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

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#41

Post by awj »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #19
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…

> 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.

Since when is "equipment subpoenaed via grand jury indictment" not due process? I'm all for arguing if what's happening should/should not be allowed, but let's at least get the facts straight on "what's happening" first.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#42

Post by pyre »

dsthysd wrote: post #34
scott_s wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fa…

  > -Megaupload never got to state their case
That usually happens at the trial. This is like saying that my life was disrupted when the police arrested me, because I should have had a chance to state my case before being arrested and indicted.

  > -There was no trial (and probably will not matter
  > because their site has already lost all its traffic
  > and revenue)
The site was taken down because the servers were confiscated as part of a pending trial. I don't understand the 'no trial' business.

  > -It is not a US based site
They had servers in the US, which established a US presence, and they are accused of massive copyright infringements against US companies who have all/most of their copyrights based in the US.

  > -The majority of its traffic did not come from the US
Do you have numbers to back this up?

  > -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 government plans to prosecute the employees and send them to jail. I'm pretty sure that they wouldn't be attempting this if they had little to no evidence. Not that I believe that the US government are saints, but they usually don't bring cases that have little chance of winning. The evidence will out itself at trial. Have you read any of the requisite legal documentation on this?

  > 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.
If you read the court filings, you would have realized that MegaUpload limited the number of filings allow per day. The content companies were hitting that limit and requesting that it be increased/removed. If there are a million infringing files and you only get to take down 2500/day, it's going to take awhile, no? Especially considering that the number of infringing files/links would not be static.

The government is claiming that MegaUpload purposefully restricted the number of takedowns because they knew that they needed the infringing material to bolster their growth (and allowing all infringing files to be taken down would hurt them).

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#43

Post by jean_valjean »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #21
mpyne wrote: 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.

It is offensive to describe MegaUpload as a 'youtube/dropbox hybrid'. That intellectually dishonest comparison is an appeal to emotion.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#44

Post by tikhonj »

Steko wrote: post #35
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I can't help thinking that this exact logic (life's not fair, sucks to be you) can just as easily be used to justify crime as law enforcement. Oh, you didn't realize this was a pyramid scheme? Sucks to be you, life's not fair.

I really do not think it is a constructive argument.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#45

Post by comicjk »

Steko wrote: post #35
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In case you haven't noticed yet, digital goods aren't like physical goods. The feds could have made a complete copy of the Megaupload servers while still leaving some or all of them running.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#47

Post by earl »

mdasen wrote: post #38
earl wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ind…

Nothing you said contradicted the fact that an unaccountable person in the government broke their business without any opportunity for megaupload to defend themselves. And so it is exactly like Russia. Unless you think that a grand jury indictment -- and let's not pretend, prosecutors are more than capable of indicting a street post, or a ham sandwhich [1] -- should give the doj or fbi the ability to destroy a business.

Further, I'm making no claims about whether megaupload's conduct should be criminal; I'm merely claiming that permitting unaccountable people to destroy companies before any conviction or before megaupload has had any chance to defend itself is bullshit.

So no, there wasn't anything like real due process.

   [1] "As a practical matter, a federal grand jury will almost always
   return an indictment presented to it by a prosecutor. This is the basis
   for Judge Saul Wachler's famous saying that a prosecutor can get a
   grand jury to 'indict a ham sandwich.'" — Solomon L. Wisenberg,
   "Federal Grand Jury Crash Course"
      
   http://www.wisenberglaw.com/White-Collar-Criminal-Defense/Grand-Jury-Investigations.shtml

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#48

Post by lancewiggs »

mpyne wrote: post #18
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 w…

It may have been proven to a grand jury in the USA, but not in courts in the rest of the world, and certainly not here in NZ. This is punishment before guilt is proven or even contested.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#49

Post by Steko »

comicjk wrote: post #45
Steko wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In case you haven't noticed yet, digital goods aren't like physical goods. The feds could have made a complete copy of the Megaupload servers while still leaving some or all of them running.

In case you haven't noticed, the legal world isn't in a giant rush to throw away centuries of precedent just so Megaupload's allegedly law breaking servers can keep running.

Re: Megaupload Takedown Questioned By Users, Lawyers

#50

Post by Steko »

tikhonj wrote: post #44
Steko wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I can't help thinking that this exact logic (life's not fair, sucks to be you) can just as easily be used to justify crime as law enforcement. Oh, you didn't realize this was a pyramid scheme? Sucks to be you, life's not fair. I really do not think it is a constructive argument.

I'm just explaining the way it works and that there's nothing special about megaupload or new happening here:

Break the law and the police are going to take your stuff. If you used that stuff for your business oh well sucks to be you.

You may think that is a bad system and have some great ideas for liberating us from the bad police but those ideas are no more valid or invalid today then they were 5, 10, 20, 50 or 100 years ago.

Post reply on HN