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

51–60 of 1001 posts

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

#51

Post by wepple »

neilv wrote: post #41
wepple wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a substantial ongoing debate about how much responsibility a platform as for what users do on that platform. Nearly everyone in tech is affected by that. The theatrics and drama of it is a silly distraction, but the fundamental questions seem worth following and discussing. I’m not German; what an odd thing to comment.

Interesting. I thought the appeal of piracy-related stories on HN was that there's a lot of piracy going on, as private individuals. And also because some subset of those consider piracy a hobby, mission, or right, not only a pragmatic way to get the content they want. But I guess some people could be interested in the platform responsibility angle. However, when discussing obviously entirely piracy platforms, isn't…

I bet that too is a ton of what drives interest, the platform angle was just the primary thing that came to mind now that that’s more the world I think about

The piracy discussion is also hugely fascinating; I’m sure a good portion of HN remember Napster and friends, and the endless discussions had about that. We don’t seem to talk about it a lot.

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

#52

Post by whaleofatw2022 »

herculity275 wrote: post #33
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.

Did he get hundreds of millions in cash and dozens of luxury cars by pirating songs on the Internet?

Megaupload had lots of grey/dark patterns, namely people could upload whatever but downloading anything big, each Downloader had to buy credits.

Actually to that end he got millions in cash facilitating piracy of movies/tv/software

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

#53

Post by enriquec »

thor-rodrigues wrote: post #46
finikytou wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sad to see that kind of comments in HN. I feel that 10 years ago there was more room for accepting that a political opponent should be free to speak up. now our educated masses are pushing for prison and extradition because they don't belong to the axis of good.... you def cannot be for opensource and its values and say things like that

I don't understand your line of thought. The question with Kim was not about open-source, was about copyright and intellectual property all along. As other comments noted, the man literally made millions distributing copyrighted material, while completely aware of what he was doing.

no. he gave people a way to send stuff and they sent what they wanted.

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

#54

Post by zik »

josefresco wrote: post #32
tedk-42 wrote: post #21

As an Aussie observer, I'm seeing more US influence in our region. With some 'diplomacy', Julian Assange was brought home after near 15 years fighting for BS extradition charges. The news and politicians in Australia follow almost lock step with whatever our US overlords allow us to say. It's been more of a thing lately with them trying to secure the pacific away from China's sphere of influence and the biggest 'dumb…

In your opinion why is the submarine deal/F-35 program "totally useless" for Australia? Are you saying it's the wrong equipment? Too expensive? Not needed?

The submarines are almost certainly useless. We won't get them for decades. We're not even allowed to service the nuclear reactors when we do get them. And the technology is already an old one and will likely already be superceded by the new much quieter air-independent fuel cell and lithium battery technologies which other countries are adopting.

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

#55

Post by popcalc »

rout39574 wrote: post #42
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…

If that logic sounds sketch when the police take $10K from a man going to buy a car, it should also be sketch when you add zeros somewhere else. In general "That's really unusual behavior" shouldn't be enough to forfeit a fortune.

He hasn't been sentenced, let alone seen court yet. You don't have a right to flee a warrant for your arrest?

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

#56

Post by woodruffw »

rout39574 wrote: post #42
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…

If that logic sounds sketch when the police take $10K from a man going to buy a car, it should also be sketch when you add zeros somewhere else. In general "That's really unusual behavior" shouldn't be enough to forfeit a fortune.

I don’t think the money in question was forfeited in the sense that the US uses, only seized pending an investigation. The lack of a corrupting incentive alone makes the seizure less suspicious in my eyes.

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

#57

Post by ajsnigrutin »

herculity275 wrote: post #33
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.

Did he get hundreds of millions in cash and dozens of luxury cars by pirating songs on the Internet?

Nah, he built a file sharing service and people paid for that.

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

#58

Post by lukan »

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…

As far as I remember, not only aware, but activly uploading warez themself (not officially).

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

#60

Post by orra »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #38
snapcaster wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other options does he have? I really wish people wouldn't cheer when smallfolk like us get crushed by the state. Not saying he's perfect, but what him and others have to suffer seems vastly out of proportion to what they did

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.
Post reply on HN