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

251–260 of 1001 posts

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

#251

Post by EasyMark »

e40 wrote: post #166
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…

Bernie Madoff got real prison time for his white collar crimes.

I assume they’re talking about hiding being the corporate veil and just getting a slap on the wrist. Embezzlers are caught and sentenced all the time but people on the board of directors get away with a fine and finger waggle for similar activities

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

#252

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

biztos wrote: post #184
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…

Large TVs? I wonder what the threshold is for assets worth seizing. Anything under about 100” is going to cost more to seize than it’s worth. If the kitchen is full of AllClad do they seize the cookware?

At least with local departments, yes police will seize kitchen appliances if they are high dollar. Then it all goes up for auction. Maybe a cop likes the look of it, picks it up for pennies on the dollar at the auction. Maybe no one bids and it all gets junked. While the primary purpose of civil forfeiture is to seize valuables, there are sometimes secondary concerns... the cops like to fuck with certain people, and if they can just make them paupers by taking their belongings then that alone can be enough motivation. Paperwork's pretty light because jewelry or cash never has lawyers to defend itself.

Feds seem to be a bit more discriminating, tending towards larger amounts of cash, bullion, vehicles, and real estate. But I've seen more than a few news articles over the years where they seized property you might call petty.

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

#253

Post by underlipton »

earthnail wrote: post #169
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I believe the implications are a bit different. It takes a lot of time to learn to make music. If you can’t make it as a famous artists (the odds of which are about as high as becoming a football star), you previously still had the option to use your music skills to make money with boring work: music for ads for example. That’s going away. Now it’s becoming a lot more like professional sports: either you make it, or…

It'd seem to me that a society that values art would find a way to keep artists secure economically while letting as many people as possible enjoy their work. I tend to think of piracy as a scapegoat for the draining of the working and middle class's purchasing power. Napster and Spotify came along as people were beginning to find it prohibitively expensive to drop $20 on an album. People would pay if they could (some do, if vinyl sales are anything to go by).

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

#254

Post by BLKNSLVR »

swozey wrote: post #241

Are any of the people who were arrested for RIAA/MPAA violations still imprisoned? That was such a weird time to be a kid. Scared if I downloaded a Greenday mp3 my parents would get arrested for piracy and I'd never be able to work in computers.

Make sure your own kids' curiosity isn't stifled by such fears.

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

#255

Post by kspacewalk2 »

snapcaster wrote: post #79
DSingularity wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the classic. Everybody who opposes american foreign policy is labeled. Tweet about opposing the genocide in gaza? Oh dont listen to him -- he is pro khamas. 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. I understand when leaders in politics or industry make these character-assasination atta…

>I understand when leaders in politics or industry make these character-assasination attacks as they do it for their own interests (political or economical) but why do you do it? Thanks for articulating this, similar idea behind my sibling comment. Sadly i think the conclusion is that the vast majority of people are small minded, spiteful, and more or less accept whatever narrative the empire feeds them. Wish it wasn…

I agree that Kim Dotcom is not likely to be on Russia's payroll, but, as you said, he's simply small minded, spiteful, and more or less accept whatever narrative that empire feeds them.

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

#256

Post by sandworm101 »

vasco wrote: post #237
vessenes wrote: post #103

A fair amount of “this is fine, governments enforce IP laws and that’s a public good” vibes in here, which is all a very reasonable perspective. I’d argue Kim was too successful and too unlikeable at the end of the day, and that was probably his downfall. Toward the end, MEGA had transitioned to actually partnering with hip hop artists for distribution. The US has a long history of IP rights holders criminalizing new…

One thing you learn over the years is that people make up everything. I can't recall the exact quote but the character Frank Underwood once said something to the effect of "the law is the law, but the law is people and I know people". Meaning he could control the situation regardless. The opposite also happens and you can see cases like this or Shkreli, Dotcom and others where they think being edgy on top of minor cr…

>> probably because a bunch of people dealing with their cases also start disliking them personally.

More likely because those people remain naïve about the real world. In a past career I had some interaction with IP enforcement lawyers. They were stuck in the past then and have not really evolved. Their understanding of "the internet" extends only to those things discoverable via google search. Megaupload was knocked down because it was so visible. Piracy is more alive now than ever, but as it is no longer visible via Google, the likes of the MPAA and IRAA cannot see it.

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

#257

Post by plorg »

codetrotter wrote: post #177
i80and wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedantically: MEGA runs today as a Dropbox-alike, and has very little to do with Kim Dotcom beyond his being involved at the very beginning and then departing quickly. You're referring to Megaupload, which is entirely different despite the name similarity.

I might be misremembering things here but AFAICR, it went something like this: MegaUpload existed as a file hosting service. It was widely used by pirates, and MegaUpload earned a lot of money off of hosting pirated files because users would buy subscriptions to MegaUpload specifically because of the pirated content that they could download, without the limitations that are placed on the users of the free tier. With…

Adding to this there were stories that came out that even beyond knowingly profiting from pirated content people working on the MegaUpload backend would search it directly for warez to share amongst each other.

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

#258

Post by underlipton »

e40 wrote: post #166
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…

Bernie Madoff got real prison time for his white collar crimes.

Bernie Madoff is notable because someone of his stature being pursued so vigorously is rare. If officials went after every financial industry criminal with the same energy, the financial industry would cease to exist. Likewise, executives who sign off on decisions that actually kill people (Boeing) rarely see jail time.

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

#259

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

chaostheory wrote: post #225
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 music industry isn’t a “goose that lays golden eggs” for the greater economy. It’s not as democratic or accessible as the tech industry either. You’d have a stronger argument if it was at least fair to the artists that it purportedly represents. It’s not.

The music industry has been the one making the pots and pans.

But it is also the one that has been making it possible for creatives to become obscenely rich. It's actually only fairly recently, in history, that creatives could become independently successful, without having patrons. I don't know of anyone that has become rich, using Patreon (I could be wrong, though, as it has never really been something that I've paid attention to).

Not sure if the patronage model works for creatives.

It's fascinating to see folks in tech, who are obsessed with becoming rich robber barons, get upset at the prospect of other people getting rich, doing non-tech stuff.

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

#260

Post by greenthrow »

vessenes wrote: post #103

A fair amount of “this is fine, governments enforce IP laws and that’s a public good” vibes in here, which is all a very reasonable perspective. I’d argue Kim was too successful and too unlikeable at the end of the day, and that was probably his downfall. Toward the end, MEGA had transitioned to actually partnering with hip hop artists for distribution. The US has a long history of IP rights holders criminalizing new…

He was not early at all.
Post reply on HN