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

Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 1001 posts

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#481

Post by csallen »

tim333 wrote: post #215
stainablesteel wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not really, his website was based on hong kong, this is a fight against america playing world police, which i'm on board with they have no business going after just a single man so fervently, he's a foreign national and the websites weren't based in the US

He was predominantly stealing US intellectual property, films, TV shows and music and the like. And unlike say normal use of bittorrent, making a lot of money off it. And being the largest player doing that. I'm not sure about the morals but you can certainly understand financially why they've gone after him.

Minor nitpick, but he was not stealing, he was infringing copyrights.

To "steal" is to take another's rivalrous property without permission, such that you now possess it, but they no longer have it.

To "infringe a copyright" is to make and distribute a copy of another person's work without their permission.

Both illegal, but very different things. What targets of copyright infringement are losing is not their property, but the potential extra profit they could have made if they'd retained their monopoly on the ability to copy and distribute their work.

Stealing is illegal because it deprives people of their property. Copyright infringement is illegal because (theoretically) it leads to a world where people are less incentivized to create things because they won't be able to profit as much.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#482

Post by lawn »

DSingularity wrote: post #144
Tade0 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tweet about opposing war in ukraine arguing that NATO is outdated and not in the interest of Ukrainians? Oh pay no attention to him -- he is on the communist payroll. Hailing from a country that joined NATO in the 90s I wouldn't brand a person arguing this as being on communist payroll - just ignorant beyond measure. Russia has been a consistently bad neighbour for decades now and I for one am happy that in my coun…

[flagged]

> What would have been better for Ukraine? To find a way to make peace with Russia or to fight it for a decade? And please dont say this is for "democracy", "freedom", and "liberty".

The option is to let Russia freely commit genocide with rape, murder, and terrorism.

Only to then steer their target to the next country and do exactly the same.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#483

Post by gliiics »

preaching5271 wrote: post #24

I appreciate Kim Dotcom for running MegaUpload and later Mega, in a time when the internet was younger and wilder. Also for his pirate spirit and "stick it to the man" attitude. But everything has a limit, specifically his resistance against the law, even if he hid it behind virtues. I think it's clear for everybody that one cannot get away with this kind of stuff, once governments get involved. Isn't it wiser to sto…

It's not always black and white; let's be honest, yes, Kim Dotcom was probably more about piracy than freedom of whatever simply because that's where his money was. But:

> Isn't it wiser to stop at some point, and find other stuff to do, even if all your nerves say otherwise?

Do you think this should apply to, say, Snowden, Assange, and whistleblowers in general?

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#484

Post by Ringz »

londons_explore wrote: post #478
kube-system wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube is way more successful than Megaupload or Napster. The difference is that YouTube went above and beyond to comply with the law and Megaupload and Napster didn't.

With the right third party search engines, you can find almost any full movie on YouTube. They don't have to stop pirates, just keep them in the shadows.

Which search engines are these? I ask for a friend who is doing research in this area.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#485

Post by damagednoob »

mise_en_place wrote: post #452

Much like Napster, his only real crime was success. If nobody or barely anyone used Megaupload, he wouldn’t have been in as much trouble. He paved the way for streaming and digital distribution of media. Megavideo in particular had the highest encoding rates possible at the time, even superior to YouTube.

> If nobody or barely anyone used Megaupload, he wouldn’t have been in as much trouble.

In a world where opportunity costs exist, as they do for law enforcement, this makes sense?

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#486

Post by FredPret »

sensanaty wrote: post #458
stalfosknight wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If not the US, then who do you suggest could plausibly lead (I would even say prop up) the free world and the global economy?

Catering to trillion dollar media companies is not exactly my idea of freedom.

Does their size make the moral situation any different?

Many of these are public companies that anyone can buy shares in. Tons of people have part of their life savings in US stocks - these people all own a slice of the rights to various works of art.

Are you saying if they own a large enough amount of it, it's OK to ignore their rights?

As an aside, here's a list of public companies [0]. 7-8 of them are "trillion dollar companies", and only one (Apple) has a stake in media (that I know of) and that's a very minor part of their business. The media business is not a very good one to be in.

[0] https://companiesmarketcap.com/

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#487

Post by hinkley »

skullone wrote: post #459
mise_en_place wrote: post #452

Much like Napster, his only real crime was success. If nobody or barely anyone used Megaupload, he wouldn’t have been in as much trouble. He paved the way for streaming and digital distribution of media. Megavideo in particular had the highest encoding rates possible at the time, even superior to YouTube.

Except, he paid people for, and promoted the upload of copywrited works. He knowingly participated and basically tailored his products to pirating. Some people love him, but he will see his day in court apparently, but no one wants to even deal with him because he's gone crazy.

We had a friend who threw amazing parties because he had this sort of transgressive sense of humor. He got rich, retired young, and I fully believe that the professional peer pressure was the main thing keeping his screws tight because he just fell apart over three years. At one point he was telling my spouse he was trying to make himself crazy. Congratulations bud, you already are. Sane people don’t do that.

Predatory people took advantage of his behavior and generosity, and by thirty he was involuntarily committed, his mother given power of attorney. My spouse was the person feeding his mom the information she needed to see to intervene. All he had left was the equity in his condo and $50k.

I’m not sure I believed the deranged millionaire trope until I met this guy. And I watch my younger friends and acquaintances for signs of mania that masquerade as out of box or transgressive thinking.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#488

Post by lenerdenator »

gliiics wrote: post #483
preaching5271 wrote: post #24

I appreciate Kim Dotcom for running MegaUpload and later Mega, in a time when the internet was younger and wilder. Also for his pirate spirit and "stick it to the man" attitude. But everything has a limit, specifically his resistance against the law, even if he hid it behind virtues. I think it's clear for everybody that one cannot get away with this kind of stuff, once governments get involved. Isn't it wiser to sto…

It's not always black and white; let's be honest, yes, Kim Dotcom was probably more about piracy than freedom of whatever simply because that's where his money was. But: > Isn't it wiser to stop at some point, and find other stuff to do, even if all your nerves say otherwise? Do you think this should apply to, say, Snowden, Assange, and whistleblowers in general?

Whistleblowing is not the same as hosting pirated material.

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#489

Post by [deleted] »

mise_en_place wrote: post #452

Much like Napster, his only real crime was success. If nobody or barely anyone used Megaupload, he wouldn’t have been in as much trouble. He paved the way for streaming and digital distribution of media. Megavideo in particular had the highest encoding rates possible at the time, even superior to YouTube.

[deleted]

Re: Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

#490

Post by kylebenzle »

nkmnz wrote: post #464
halyconWays wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no evidence that piracy causes any type of harm to these multi-trillion dollar American entertainment conglomerates. Moving heaven and earth to extract a citizen from another country using the power of the state, and drag him before their feet is tyrannical.

Here's your evidence: I would have bought House on DVD 15 years ago if there hadn't been the option to stream it illegally. You might object this evidence by telling me that you bought all seasons of House only because you had been streaming it illegally before, and that you wouldn't have done so without previously streaming it – but in most jurisdictions, this kind of "business procurement" does not cancel out the h…

I think what they are saying is there is no way to compare a good when it's free to when there is even a nominal cost.

My "counter evidence" to your example could be something like: I bought House on DVD 10 years ago because my friend who had pirated it told me it was a good show to checkout.

Post reply on HN