No, it's not a new principle - and it's long been enforced prior to 9/11. Cross-border operations are far more common than most people realize.

Most developed countries are signatories to a variety of treaties in which all have agreed to establish and maintain a common set of laws to protect "Foreign Interests" as well as participation in the UN.

In this case, while the crimes were not committed on US soil, they were committed against US citizens/organizations. They were arrested by the NZ police after an international warrant was issued.

Most of the time, it's not the US specifically acting alone, but rather coordinating with the authorities in each affected country. It's also why it takes so long, i.e.; 2 years in this case to obtain an indictment, because of the intricate legalities involved.

I'm not sure if this was mentioned or not, but the alleged offenders are said to have leased servers in Virginia for U.S. based mirror sites.

Just read an article (NYT) that they are also keeping an eye on Rapidshare.

Whatever next?

Max

who's next? maybe filesonic ( olso based in Hongkong )

REally? Allowing a person to use software for whatever they want should be illegal?

What if the government tells you tomorrow that if you sell a car to a robber, and he uses it to rob a bank, you go to jail.

They don't "allow" anyone to use the site for copyrighted files, and in fact, when told files were copyrighted, took them down. What the USA wants is that they should be looking into everyone "private" files and play big brother. Do you like that?

Also as pointed out, no one has been convicted of ANYTHING. These are accusations. Do you want your site shut down tomorrow based on an accusation? Your business completely shut down without a judge's say. COme on!

That is nothing compared to what US government is doing around the world for the same Corporations that 'pretend' to be law abiding.

Shut down. Seized. No trial. No due process.

More evidence our government is committed to acting without legal authority; from Congress or the rule of law. This administration has stated multiple times they "will act if the Congress does not."

This simply means they make themselves a law unto themselves. They are judge, jury, and executioner. We are not ruled by kings or oligarchs, but by the rule of law written and adopted in the Constitution.

No matter what we think about these alleged crooks, we must not allow the Constitution to be trampled under the foot of men.

More reasons to call your congressional representatives and senators. Demand the death of SOPA and PIPA. Demand they reign in the lawless feds.

No private property seizures without a finding of guilt in a court of law by a jury of one's peers! Even then, sentence must be pronounced. If any fines are not paid, then impoundment can be executed only by a judgment from the court.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.
-Chris

Yep this is definitely the major reason they don't want another napster situation cropping up out of nowhere. When people think they are losing their money they will do anything!

You know what? The sad thing about this is, as I look back to the time in my life when I spent a ton of money on music, the only times I bought music is when I had heard songs on albums I LIKED. How did I hear them enough to know I'd like the whole album?

By hearing them from free sources.

That's right. The only way to tell if an album is even worth shelling out money for is TO HEAR THE MUSIC FIRST. Someone @ RIAA should realize that nobody likes to buy a pig in a poke, and the only way to be sure you are NOT buying a pig in a poke is to hear it first.

I recently went to a Best Buy store hoping to buy an album that had been released last year, and not only was it not available on the shelf, but the people working that section of the store had no idea who or what I was talking about. And it wasn't some new or obscure artist, it was someone who has been putting out best selling albums since the 80s.

Amazon sounds like a great idea, and yes I could find the music on Amazon. But at the time I was getting ready for a road trip, leaving later that day, and I wanted the music NOW, not in a week or two. It was an impulse buy. I woke up that morning and thought to myself, "this road trip will be even better if I can play _________ as I'm flying down the road @ 80mph." (There are parts of my state where 80 is legal, and Guvnor Perry wants to raise that limit to 90! )

The lack of ability of a potential customer to make an impulse buy of high quality music is a major part of the reason the music industry is seeing the lower numbers that they whine about. That, and making their customer the enemy. (And I HATE music in MP3s; the format is not a lossless technology; when I am paying attention I can hear the differences in quality after years of playing nothing but CDs.)

I not only remember Napster 1.0 with fondness, I remember Prince (or The Artist Formerly Known As, depending on when you were paying attention to him!) saying he could release an album on Napster and charge $5.00 and take home more money than he ever would if he used traditional channels and his end-user customer paid $16.98 . . . the going rate for a CD at the time.

The thing with FBI and DOJ going after people in other countries is actually an empire showing signs of being at the end of its reign. It is now just a matter of time until this whole country that once was great collapses from its own weight. Every empire that has once ruled has gone down the same path, and every single one without exception has fallen soon after. It won't be long before they'll be telling Mr. President-Of-Iran that he can no longer visit South America due to the Monroe Doctrine. And to tell the truth, I'm actually surprised they haven't already, except I don't think Obama knows much about the Monroe Doctrine.

The signs of decay are evident everywhere if you know where to look and what to look for. Heck, a local Walmart in my neck of the woods has been on the news for being robbed @ shotgun and having the vault drop of the day intercepted at the exact moment when store management was on the way to the vault to lock up the money.

Getting back to the music issues, it's interesting because I don't buy music so much anymore. Not because it's available everywhere around me for free. No, I'm an audiophile, so the true high quality stuff is NOT available for free. The reason I don't buy music anymore is because I don't play it as much anymore and I'm much more likely to listen to you guys in videos and audios telling me how you are making those mega cash cow sites!!! There are, after all, only so many hours in a day!

But seriously, a major part of the decline in music sales is because there is also a decline in the number of people in their target demographic. There are more baby boomers than there are Generation X'ers or Y'ers, and the music industry as a whole didn't plan on that. They thought the gravy train was going to last forever, and now they're as mad they cannot keep the party going as the janitors and legal secretaries who are getting foreclosed on because they didn't plan to ever have to face an interest rate hike when they signed that adjustable rate mortgage that got them in for so cheap into a McMansion they could not afford any other way.

The thing is, if you make your living on the internet you should be looking into a Plan B and Plan C, and maybe even a Plan D. What will you do if (when) YOUR gov't decides to turn off the internet? Do you have a bulletin board system or some other kind of ability to keep going in place? Will you even be able to dial up to another country if your broadband provider goes down? Sounds archaic, doesn't it? Especially in these days and times of VOIP phone service! But if it's your BUSINESS, you should probably look into it because if it's your livelihood on the line, well . . . I wouldn't have wanted to be trying to run an internet business in Egypt back in the spring or summer of 2011. Even the students in Tiananmen Square had their international fax numbers they could get messages out through in order to let others know what was happening!

hey you must be psychic or something.

How did you know, Cause "I love the smell of NAPALM in the mornin'"

LOL have been feeling the same thing since yesterday... oh wait maybe our government will bring North Korea 'feel' here...whaddaya think? :rolleyes:

Ya the key to what was said is "Google Search" and you don't see Google with this...
http://megaupload.com/banner.jpg

They're behind bars now...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/di...et-piracy-bust

Dotcom's Court Appeal for Bail lost.

'Flight of fancy' over Dotcom fears - lawyer | NATIONAL News

Ewen

don't feel bad about Megaupload-they made gobs of money from criminal activity. They are (and sites like them) the reason these SOPA/PIPA bills were created to begin with.

Now, I'm against the SOPA/PIPA bills, but not because I condone piracy or copyright infringement. The SOPA/PIPA bills are wrong as they are written because they are a threat to our freedom of speech and to the normal flow of Internet commerce. Many innocent people can be unjustly punished for crimes they didn't commit.

But in this case, Megaupload are guilty, whether you believe it or not.

And for the record, I really don't think it is wise to applaud Anonymous for hacking into government websites. Why?

It just perpetuates cyber terrorism, and gives the governments even more reason to just shut the whole thing down.

Do you want that?

This is HILARIOUS!!


Yes. Yes, you will.

of course it will.

More power and control.

Do you think the elite want more people telling others to wake and realise the whole economic crisis was planned. Of course not, and that is just 1% of all this kerfuffle.

Time to read between the lines and wake up people. Not just the people in the US.

I have to agree. Plenty of my products were stolen and posted to Megaupload. But they always complied with my DMCA notices.

Contrast that to the b-hat forums that basically laugh in your face when you contact them.

So, will this action by the FBI leave only the hard core pirates intact?

Paul

Yeah, probably.

What's amazing is how we had all these sites in the first place.

It's not amazing the authorities are ridding of them. That's expected.

We sure love our buzz words don't we? How did copyright violation become "innovation". Its in fact the direct opposite of innovation.

Once you make over $100M a year, you have a right to change your name to whatever you f'ing want. Seriously.

Russ,Thanks. That article provides yet another good example of how the problem can be much more complex than it looks on the surface.

Consider the argument that this creates a chilling effect on the use of cloud services by consumers. That alone is the basis for all sorts of very real concerns.

And the ethical debates could be ponderous indeed. Do we allow sites like this to use legitimate users as virtual "human shields" to perpetuate a pattern of large scale copyright infringement? What steps, if any, are appropriate to protect those innocent users, who may not be aware they're storing their family photos or business documents on the same machines as pirated movies and who knows what else?

Some things make such questions clearer in certain instances. For example, according to that article:If true, that takes MegaUpload out of the realm of a backup system, and anyone who used it should be aware it's not a long-term solution. Changes the equation in big ways.

Then you can make it even more interesting, by looking at the distribution of documents from the Church of Scientology, and how the CoS went after the file sharers. Or, for more current fodder, Wikileaks.

Those are nowhere near as clear in most people's minds as the pirate sites. I know people who regularly pirate music who aren't going to be morally outraged if their favorite download sites go offline. They'll shrug and consider it a minor inconvenience. Those same people might think very differently about Wikileaks being taken down.

Anyone who thinks this overall debate is just about piracy isn't paying attention.


Paul

The intent is to stop the worst offenders, and make it too risky for the rest to keep pirating.There's nothing crazy about people wanting to be paid for their work.


Paul

Considering where you're posting from, that's a particularly humorous comment. Rather than a black market, there's an open air market, where you can buy and sell counterfeit goods and pirated software and movies on any street corner.

Sure. That's a great solution. Rather than one ridiculous extreme, your country has gone to the other.


Paul

This is a good news..

About megaupload, what do you think are the rules that they have violated? Is it about uploading pirated softwares, movies?

U.S. extradites Panama's ex-leader Noriega to France - USATODAY.com

Alleged Spouse Killer and Producer Awaits Extradition to Mexico - Hispanically Speaking News

Now, I found something arguably interesting a moment ago. Ideally:

USAM 9-15.000 International Extradition and Related Matters

In reality, well...

Now, now, John. It's too early to give away the plot.


Paul

Now THAT is funny! I love your humorous, pop corn munching, whatever he/she/it is.

Carlos

Justice system has been that way for years. No more, "innocent til proven guilty", it's "guilty til proven innocent". It's rather sad.

I am more amazed that they arrested the employees of megaupload. A graphic designer and software developer was arrested. Did they get arrested just for being employed by megaupload, or is there more to it?

If they did, and if SOPA by some miracle got passed, is DOJ going to arrest everyone working for Google, Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, etc.?

Do you see the massive avalanche of effects it would have?

It's pathetic if it did come down to that. Going to jail for having a job. The way the economy is, you have to take what you can get.

Just my 2 cents.

Not that I know of, but at this point, it seems inevitable.

I have never seen a full length movie on Youtube. Have you?

When I first heard about Megaupload going down I thought it was unfair to prosecute the owners of the site for what the users uploaded. That would be like putting the owners of a company that manufactures bolt cutters in jail because criminals use them to cut locks and break in to buildings.

BUT

Now that I have read more about it, when you consider the way the system was setup, there is no denying the owners knew exactly what was going on. It wasn't payouts based on premium membership sales. It was payouts for members whose links got downloaded the most, like 10,000 downloads = $xx.xx to the up-loader. Definitely places responsibility on the owners of Megaupload.

The seizure of assets was justified and obviously was a clear message to other sites who are doing the same thing.

This proves there is no need for SOPA or anything similar. The ability to take down major contributors to piracy are obviously already in the hands of the Feds.

:rolleyes:

Poor poor megaupload owner with his "Guilty" license plates on his 100K+ luxury cars. Can you imagine the surprise on his face when they accused him of piracy?

"File sharing" LOL

Pray tell, apart from other peoples movies/music/ TV shows what do "file sharers" have to share that demands so much space and band-width and makes megaupload one of the most popular sites in the world??

This is just the beginning. The days of Piracy 2.0 eeeer I meant to say "web2.0" are over.

Do you know how much it costs to re-write SOPA? A few days work at most....

If you read the indictment, it will be strongly clear that Megaupload's main business strategy was offering pirated content.
They enticed users to upload it.
They hid it from searches so that the owners or authorities could not find it.
They rewarded the uploading of it.
When sent C&D letters they ignored them. <--- this is a big one, true pirates do not follow C&D letters.

Kim dotcom aka Kim Fatcom, instructed them not to delete content when normal users pointed out it was copyrighted. He told them to ignore the request. This is in his own emails.

Content owner's were limited to reporting only 2500 links per day, then their limit moved up to 5000 links per day, when there should of been no limit to the number of copyright infringement that could be pointed out.
If it is copyrighted, and some one wants to report it, then why limit them if you are really not trying to have pirated content on your site.

Money laundering is the process of concealing sources of illegally obtained money. They were getting money from hosting and facilitating the streaming of copyright materials. And depositing in banks, making it look like it came from a legitimate business.
No different than a restaurant used as a front, where you pay for food and they add an extra $20 on the bill, and give you a baggie of your favorite poison.


******************
The difference between Youtube and megaupload , is that youtube's business model is not solely based on selling subscriptions. Megaupload sold subscriptions to be able to access pirated material.
Megaupload was the NETFLIX of pirated material.
Not only did they host it, they were streaming it.

People say how can a site go thru all the uploaded videos and files.
It is not an impossible task, there is software that can drastically help with that. Just think, all of those IM people that upload videos to youtube and their video gets deleted real quick because it has affiliate stuff on it.... how can youtube spot & remove affiliate videos and not copyright videos.

Now most of these files did not have cryptic names, they had names like showname, S2 EP4. Real easy to spot.

After the take down of megaupload, other file sharing sites are on a frenzy, purging pirated content as we speak. How is it that they can do it now, when they had not been able to do it for the past years?

Because the possibility of going to prison just became REAL.



*******************************
I do not understand how people can support piracy and hide behind internet freedom. Since when does having freedom, translate into stealing other peoples work.
You have the right to all the internet freedom you want, but your freedom ends where someone else's freedom begins.

To say, that the big ugly corporations have too much money and they are just greedy, is so wrong. How can it be greedy to want to get paid for your work. When did getting reimbursed for all your hard work become equivalent to greed.
Pirates are greedy, they will rather steal, because their greed does not allow them to part with their money to pay for the movie. They make excuses that the movies are crap, that is why they rather not pay for them, yet they do not stop pirating them.


It is so hard to comprehend how people can break down pirating to almost a philosophical level, "did he steal someone's work or just 1 and 0's." Come on people. Who are we trying to kid here. It is mind boggling how far the justification for stealing can go, just to satisfy our craving for watching the latest movies without paying for it.

It is easy to see who are the real pirates amongst us, just watch how they argue for pirating.
They argue and argue about why it is okay to pirate stuff.
Justifying "the stealing" with lame excuses of why it is not really wrong.
The do not say it is right, they just try to convince you it is not really wrong. Since when did stealing become not really wrong?

The feds have sent a strong message.
Piracy will not be tolerated.

You facilitate piracy, you go to prison.


Don't believe me, ask Kim Fatcom.


.

[DELETED]

So...should actual drug lords not have their drug labs seized upon being served a
warrant - to stop the manufacturing of drugs - while they're being heard in trial?
I realize the unauthorized sharing of copyrighted material doesn't seem as harmful
materially as selling drugs, but the idea behind it - again - is to stop the activity
while still giving the accused a chance to dispute it all in court.

Whether this activity shouldn't be handled by the government or so is a different
debate, which I'll pass for now.

To who? Other than thieves, that is...

The court document says otherwise. It says they took down the link but not the file. If a file was uploaded multiple times then a new link would be created each time but the file would remain the same. This made it difficult for copyright holders to remove complete access to the file as they would have to stumble across every link to their work across the web.

Aren't they in trouble because there is evidence that they not only condoned it but encouraged it?

Pace,

Did you read the charges?

Disabling a specific link to "shared" content, while leaving other links to that same content active is not the same as taking it off the servers. I wonder if that's what really happened with the "one Warrior member" who reported that his content was being pirated through them?

I have never even heard allegations that YouTube did anything like that.

MegaUpload are said to have paid what amounted to bounties for premium pirated content.

The whole system was set up in a way that any reasonable person would have known in advance was going to make it a pirate haven. It is simply not possible that an intelligent person in the management of the company could have been unaware of the things listed in that document for any length of time.

Read the charges, Pace. Vague comparisons to YouTube don't hold up when set along side those specific allegations, assuming they're true.


Paul

That's actually a very good point. I concede on this issue.

Paul, I should have been more precise about copyright and the issue of interfering with a person's right to distribute their intellectual property.

Copying someone's stuff is one way to infringe on copyright rights. Preventing someone from exercising their legal rights could be a different type of infringement.

"Copyright" is actually a "bundle" of numerous different legal rights.

.

I don't disagree with that, and am also tired of sending DMCA notices. But personally, I do have a concern with the ramifications of arguably overreaching US government action.

A few years ago someone posted several WSOs for a script that basically was intended for a massive copying of ClickBank websites and changing the links to be affiliate links. There was a massive thread about my criticism of the product. Could a product like that be leveraged into a sudden seizing of the forum because it was approved for sale here?

Why can't the entertainment companies who supposedly lost millions due to megaupload file a civil lawsuit, prove their claim, and then get a court order shutting down the site? I'm pretty sure the feds will not take up a criminal case to protect my property.

What is the impact of the US government's ability to seize and shutdown .com domains - when other countries do not have a similar power?

When you look at what various politicians have said about the US President having a 'kill switch' for the net, or saying this and that should be sufficient to shutdown a site, where is the line drawn?

I have seen all sorts of ridiculous claims by companies who don't know the difference between copyright and trademark, or who think merely mentioning their name on a website is an illegal act. You cannot assume a power used against a bad person will rationally be used in the future.

.

Sardent,Because they are crimes, and that's part of what we pay taxes for - enforcement of the various existing laws and protection of individual rights.

Andrew,It is entirely possible that all copies involved in your scenario are legit, in terms of copyright compliance.

I could easily make a book I wrote available freely on Scribd, and also sell it through the Kindle Marketplace. The only violation would be of Kindle's pricing policy, assuming it was the same book, with no major revisions or differences.

I could sell the book on my own site and give it away on Scribd, while simultaneously selling an improved version through Amazon, and a cheaper, abridged version through the RapBank system.

No copyright issues with any of that.

Or, I could buy non-exclusive rights to a book from the author and give it away on Scribd. The author might be able to sell the same thing on Amazon at whatever price they chose and still be complying with the terms of service. (Might. I'd have to check on that one.)

Google is not distributing the book just by indexing the location of the thing. And the existence of links to pirated materials in their database has nothing to do with intent to facilitate infringement. It's an inescapable part of the process of indexing the web.

That's the difference, by the way, between something like TVshack/O'Dwyer's carefully selected links to pirated materials and Google's potential indexing of the same content. One is done for the specific purpose of profiting from illegal distribution. The other is a small and unintended part of a much larger, and perfectly legal, effort.

Brian,And many other good points before that...

I share those concerns. I don't think they're major issues in this case, but they're something we ought to be discussing.This is the one that disturbs me most. Someone ought to have that power, but it should not be a party that is in any way politically motivated. Defining the scope of that party's power and responsibility is a mildly difficult challenge. Selling it would be a hard job.

I personally believe that ICANN should be separated from ALL governmental entities, and any existing NGOs or treaty-based organizations, and funded solely from domain registrations.

That would be a hard sell in the US, and possibly the UN, but it's a reasonable proposition. Staffing it would be the tricky part.


Paul

Yeah... anytime someone retreats to a "safe room", a'la Jodie Foster... that's worth a few column inches.

--- Ross

I'm on a 10 day vacation Fraggler..

Youtube does pay royalties, in the 100 of millions a year.
People do not know that but they do. Megaupload never paid squat.

Is there pirated content on youtube? Of course there is.
Are they profiting from it? Yes, mam.

So what makes them different from megaupload?
The fact that they are actively combating it. It is a losing battle but they are NOT encouraging it. They do not reward people that upload pirated content like megaupload did. If your content was downloaded a million times--- they would pay you over $1000 dollars. They knew who uploaded the file, they knew the file was pirated content--- and they paid a reward for it.



I have uploaded youtube videos in which they ask me to prove I have the rights to the video--- megaupload never did that.


Having transparency with the feds goes a long way. Youtube is on US territory. Has opened its doors to the authorities in trying to combat piracy.

Megaupload was the complete opposite.
They were the classic crooks with offshore hostings, hiding pirated files by not indexing them.

I understand people's need for space to store stuff.

What I do not understand is people's need to share their stuff.
By that I mean share stuff that you made... you created.
People have 2GB files they created themselves and have an urgency to share with the world?

I guess there are vast numbers of "closet" content providers.

Please read the last statement with sarcasm turned all the way up.

well he could have been playing on his laptop on a beach somewhere sipping margaritas, in which case, I could completely get that.
I've deliberately tried to stay away from this thread, but I feel that this is too important of an issue to completely ignore. I still think Megaupload, based solely on what I read in the charge document, operated a racket, and encouraged and rewarded piracy. Whether they are guilty as charged, I leave up to the judge to decide.

What I'm most concerned about is how far one government is allowed to go to enforce it's laws and I therefore strongly support a non-political entity to govern the Internet that Paul eluded to above.

I would like to see a mix of corporate representation as well as representation from the Internet innovators such as the WordPress community, the social media sites, the search engines, maybe even some of our own successful Warriors.

Am I being a dreamer? Maybe. But perhaps if we actually stop arguing about Megaupload and start concerning ourselves with the bigger picture, we may actually accomplish something.

Let's see if we can't push for this independent entity to govern the Internet. That would be something, I think, worth fighting for.

So you think that while some federal agent were raiding megaupload, the rest of the Federal agents in the US were at home sleeping??

It was just a handful of agents at most, assigned to this case.

This case is super high profile because of its massive size.

At the same time, murderers, child molesters, human traffickers, and other terrible people were being investigated, raided and arrested by the feds.

Do not be fooled that all other criminals were running rampant without a care in the world, because the feds were too busy with taking down megaupload.

Dozens charged in child porn ring bust - US news - Crime & courts - msnbc.com

U.S. authorities bust Mexico drug network in Arizona | Reuters

HumanTrafficking.org | News & Updates: Massage Parlours Raided in Kansas City, Missouri; Trafficking Suspected

Next?

I gave one possible answer in post #209. If anything, it depends how the law is
defined on something.

I guess it's too much to ask some people to read the indictment. Then again, it
can feel better ranting or raving over something they don't like, yet might still
be arguably justified depending on the circumstances.

A little Know Your Customer would suffice to me. Make no mistake YouTube is all to happy to capitalize on the "user experience" of "file sharing". YouTube per se is not a typical pirate platform but they DO make it easy for people to "share" because they are concerned with making money and having lots of users, so they are too good to hold their "sharers" responsible for the uploaded content.

I do not agree with you that its 100% impossible to police content. Just adding customer verification would solve most of the problems, but this would not ring nicely with users who want to "share their free speech" crap and Youtube are all to happy to pretend like it is enough that they take down stuff when asked. Hey how about I steal stuff from the shop and give it back if asked? How come it does not work like that in any other business on the planet but its, somehow, fine if its done with other peoples intellectual property?

Screw Youtube if you want my honest opinion. There's lots of things they could do if they really cared, but they don't because it would cost them money. Pirates cost me money and anybody who provides a platform for this is bad in my book.

In Spain there is the SGAE that make things like this on behalf of the authors, many burglars playing a guitar in the street had been fined.

Then the leaders of the SGAE were arrested for using this money to finance themselves a lifestyle.

Mike,Watching them sue the folks at MegaUpload would have been... interesting. I doubt they'd have standing, unless they own the copyright to some of that pirated content.

I'm sure they were pleased about the closing/seizures, but they probably didn't have much to do with it.


Paul

Amazon would be more concerned about creating something as good as Netflix.

My video/TV watching has shot up since all of these streaming services have taken off. It makes it so easy to spend money. A subscription to Netflix or Amazon is probably cheaper than a sub to megaupload too.

If it was going to involve the kind of games Megaupload was allegedly playing with the law, that's definitely a good idea.