the answer is "since WWII") But how many people in the U.S. were being so irreversibly harmed by MegaUpload that our government felt such a need to command this world-wide operation.

> But since when did the U.S. see themselves the official justice department for the entire world? I'm still confused on why you're confused. MU was distributing copyrighted material around the globe. The US gathered evidence, presented that evidence to its partners, partners made the arrest. It's a global network, there are various treaties, and there is cooperation.

Well that's what's in question. Nobody is sure yet, but the question is: did the U.S. overstep their boundaries on this one? That's really all it is on the surface.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#37

I'm still wondering how the US legally obtained copies of Megaupload internal email prior to seizing their servers.

Can't they use the Patriot Act to do that? The Patriot Act was used to catch terrorists, and yet the vast majority of cases in which they used it are drug cases. Ever since 9/11, this whole culture of not following the Constitution, or trying to exploit the loopholes in the laws, has formed. There's no spirit of the law anymore. Now authorities try to find the smallest possible potential loophole to do whatever they…

He's assuming all these emails are on an internal network.

If that were the case it's likely the government gained access from a MU employee they leaned on (there are redacted MU conspirators from the indictment who are apparently not presently being charged meaning they may have been cooperating).

What's more likely it seems is that these emails were sent internationally and the government (armed with a warrant hopefully) used their backdoors to access them. The arrests were apparently timed to conincide with many of the international employees being in NZ for KDC's birthday.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#38
post #4

I'm still wondering how the US legally obtained copies of Megaupload internal email prior to seizing their servers.

What I find far crazier is how does the government get off stealing domain names and servers, taking Megaupload's business dark, and of course encouraging all users to leave, without a conviction. Or any adversarial representation from megaupload, Kim whatever-his-name-is, at all. It feels a lot like Russia: some unaccountable someone in the fbi or doj just decided to steal this company and did so, with the full supp…

So, I brought up something similar to a third year law student last week. As he explained it, when the police arrest a drug dealer, the drugs are seized and tested for evidence. They don't get to keep the drugs, possibly destroy or sell them, etc. while the trial is pending. Likewise, in this case, the servers are going to be seized as evidence pending trial.

He also noted that a grand jury had been impaneled and indicted Megaupload (along with six individuals) and a judge had issued a warrant.

So, it wasn't just someone at the FBI or DOJ. It was a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia that indicted them. It is being prosecuted by a US Attorney. More than 20 search warrants were issued in nine countries. It was investigated by the FBI, the New Zealand Police, Hong Kong Customs, the Public Prosecutor's Office in the Netherlands, London's Metropolitan Police, the German Public Prosecutor, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and others. Megaupload and the named individuals will have a public trial.

I'm not saying that you should like it, but it is different from "feeling a lot like Russia". There's a certain amount of secrecy that happens in a criminal investigation to prevent those being investigated from being able to hide what they're doing (if they're doing something wrong).

I definitely had your reaction when I found out that the site was down and they hadn't had a chance to defend themselves. I think most of us see this as a civil offense - in which case, the seizure might not be justified (I use "might" because I'm not a lawyer). However, if you look at criminal offenses (bank robbery, drugs, gun running, art theft, etc.) you wouldn't expect the accused to keep that property pending trial.

We'll see how this plays out. If you don't believe what they did should be a criminal offense, even if they're "guilty" of it, you're not going to agree with any of what the governments are doing. You're going to think that they should be sued similar to what happened to YouTube and have the chance to defend themselves while operating. That's an argument to change the law and you won't be satisfied by the process no matter how above board it is. And I'm not saying that you're wrong - Megaupload does seem a lot more innocuous (even if wrong) than what we generally consider racketeering or conspiracy. I mean, if Megaupload continued, you're not going to have some kid getting addicted to crack on the street or gangs getting guns and causing violence in the community - some rich media company potentially loses a little profit. And I think that reality makes a strong argument that maybe seizure wasn't necessary. However, it's also important to know that there was a lot of due process in a lot of jurisdictions with a lot of different law enforcement working together on this one. It wasn't just seized because some unanswerable someone in a random agency decided they wanted to. Likewise, there will be a trial.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#39

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…

We all know MegaUpload is the go-to place for pirated content.

We all know that the west side of the Chicago is the place to go to buy drugs. That must mean that everyone living west of Halsted Street is a drug dealer and should be put in jail without a trial.

Post reply on HN