11–20 of 43 posts
I don't know if they have any chance of winning, but if they did I can't imagine their being able to rescue the company - even if they did, they surely wouldn't have a hard time showing how much damage the downtime did to them financially. What options would they have?
> The most logical thing to do would be for prosecutors to pay both data hosts using cash from the seized Megaupload bank accounts. Maybe the most logical, but certainly also the most immoral and illegal. That's basically stealing money - why should Megaupload pay for data hosting if it can't use? As long as it's not ruled illegal by the court, it still has the right to use its money just the way it wants.
"""On the flip side, Kim Dotcom will lose the ability to use the data to defend himself after pleading not guilty to piracy.""" Is it me, or is this saying: "We [the author(s) of the page] don't care if he has any evidence proving he is innocent. We just want to see him in jail"
No, in context of the previous sentence: > But just as serious, prosecutors will lose valuable evidence with which to prosecute Megaupload’s owners. they just pointed out that both sides will lose evidence that might help their case.
With the data deleted isn't it like trying to commit someone of murder after the murder weapon mysteriously vanished?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No you are not, I think the same. Now about letting the files be deleted, this is good and bad, legitimate users will lose their data (obviously bad, but not knowing the rules of the storage I'm not sure), evidence will be destroyed (good for pirates, bad for the prossecution, about the defense I'm not sure)
Only legitimate users who did not keep a local copy of their files will lose their data... Unfortunately Google cache has stopped serving the MU terms of service, but this link still has them: http://www.scribd.com/doc/78876728/Megaupload-Condiciones-de... and there it says: "No Warranty You expressly understand and agree that: (a) your use of the Service is at your sole risk. Megaupload Services are provided on an "…
I would have thought it would be evidence tampering if they did delete the data.
I would have thought it would be evidence tampering if they did delete the data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only legitimate users who did not keep a local copy of their files will lose their data... Unfortunately Google cache has stopped serving the MU terms of service, but this link still has them: http://www.scribd.com/doc/78876728/Megaupload-Condiciones-de... and there it says: "No Warranty You expressly understand and agree that: (a) your use of the Service is at your sole risk. Megaupload Services are provided on an "…
As if anyone read the ToS.
> The most logical thing to do would be for prosecutors to pay both data hosts using cash from the seized Megaupload bank accounts. Maybe the most logical, but certainly also the most immoral and illegal. That's basically stealing money - why should Megaupload pay for data hosting if it can't use? As long as it's not ruled illegal by the court, it still has the right to use its money just the way it wants.
I suspect a Judge could just order the data hosts to retain the data, or seize it as evidence through an order to transfer it.
You need to think about the cost to the hosting company. I assume they are holding a lot of data and a large number of servers are tied up doing nothing without payment. They have every right to clean the server and allocate it elsewhere.
If anyone should be footing the bill it should be the prosecutors themselves. They can't take it from MegaUpload. The defense shouldn't pay for it as the data may actually damage their case. You would expect them to be in a stronger position with the proof gone.
You also need to think about the damage to the company. I am sure the prosecutors think they have a slam-dunk but what if they loose? They would have effectively destroyed a multi-million dollar company as a result of a failed prosecution. You could expect a fairly large compensation package in this scenario.