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

761–770 of 1001 posts

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

#761

Post by strbean »

duped wrote: post #576
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #218

The US seems to have this knack of sliding itself into this narrow gap between individuals they're idealistically pursuing and something worse. "If I could just slip in there, ooh, that's tight, yes, thank you, aah comfy, this feels like where I belong". In their desperate attempt to not lose a fight that's been going on for, what, 10 years? 15 years? They're increasingly looking like a child that cannot move on from…

You're looking at this through too narrow a lens, I think. The Government has a duty to protect domestic industry from foreign threats, and throughout history, that isn't reserved to state actors. Megaupload was a severe threat(*) to major American industries, and Kim Dotcom flagrantly ignored pressure from America to stop what it was doing. When that happens the Government gets to pick which of its heavy hammers to…

Mega succeeded Megaupload and together they operated freely for almost two decades. I think we can conclusively say they were not a threat to US industries.

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

#762

Post by wordofx »

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…

> As an Aussie observer, I'm seeing more US influence in our region.

No you’re not. You’re seeing more TikTok influence but not US influence.

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

#763

Post by slater »

blandpiper wrote: post #746
kstenerud wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kim was a maverick, and his political connections were weak and easy to break. If you don't have the connections, you shouldn't be playing such a dangerous game.

he was swedish and thats enough sometimes. the government thinks ahead instead of acting like mobsters after the fact

Finnish?

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

#764

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

hnisoss wrote: post #755
ProofHouse wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not pirating. It’s transformative and fair use. Derivative even in some cases. Each piece of content is but a grain of sand on an island. It’s called the open internet.

So how much of a book of poems can I assemble from other books of poems and spit out as an ebook on amazon before it is not "transformative and fair use"? Few words, sentence, chapter?

Syllables, honestly.

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

#765

Post by anothernewdude »

nottommo wrote: post #748
sergiogjr wrote: post #715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that can be applied consistently. Would you say the same about heads of drug cartels or human trafficking rings (not equating these to Kim, as I'm sure you understand)?

No because they have committed serious violent crimes. Human trafficking is not the same as enabling and profiting from internet piracy.

What about the wire fraud and money laundering that he's actually accused of?

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

#766

Post by BLKNSLVR »

19h wrote: post #544
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See reply to antai below. MEGA, not Megaupload. Re: source. Hopefully I'm consistent, you can go back through my comment history. I was raided by the police a bit over two years ago. When I got my stuff back (8 months later, no charges) the lead detective said that there was evidence I'd downloaded things from Mega, and that this was "suspicious", amongst a couple of other things. I got the feeling she thought I was…

As someone working in comint I can assure you that there's nothing special about MEGA compared to others in terms of flagging.

That's what someone in comint would say ;)

Does that mean usage of all file lockers are equally flagged as suspicious?

My memory gets a bit patchy here, but I'm pretty sure the detective said something along the lines of "MEGA is only ever used for ". Which struck me as blatantly false and indicative of either an agenda or incompetence.

And I tend to subscribe to Hanlon's razor:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

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

#767

Post by anothernewdude »

fluoridation wrote: post #267
philippejara wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 say it would be a a reasonable perspective if his case was being tried where the offences actually took place and/or where he was a citizen of and not a country who refuses to give the same rights to non-citizens being tried there compared to citizens[1] and wasn't eve…

It's a mockery of jurisdiction. It's a joke that NZ would sell out its own citizens like that.

It's a joke that we allowed him to buy residency. I hope it was worth it for him, and only hope similar things happen to Peter Thiel.

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

#768

Post by starspangled »

adrr wrote: post #397
treprinum wrote: post #207

Didn't YouTube get popular on pirated content first? What was the main difference of the initial phase of YouTube and MegaUpload? They both went legal later.

I am sure if youtube execs had emails showing that they were actively encouraging and participating in the posting of copyrighted material on the site they would have been prosecuted as well. Thats the evidence against Kim Dotcom, emails.

No it's not that, it's that if Google had not donated to the right politicians, or had enough lobbyists, they would have been prosecuted.

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

#769

Post by miffy900 »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #572
treprinum wrote: post #207

Didn't YouTube get popular on pirated content first? What was the main difference of the initial phase of YouTube and MegaUpload? They both went legal later.

It did. YouTube has paid the piper here and continues to do so. It pays a lot of money to record labels right now. TV networks choose to run their own streaming, and YouTube enforces what networks ask for. Consider what things look like when you can't pirate. Many services now, like Claude, do not let you create password accounts, to make it less practicable to share a subscription. Apple News and Apple Arcade is tot…

> It's a big part of why Apple is so fucking rich. Should only Apple be permitted to make real money? I don't think so.

Apple is rich because they've optimized the hell out of their supply chain and through some clever marketing have convinced (rightly or wrongly) people that it's somehow reasonable to charge $200 for 64GB flash storage upgrades on their devices that only cost them ~$20. They are probably the only company in the world that have consistently run 20%+ profit margins on selling hardware ALONE. Their services revenue from streaming and arcade are puny in comparison. Even throw in the cut they take from app store sales, compared to hardware it's relatively small.

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

#770

Post by jmspring »

Good. He has had a major hardon over Joe Biden for years and his X posts indicate such.

Lately, as other pointed out, he's been a ccp/russian/who knows shill.

He did some interesting things, some not legal - others served their time he wandered off rather than trial.

Post reply on HN