SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Megaupload started out being presented as a regular copyright enforcement case. However as the facts of the military-style raid surfaced, followed by details of the many serious legal irregularities, it quickly became very peculiar and atypical. Soon, when former president Barack Obama arrives in New Zealand later this month, Kim Dotcom aims to try to find out what he knew about the case through subpoena.
Kim Dotcom is claiming that an associate was able to hire a friend of the Obamas to ask about the Megaupload case. "Mistakes were made. It hasn't gone well. It's a problem. I'll see to it after the election," Barack Obama reportedly said. With Obama due to land in New Zealand next month, Dotcom says he'll have a court subpoena waiting for the former president.
One of the interesting items that might eventually come from the case is what the difference between Megaupload and its competitors was. So far, there have been no raids, big or small, against Box, Dropbox, One Drive, Google Drive, Spider Oak, and the others.
Source : Dotcom: Obama Admitted "Mistakes Were Made" in Megaupload Case
See also : past soylentnews posts on Megaupload
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Thursday March 01 2018, @05:25PM (10 children)
Kim Dotcom's case has a lot of similarity to the 1980s raid on Steve Jackson Games that began the EFF. The main difference is that Steve Jackson had a game about hacking, and the idiot law enforcers didn't understand it was only a game and went nuts. Raided their business, and seized their equipment, though Steve Jackson Games had clearly done absolutely nothing wrong. Kim Dotcom on the other hand is accused of piracy, or enabling piracy, which may be in violation of others' property rights or the law, it's not clear.
Whether whatever exactly Kim Dotcom has allegedly done should be illegal is the question. And it's not going to be answered with strongman bullying tactics on the part of law enforcement. That often backfires, and it sure has in this case. Got to keep a tight leash on law enforcers to stop them from being idiots. Judges too can really screw up, and are a little too ready to sanction raids in cases where no physical harm has occurred. Busting down doors, waving firearms around, seizing equipment and cuffing suspects is dramatic and makes great copy, but should not be done in civil cases. Can you imagine any of the perps in the 2008 market crash and the Great Recession being treated that way, however much we wished for that? I'm not sure even Bernie Madoff was cuffed when he was arrested. He was cuffed after the trial in which he was found guilty, but it was for dramatic appearance and punishment rather than any serious thought that he could escape or physically hurt anyone. But before that? Posted bail and got house arrest! No, those guys get all kinds of gentlemanly treatment. The rest of those superrich dirt bags weren't even convicted of anything, just given a wrist slap of a plea bargain in which they pay fines that aren't big to them, and they don't have to admit to any wrongdoing.
Tough to find people who don't let shiny law enforcement badges pinned to their chests go to their heads and cut loose on the accused that they perceive to be the little people, rough them up a bit.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 01 2018, @05:58PM
No, Mr. Dotcom is not being accused of piracy. As far as we can tell he never forcefully took control of a ship belonging to someone else, nor did he take part in the killing, mauling, raping and other uncouth behaviour usually associated with such an event.
What he is accused of is violations of copyright. Which (perhaps!) cost someone some money, but nothing more.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by sjames on Thursday March 01 2018, @06:13PM (4 children)
It doesn't matter if what he did SHOULD be illegal, it matters if it WAS illegal. I note that there has been no prosecution. If "the authorities" thought it SHOULD be illegal, the correct action is to pass a law, not tear the business apart and then just sit on it.
At this point, they should be selling their shiny badges to the scrap dealer to pay for the damages to Dotcom AND the many injured 3rd parties who are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
That includes paying for all those colo servers that the completely innocent colo companies could neither rent out or get rid of for all that time.
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Thursday March 01 2018, @07:41PM (3 children)
While I am on Kim Dotcom's side in this... The reason why there has been no prosecution is that so far, Kim Dotcom has not been extradited despite continuing attempts.
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 01 2018, @08:58PM
But, of course, that is because the U.S. cannot come up with enough evidence to even convince the NZ courts that a trial is warranted. They've had YEARS now. If not for extra-legal coercion and perjury, they wouldn't have been able to carry out the raid at all.
(Score: 2) by dry on Thursday March 01 2018, @09:28PM
Extradition treaties usually have clauses where the crime and punishment has to be roughly equal in both jurisdictions.
Something like murder is usually pretty simple though even then a country might insist on roughly equal punishment such as how Canada won't extradite a murderer to America without a promise of no death penalty.
In this case, it sounds like the crimes that Kim is accused of aren't particularity serious crimes in New Zealand compared to the USA, so no extradition.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 02 2018, @08:50AM
If you can't extradite someone, you take them to court in their country of residence.
Except of course in the case where the reason you can't extradite them is that no law was broken in their country of residence, in which case the police raiding the premises is a gross violation of everything from human rights to laws governing what the police is allowed to do - outside of dictatorships like Syria and North Korea, of course.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday March 01 2018, @08:15PM (2 children)
As a New Zealander I am unhappy with the prosecution of Kim dotcom for the following reasons:
The New Zealand Police arrested a legal resident of New Zealand for something which is not a crime here.
They carried out the raid while armed, which is highly unusual for this country. The police do not routinely carry guns here.
The police leaked the footage of the raid to TV news for broadcast the same night of the raid.
The whole case was conducted on the orders of US authorities, and the New Zealand police did as they were asked without checking if what they were doing was even legal.
If I thought about it longer I could probably come up with a bunch more reasons to be unhappy, but fortunately the Judiciary of New Zealand are fiercely independent, and resent political interference, so I trust the judge as much as anyone involved.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Fluffeh on Thursday March 01 2018, @09:47PM (1 child)
How about the big one where a New Zealand citizen was spied upon using the tech that was there only for "the terrorists!!" and instead was illegally used to help the American entertainment industry protect profits?
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday March 01 2018, @11:44PM
To be fair, he wasn't actually a citizen, but a permanent resident. Not that that makes your point invalid. The police still acted illegally.
(Score: 2) by epitaxial on Thursday March 01 2018, @11:03PM
I read the article about Steve Jackson Games. He wasn't raided over a hacking game. He was raided over some proprietary BellSouth 911 document.