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

201–210 of 1001 posts

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

#201

Post by account42 »

finikytou wrote: post #29
popcalc wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. "Two weeks later on 20 January, Dotcom, Finn Batato, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk were arrested in Coatesville, New Zealand by the New Zealand Police, in an armed raid on Dotcom's house involving 76 officers and two helicopters. Seized assets included eighteen luxury cars, large TVs, works of art and US$175 million in cash. Dotcom's bank accounts were frozen, denying him access to 64 bank accounts wor…

how old are you? did you live through the megaupload era? for a few years it was ubiquitous and def a cashcow machine

Since when is file hosting a cash cow?

But no matter how big/small he is, I don't approve of other countries extraditing their citizens to the US for things they did while physically outside the US. Especially when the US wouldn't do the same when it comes to its citizens.

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

#202

Post by dialup_sounds »

orra wrote: post #60
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish people wouldn't cheer when criminals evade accountability.

The fair thing to do would be to bring proceedings against him the New Zealand. Extraditing him to the U.S. isn't accountability: it's a flex.

Dotcom declined that option. His co-defendants plead guilty to NZ charges instead of being extraditioned.

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

#203

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #140
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without cutting in the existing rights holders properly. That's the killer, right there. "existing rights holders" is a big deal, and one that has been ignored by tech bros for a long time. As a [former] artist, and [former] musician, I can say that the tech industry has been cooking the Goose that Lays the Golden Eggs. The opportunity for individual financial and ego success is a huge driver for modern popular art…

Destroying commercial art culture really might not be a bad thing. The overwhelming majority of visual artists, writers and musicians don’t make money from their art, and would continue doing it even if the big corporate parasites went bankrupt.

> The overwhelming majority of visual artists, writers and musicians don’t make money from their art

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

The overwhelming majority don't make big money, but many, many creatives make a living on their art, and a lot of them are OK with being fairly low-paid (I know quite a few). They do what they love, and get paid enough to keep doing it. As a musician friend of mine says "You know what's great? I get to play music for people, and then they pay me for it, when I'm done!". He is not a huge rock star, but does well enough to tour around the country.

People tend to sneer at creatives, thinking of them as "parasites," or "doing something that anyone can do, so why should they be paid?"

I can tell you that I appreciate having a trained professional designer, help me with my software design. They can do something like fart out a logo in five minutes, that can become one of the most significant assets a company has. That's a really valuable skill.

We'll have to see if AI can actually replace that. It probably will, for many contexts. It's gotta be better than some of the efforts I see, by engineers that think they are creative, but aren't.

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

#204

Post by SXX »

popcalc wrote: post #96
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

File sharing is not a crime. IP holder damages should take in consideration what the actual buying power of pirates is, not just multiply downloads by dvd costs, and copyright laws need a huge reform. He's a modern day robin hood, people would prefer him to win over eg. disney... and disney is not doing itself a favour these days :)

Sharing CSAM definitely is a crime. Nuances exist. >He's a modern day robin hood He's run or partnered on multiple pump-and-dumps for the better part of 30 years, some of which capitalized on his fanbase.

> He's run or partnered on multiple pump-and-dumps for the better part of 30 years, some of which capitalized on his fanbase.

Yeah and there is Logan Paul living in US running pump and dumps, scams and other things. But he look nice and popular so he'll continue to do it without any prosecution. As well as many other YouTube personalities. After all they pay taxes to US so they can do it freely.

Again, not protecting Dotcom or like him as person, but he is not some war criminal to justify this kind of effort US put into trying to get him.

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

#205

Post by account42 »

diggan wrote: post #20
throwaway48540 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still a human. He just shared songs on the the internet. He's treated like a war criminal.

Maybe I don't know the full story, but as far as I understand, it seems like they (Megaupload) were ignoring DMCA takedown requests for a long time, was aware there was a ton of piracy on the site and didn't give any indication whatsoever that they were even trying to react to it by banning accounts that were uploading infringing content. I don't necessarily agree you should be taken away from your home-country becau…

So? If that's a crime under NZ law he can be prosecuted there. If it isn't then too bad for the US.

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

#206

Post by ToValueFunfetti »

moomin wrote: post #165
curiousObject wrote: post #120

Kim DC is not a likeable or admirable person, but this vindictive pursuit seems even worse. It appears very similar to the treatment of Ross Ulbricht, Assange, maybe even Snowden? These are the equivalent of white collar crimes (typical massive frauds from the finance sector, etc) but they are getting a blue collar punishment of decades in jail that a successful and persistent street drug dealer could receive, NOT th…

I remain unconvinced that the relative punishments of the two categories is either pragmatic or fair, mind you.

I'd go along with unfair, but it does seem pragmatic to keep criminals who would harm anyone in striking distance away from the public, while only keeping criminals who would harm corporate and investor interests away from executive positions and boardrooms.

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

#208

Post by yieldcrv »

tedivm wrote: post #162
curiousObject wrote: post #120

Kim DC is not a likeable or admirable person, but this vindictive pursuit seems even worse. It appears very similar to the treatment of Ross Ulbricht, Assange, maybe even Snowden? These are the equivalent of white collar crimes (typical massive frauds from the finance sector, etc) but they are getting a blue collar punishment of decades in jail that a successful and persistent street drug dealer could receive, NOT th…

One of these things is not like the other. Ross Ulbricht was part of a murder for hire scheme, and was not a whistle blower or anything close to a reporter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht#Murder-for-hire_...

You realize that the moderators in question were Secret Service and DEA agents creating fictional scenarios to line their own pockets

Their involvement and indictment was withheld during the Ross trial and they went to prison for that

Ross was not charged for these scenes, the other district court is saving face by calling it redundant and dropping it but it’s really a shaky case

It shouldn’t have been brought up in sentencing, but there is no accountability in a judge doing so

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/news/cyber-vault/2019-12-13/silk-r...

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

#209

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

bobajeff wrote: post #170
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without cutting in the existing rights holders properly. That's the killer, right there. "existing rights holders" is a big deal, and one that has been ignored by tech bros for a long time. As a [former] artist, and [former] musician, I can say that the tech industry has been cooking the Goose that Lays the Golden Eggs. The opportunity for individual financial and ego success is a huge driver for modern popular art…

>The opportunity for individual financial and ego success is a huge driver for modern popular art culture (for better and for worse). If we take that away, guess what happens? No one wants to do it, anymore. I don't know about financial success but I think losing ego building as artist incentives might not be a bad thing. Maybe it's an unhealthy focus and probably shouldn't be supported. Intuitively, I think those ki…

The ego stuff can be sickening, but it is definitely a draw. Some of the best musicians and artists, ever, have been rather appalling personalities. I won't go into naming names.

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

#210

Post by ineedaj0b »

bee_rider wrote: post #197
curiousObject wrote: post #120

Kim DC is not a likeable or admirable person, but this vindictive pursuit seems even worse. It appears very similar to the treatment of Ross Ulbricht, Assange, maybe even Snowden? These are the equivalent of white collar crimes (typical massive frauds from the finance sector, etc) but they are getting a blue collar punishment of decades in jail that a successful and persistent street drug dealer could receive, NOT th…

White collar crimes should be punished with the same vigor as blue collar ones. White collar crimes mostly steal money, at scale. Insufficient money is a huge cause of suffering—people don’t get to retire at early, they and their kids don’t get the opportunities they would have had otherwise. You can be a drug dealer that doesn’t hurt anybody.

No. Drug dealers always hurt people - we have the word Pharmacist for good drug dispensers.
Post reply on HN