Megaupload.com Gets Hit By Mega Piracy Indictment

[johname]

Four of MegaUpload's operators have been arrested for copyright infringement. Site offline. Interesting timing of this.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2012/01/file-sharing-megaupload-shut-down-for-piracy-by-feds.html

 

[Kate]

They're back:

http://news.yahoo.com/megaupload-ba...5kIHRyaWFscwRwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2UEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3

It's a fake.

 

[silentg]

Mashable author was stupid to post that IP without checking it.

 

[Archangel]

I didn't bother to check the link itself, as I don't use the site. I have to question it, though. ppl think the site is back simply because of a random posting on a domain-less IP? That doesn't make sense.

It's a fake.

 

[johname]

Check out the MegaU Dude's Mansion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/21/kim-dotcom-megaupload-arrest_n_1220491.html?ncid=webmail1

"Officers broke the locks and Dotcom barricaded himself into a safe room which officers had to cut their way through to gain access."


"Dotcom leased the property after being blocked from buying it last year by the government after failing to meet a "good character" test for migrants, although he was granted residency in 2010"


New Zealand government knew he was a bad guy, or they didnt like his new name: Kim Dotcom

Reported he made 42 mil in 2010 alone

 

[alien51]

Megaupload only exist to break laws.

I think that's a very SOPA-like view. From what i've read in CNN, there were a lot of legit Megaupload users who are outraged that they could no longer access their personal non-copyright files.

Granting there were a lot of pirates in there, technically you cannot say Megaupload "only" exists to break laws. Because their cloud service infrastructure looks exactly the same as Microsoft SkyDrive.

---------- Post added at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 PM ----------

From what I saw somewhere in that document, they have evidence of the principals of the company talking about obtaining pirated files for people. That's not looking good for them. Without that kind of evidence, they might have been able to point to their policies and documented instances where they removed material and claim they tried their best to do the right thing..

That's exactly the kind of "infringing" evidence i'm talking about.

Megaupload in itself, is just like any other cloud service out there. You must specifically pinpoint what element makes them criminally liable, while YouTube is not.

 

[Archangel]

There may be many legit users but sure over 90% download or share copyrighted items. Saying it 'only' exists for law-breaking was a generalization. Only the vast majority is law-breaking. There are 2 or 3 legit users for the site, I'm pretty sure.

I think that's a very SOPA-like view. From what i've read in CNN, there were a lot of legit Megaupload users who are outraged that they could no longer access their personal non-copyright files.

Granting there were a lot of pirates in there, technically you cannot say Megaupload "only" exists to break laws. Because their cloud service infrastructure looks exactly the same as Microsoft SkyDrive.

 

[alien51]

There may be many legit users but sure over 90% download or share copyrighted items. Saying it 'only' exists for law-breaking was a generalization. Only the vast majority is law-breaking. There are 2 or 3 legit users for the site, I'm pretty sure.

This is what makes it complicated.

What is the percentage threshold that will make a cloud-sharing service a criminal copyright infringer? You say 90%. So if we bring it down to say 80%, then that should be safe then.

What makes people Anti-SOPA, is because evenif you trim that number down to 10-20% illegal, the entire cloud service will get shutdown-- along with the 80-90% legit users. SOPA doesn't discriminate numbers.

And it's very difficult to base your regulation on a numbers game. Evenif you set a threshold of 50%, the wisecracks will test the limit up to 48% illegal.

In the latest news update, Megaupload says they will challenge the Feds in court and they are seeking the return of their servers.

 

[Archangel]

Utopia would be nice but a land of fallibility is more interesting. The numbers, though, don't mean much. With the ideology that a crime is a crime: If I directly assisted 1 person to commit murder--even if I worked with 100,000,000 other people who I never swayed--people would still ride my ass for that lone murder. And let's be perfectly honest: Surely, at least 100-thousand counts of infringement had been done from megaupload's website. Whether that's 90% of its business or 1%, it's still a lot. And once person alone can bring the bad things to light. Just ask Lars Ulrich. So yeah, 100k infringements really isn't something that can be ignored.

This is what makes it complicated.

What is the percentage threshold that will make a cloud-sharing service a criminal copyright infringer? You say 90%. So if we bring it down to say 80%, then that should be safe then.

What makes people Anti-SOPA, is because evenif you trim that number down to 10-20% illegal, the entire cloud service will get shutdown-- along with the 80-90% legit users. SOPA doesn't discriminate numbers.

And it's very difficult to base your regulation on a numbers game. Evenif you set a threshold of 50%, the wisecracks will test the limit up to 48% illegal.

In the latest news update, Megaupload says they will challenge the Feds in court and they are seeking the return of their servers.

 

[enlytend]

I'm sure there were quite a few legit users that got burned by this. Megaupload went to great lengths to try to "look" legit and trustworthy. Celeb endorsements (someone in the entertainment industry wouldn't promote a file piracy site, would they?) And a tool to supposedly help you find infringing content on the site and file a complaint (which allegedly was useless and/or totally ignored.)

Doesn't matter how much illegal content their *customers* uploaded - they would have been covered under current law by "safe harbor" provisions ... as long as they took action when notified of wrongdoing. The charges in the document go way beyond that.

Of course they're going to challenge it. What have they got to lose?

 

[Dave_Z]

What have they got to lose?

Bragging rights.

 

[alien51]

Everything gets muddled together simply because these guys were busted by the Feds.

But the question remains: Is the business model legit?

Look at this link: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkL5PEUIa80"]Wind Chill part 1 - YouTube[/ame]
A full-length Hollywood movie uploaded and shared on YouTube and remains accessible since 2008. This is not the only full-length stolen video on YouTube.

To rephrase the question: What should Megaupload have done to avoid getting busted in the first place?

Eliminate illegal content? That's impossible.

Reduce illegal content? By how much? 80%? 87%? 93%?

If having minimal illegal content is still unacceptable, then they should shutdown the entire cloud technology.

 

[Archangel]

They could have scanned all uploaed material for copyrights. That's not an easy task but it's still something they could have done.

Youtube's been through its legal stuff. Ad it's all coming back to them soon.

To rephrase the question: What should Megaupload have done to avoid getting busted in the first place?

Eliminate illegal content? That's impossible.

Reduce illegal content? By how much? 80%? 87%? 93%?

 

[enlytend]

Apparently this made other file sharing services nervous. Filesonic just shut down their file sharing service. So did uploaded.to ( not sure if this is global or US only.)

 

[alien51]

More details in the rap sheet of this Megaupload guy Mr. DotCom, are now coming out in the news:

http://news.yahoo.com/megaupload-owner-found-hiding-safe-room-sawed-off-215619099.html

So it appears he does have a predisposition to being criminal-minded, based on past history.

Pun intended: They said he plans to legally change his name again to "Kim DotPro". lol

But then again, even Al Capone ran a legit business himself.

Yes, i can confirm that Filesonic got spooked. I tried to download a porn flick a while ago and a message says file sharing features are disabled. But Uploading.COM is still operating normally.

I remember in the past when the Feds shutdown Napster, i thought it was the end of file sharing as we know it.

But to quote what Jeff Goldblum said in Jurassic Park: "File Sharing will find a way".

 

[Domainace]

Here are some pics of Mr. Dotcom chumming with Bruce Willis. Odd, considering he is accused of stealing Bruce's property.
https://picasaweb.google.com/112764836840664936763/France2000

 

[lll]

wow Mr. Dotcom was living the life though.

 

[Dave_Z]

To rephrase the question: What should Megaupload have done to avoid getting busted in the first place?

At least this, from the indictment:

25. On or about June 24, 2010, members of the Mega Conspiracy were informed, pursuant to a criminal search warrant from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, that thirty-nine infringing copies of copyrighted motion pictures were present on their leased servers at Carpathia Hosting, a hosting company headquartered in the Eastern District of Virginia.

...

As of November 18, 2011, more than a year later, thirty-six of the thirty-nine infringing motion pictures were still being stored on the servers controlled by the Mega Conspiracy.

And not flaunt it, too.

 

[turnhardtoeasy]

i guess its too much worse for people in the USA...
checkout this


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tD1yaE0GfQ"]MegaUpload Dangerous Secrets affect YOU, Mike Mozart JeepersMedia ACTA / PIPA / SOPA - YouTube[/ame]

 

[ngenme]

In US you can get your asset seized for anything. Look up civil forfeiture. There is no innocent till proven guilty. Government logic is that the property is "guilty". You have to proof that the property is not guilty which will often cost more than the size of the property.

---------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:08 AM ----------

At least this, from the indictment:


And not flaunt it, too.

Most likely it's not the same file. Some guy reupload it.

 

[ngenme]

Also there is news that mega upload will arrange that start up artists that's popular can upload their content for free with sponsors or get paid directly (say 90% of the money)..

That's the real reason behind the arrest. Not to protect artists, but to maintain the monopoly of recording industry.

 

[Ronald Regging]

All that money and the man went down hiding in the corner like a little b%^$! Gimme half that money and there woulda been 6 feet of shell casings.

 

[DU]

All that money and the man went down hiding in the corner like a little b%^$! Gimme half that money and there woulda been 6 feet of shell casings.

Guns don't kill people. Real men with balls that aren't pus&^!s kill people.

That's the real reason behind the arrest. Not to protect artists, but to maintain the monopoly of recording industry.

Obviously.

Here are some pics of Mr. Dotcom chumming with Bruce Willis. Odd, considering he is accused of stealing Bruce's property.

Bernie Madoff was best friends with people he ripped off.

i guess its too much worse for people in the USA...
checkout this

I stopped listening when his truth included untruth. Even if he's 90% right you can't just make shit up.

I tried to download a porn flick a while ago and a message says file sharing features are disabled.

Finally something uncut uncensored and honest on a thread about IP and the Internet!:hearts:

They could have scanned all uploaed material for copyrights. That's not an easy task but it's still something they could have done.

They could have just done simple things like complied with requests, fulfilled the legal requirements of the DMCA and .. err.. not documented full knowledge of the illegal activities via emails.

It's the age old drug hierarchy. Once you reach the top of the drug mountain you have 3 easy choices (1) take your money and run away and live a normal low key life (2) Continue to deal until you are over taken (killed) by the next big thing... (3) Live a 5 star life and flaunt your ill gotten gains and either get killed or arrested.

Guess which is the most common choice?

But the question remains: Is the business model legit?

No it is not.

What will happen to other file sharing sites?

Depends on what they share, how they share, how they manage their business.

Not all business are cut from the same cloth.

 

[ngenme]

well I suppose next time they should have hired some lawyers and ask whether what they're doing is legal or not. Ups they did I guess.

 

[alien51]

Well, i'm not sure if deliberately defying the DMCA law can be considered a business model.

Unless of course you are saying Megaupload is a criminal business down to the core, just like a Colombian cocaine supplier.

But they have legit customers, meaning the business model has legit value.

It's like a strip joint in Las Vegas, is a legit business. But if they get caught allowing underage customers in there, they get busted. Can be charged with violations or offenses. But you cannot say the strip joint business model was not legit.

When a business model is not legit, it means it cannot survive without criminal income.

In Megaupload's case, i don't think they will fold up if they cut down the copyright violations. They simply want more money (to feed their obvious lifestyles), by doing illegal shortcuts.

But my question was, was it really impossible to run the Megaupload business and gain legal income?