Kim Dotcom’s bubble bursts
The playboy lifestyle of one of the world’s biggest Internet pirates has been exposed after a raid by police on his home in New Zealand.
Multimillionaire Kim Dotcom, one of the founders of Megaupload.com, was arrested Friday despite retreating to an electronically locked “safe room” in his sprawling home in Auckland, Dotcom Mansion.
Here's the presser from the FBI.
http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pr...with-widespread-online-copyright-infringement
what about users who were using it for a legitimate purpose (backup etc)? How are they supposed to get the data they legally own?
Still doesnt explain how the legally managed to take down the website, or how they will go about compenasting users who had non-illegal content on there
The domain name is US and several servers were located in the US (in Virginia to be exact).
Yes but what about those non-US servers? As i understand it they also had some in Europe and Hong Kong.
Those servers can continue running unless US authorities get a court order in the relevant jurisdiction, which I'm sure they are or have already done. The domain is US so the DoJ have seized it. This is a website that allegedly offered prizes to users who uploaded popular shows and whose staff allegedly referred to themselves as "modern day pirates". If those allegations are proven then it is difficult to believe their claims of innocence.
The company also had a dedicated pr0n file sharing service (megaporn), which I'm sure did not check for copyright infringement before allowing users to share movies.
Great questions. What implications does this have for the cloud storage model?
My questions are:
1. how can the governments shutdown a business without a trail?
2. And what do they plan to do about all those members who were using it for legitimate uses (such as back-up of personal files)?
The company also had a dedicated pr0n file sharing service (megaporn), which I'm sure did not check for copyright infringement before allowing users to share movies.
They have to check for copyright infringement?...i think not, Youtube don't so why would any file sharing site.
They have an obligation to remove content if the copyright owner asks for it to be removed...as i have seen done by megaupload.
Yes, that is how the DMCA act works. In amongst all the other hyperbole this is one of the things the US is accusing, that they have ignored DMCA removal requests.
I think that they are just trying to trump up as many charges as possible and see what sticks and sets a precedent. It seems like a poorly assembled prosecution to me.
They have to check for copyright infringement?...i think not, Youtube don't so why would any file sharing site.
Youtube have invested millions of dollars in a system that supposedly can catch copyrighted material as it is being uploaded (the Content ID). That being said Youtube is not a file sharing platform in the way megaporn was. That point of distinction was made when Viacom sued Youtube.
Realistically, an anonymous file sharing platform exists almost solely to share copyrighted work (I am talking about megaporn not megaupload here). Unless you believe that some dude sitting in his Mum's basement uploading "Innocent First Timers XIII" is actually the copyright owner.
It almost looks like Megaupload allowed legitimate use of its website in order to give it a veil of legitimacy. I think that's an attempted application of the "Sony safe harbour" principle from about 25 years ago.
So why not just take down the megaporn website instead of the whole suite? I stilld ont see how legally the FBI/US Gov is allowed to deny legal users access to thier own personal data that they own.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?