[UPDATE] Feds Take Down Megaupload

Robert Ewing

New member
Mar 2, 2011
1,977
0
0
henritje said:
Robert Ewing said:
Megaupload is based in Hong Kong.

Most of it's founders are from New Zealand are they not? In fact, that is irrelevant, most have no affiliation with the US. (Not sure if that is right, but I might of heard that somewhere.)

So Why? Why are the feds taking it down? WHY? WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
ONE server (not even a big one) was based in the US (I think somewhere near the east coast).
Ah, well that would make sense if that server was seized. That is incredibly justifiable. But not the whole bloody thing...
 

DanDeFool

New member
Aug 19, 2009
1,891
0
0
Grey Carter said:
Megaupload's CEO, who is none other than multi-million selling hip-hop producer Swizz Beatz. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3fjGvRX5cg] Yes, that Swizz Beatz. The one married to Alicia Keys./
So the CEO of (allegedly) one of the biggest facilitators of online piracy is also a legitimate music producer?

...

It's like looking at a serpent trying to eat its own tail.
 

rapidoud

New member
Feb 1, 2008
547
0
0
Team America, World Police.

When's the last time we heard of anyone being extradited from the US? Now I remember why SOPA is bad for everyone, as they'll literally try and police the world, something a regular citizen in a completely unrelated country should have no business worrying about.
 

Wintermoot

New member
Aug 20, 2009
6,563
0
0
Robert Ewing said:
henritje said:
Robert Ewing said:
Megaupload is based in Hong Kong.

Most of it's founders are from New Zealand are they not? In fact, that is irrelevant, most have no affiliation with the US. (Not sure if that is right, but I might of heard that somewhere.)

So Why? Why are the feds taking it down? WHY? WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
ONE server (not even a big one) was based in the US (I think somewhere near the east coast).
Ah, well that would make sense if that server was seized. That is incredibly justifiable. But not the whole bloody thing...
copyright laws have draconian punishments on them.
 

Jalius

New member
Jul 6, 2010
5
0
0
Unless they can prove that MegaUpload's employees knowingly let pirated material be uploaded to their website they do not have a case for copyrights infringement.

This is a fool's errand by the US gov.
Even more so, considering that people find new sources when one is taken down.
 
May 29, 2011
1,179
0
0
Isn't this the point where the people should be rioting on the streets? Massive amounts of people protested against sopa making it clear that they don' want the law passed, and they just do this regardless of that. This is not fucking democracy. This is corrupt fucking plutocracy.
 

Asehujiko

New member
Feb 25, 2008
2,119
0
0
Awexsome said:
So long as they aren't charged with the stuff Megaupload was, yes.

The thing that Mega did to itself was promoting and benefiting off the piracy. The charges aren't just for copyright infringement but money laundering, conspiracy, and racketeering.
Except that the money laundering is an utterly bogus claim that hinges entirely on the fallacious claim that if alleged infringers make use of the premium service, the premium service was intentionally created for laundering money in co-operation with the infringers.

Sort of like claiming the government is guilty of laundering because drug dealers pay taxes on their house where they sell weed.
 

maninahat

New member
Nov 8, 2007
4,397
0
0
Orekoya said:
maninahat said:
In some cases, I think that wide-spread, clear cutting is required.
And since you accept that then next time those doing the cutting need only alittle less evidence for support of their tree cutting than they had this time because they've already seen you accept the action. Then next time alittle less, then next just alittle, then next time none because it's happening all the time anyways. Enjoy your barren field.
Who's to say I'd allow the next time, if it had a little less evidence? My basis on whether a branch needs cutting is based entirely upon observing whether it has gone bad. If it looks mostly healthy than why would I even bother?

That's problem with slippery slope arguments; it just assumes that no one would notice the fact that things are getting worse, step by step. Using the same argument, Santorum claimed that allowing gay sex would eventually lead to the permitting of man-on-dog sex. Santorum seems to think that one change will inevitably open the flood gates.

Today, I brushed my teeth. Next I'll be brushing my tongue. Before you know it, I'll be brushing my eyeballs.
 

Gindil

New member
Nov 28, 2009
1,621
0
0
Grey Carter said:
[UPDATE] Feds Take Down Megaupload


Popular file-sharing website, Megaupload, has been shut down by the federal authorities. Oh, and it turns out its CEO is a music producer. Quite a famous one.

Before we get to the good part, here's the skinny on the takedown. The indictment, which was just unsealed today, accuses Megaupload of breaking anti-piracy laws and claims its pirate-enabling ways have cost copyright holders more than $500 million in lost revenue. According to reports, charges have been laid against seven Megaupload employees - four of which are already in custody in New Zealand. The Department of Justice reckons this is "among the largest criminal copyright cases ever brought by the United States," and listed the coming charges as "racketeering conspiracy, conspiring to commit copyright infringement, conspiring to commit money laundering and two substantive counts of criminal copyright infringement."

Megaupload's side projects, Megavideo, Megapix, Megabox, and yes, even Megaporn have all been taken down as well.

Now, you might recall that Megaupload was having some legal troubles with universal over a bizzare hip-hop video praising the Megupload service. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114751-Megaupload-Suing-Universal-Over-Pulled-YouTube-Video] Now the video makes a bit more sense as it turns out it was produced by Megaupload's CEO, who is none other than multi-million selling hip-hop producer Swizz Beatz. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3fjGvRX5cg] Yes, that Swizz Beatz. The one married to Alicia Keys.

Beatz wasn't named in the indictment, and he's yet to comment on the situation, but Megaupload has released the following statement:

"The fact is that the vast majority of Mega's Internet traffic is legitimate, and we are here to stay. If the content industry would like to take advantage of our popularity, we are happy to enter into a dialogue. We have some good ideas. Please get in touch."
Update: While the Megaupload domain has been seized, you can access the site, or a facsimile thereof, via this IP address.

Source: Venture Beat [http://venturebeat.com/2012/01/19/megaupload-shut-down-swiss-beatz-ceo-fbi-piracy/]

Permalink
There is a VERY large risk that the IP address you have is used for phishing. I would highly recommend taking it down until the IP address is vetted.
 

Orekoya

New member
Sep 24, 2008
485
0
0
maninahat said:
Who's to say I'd allow the next time, if it had a little less evidence? My basis on whether a branch needs cutting is based entirely upon observing whether it has gone bad. If it looks mostly healthy than why would I even bother?

That's problem with slippery slope arguments; it just assumes that no one would notice the fact that things are getting worse, step by step. Using the same argument, Santorum claimed that allowing gay sex would eventually lead to the permitting of man-on-dog sex. Santorum seems to think that one change will inevitably open the flood gates.

Today, I brushed my teeth. Next I'll be brushing my tongue. Before you know it, I'll be brushing my eyeballs.
I am glad you are logical and rational, now please tell me what exactly makes you think our government functions off such. And yes, that was a slippery slope argument, and it's what the government runs off from; they call it precedence. And next time with such they just need to cite this case and point out how their current case is enough like it to warrant their actions. And typically when setting one up they go for an overabundance of evidence.

And as for Santorum, well, he's been in his office since 1995 and is currently running for presidency. Are you going to tell me that slippery slope arguments aren't working in his favor politically?
 

maninahat

New member
Nov 8, 2007
4,397
0
0
Orekoya said:
maninahat said:
Who's to say I'd allow the next time, if it had a little less evidence? My basis on whether a branch needs cutting is based entirely upon observing whether it has gone bad. If it looks mostly healthy than why would I even bother?

That's problem with slippery slope arguments; it just assumes that no one would notice the fact that things are getting worse, step by step. Using the same argument, Santorum claimed that allowing gay sex would eventually lead to the permitting of man-on-dog sex. Santorum seems to think that one change will inevitably open the flood gates.

Today, I brushed my teeth. Next I'll be brushing my tongue. Before you know it, I'll be brushing my eyeballs.
I am glad you are logical and rational, now please tell me what exactly makes you think our government functions off such. And yes, that was a slippery slope argument, and it's what the government runs off from; they call it precedence. And next time with such they just need to cite this case and point out how their current case is enough like it to warrant their actions. And typically when setting one up they go for an overabundance of evidence.

And as for Santorum, well, he's been in his office since 1995 and is currently running for presidency. Are you going to tell me that slippery slope arguments aren't working in his favor politically?
The slippery slope technique may help Santorum win lots of support, but I am yet to see the government legalising man on dog action like he claimed. Slippery slopes, thank goodness, tend to be cheap rhetoric rather than a properly thought out prediction.

Meanwhile, as for the "raid" on Megaupload, I think it is more a case of the FBI testing a new strategy, rather than them seeing how much they can get away with. This is one of the more dramatic acts they've taken against piracy, and a lot of work probably went into it on their part. They will be watching closely to see if it pays off: seeing if they can easily convict the employees, and observing what effect the shutting down a major website will have on piracy.

If they struggle to make their case in court, or if they find out that pirates just flock to new webzones as quickly as the FBI can take them down, then they may give up this strategy altogether. If it proves to be cheap and easy, they might make a habit of closing down these webspaces. I assume youtube is safer, just because it is youtube, but other file sharing sights would be at greater risk. I predict they'll find that shutting down major sites won't stop piracy by any means, but it could detere the casual opportunists, who wouldn't bother searching much beyond the most popular, convenient providers.
 

DTWolfwood

Better than Vash!
Oct 20, 2009
3,716
0
0
tony2077 said:
DTWolfwood said:
dammit to hell! they are the only ones that gives me my full 6.25MB/s download speed! >.< also have like 3-5 months of my premium sub left!

man this blows gonna have to use torrents to dl anime again?! bah!
torrents are good for some things but when its illegal its illegal so can't defend that part of them
its spiraled out of control now. Every DDL file sharing site is running scared. Can't DDL anything anymore. Guess this is gonna be a new boon for Torrents
 

njrk97

New member
May 30, 2011
247
0
0
great with this dow i wont be bale to stream my cartoon or anime and before you rage I ONLY STREAM STUFF THAT IS NOT BEING SOLD BY THE MAKERS ANYMORE LIKE OLD STUFF CAUSE THEIR NOT MAMING MONEY OF IT ANYMORE ANYWAY
 

WOPR

New member
Aug 18, 2010
1,912
0
0
Grey Carter said:
Update: While the Megaupload domain has been seized, you can access the site, or a facsimile thereof, via this IP address. [http://109.236.83.66/]
Uhh, is it just me, or does clicking that redirection link set off ALL MY VIRUS SENSORS?!

Seriously I clicked it and AVG, Avast, WoT, Firefox, EVERYTHING flipped the f*ck out
Can anyone confirm this? or did the FBI just brand it a virused link for all programs until they can sieze it too..? (I'm just curious because the last time I had this much crap flip out on me was right before my computer died and wouldn't even turn back on before)
 

Mau95

Senior Member
Nov 11, 2011
347
0
21
Wait... I thought they were actually laundering money, not just conspiring. Or is the news trying to trick me?
 

JoaoJatoba

Deadman Walking
Dec 31, 2010
55
0
0
Why was MegaUpload really shut down?

BY Shauna Myers

(UPDATE: Forbes covered this story a day after this was posted. Awesome guys! (http://goo.gl/KnsW7) )

In December of 2011, just weeks before the takedown, Digital Music News reported on something new that the creators of #Megaupload were about to unroll. Something that would rock the music industry to its core. (http://goo.gl/A7wUZ)

I present to you... MegaBox. MegaBox was going to be an alternative music store that was entirely cloud-based and offered artists a better money-making opportunity than they would get with any record label.

"UMG knows that we are going to compete with them via our own music venture called Megabox.com, a site that will soon allow artists to sell their creations directly to consumers while allowing artists to keep 90 percent of earnings," MegaUpload founder Kim 'Dotcom' Schmitz told Torrentfreak

Not only did they plan on allowing artists to keep 90% of their earnings on songs that they sold, they wanted to pay them for songs they let users download for free.

"We have a solution called the Megakey that will allow artists to earn income from users who download music for free," Dotcom outlined. "Yes that's right, we will pay artists even for free downloads. The Megakey business model has been tested with over a million users and it works."
 

maninahat

New member
Nov 8, 2007
4,397
0
0
JoaoJatoba said:
Why was MegaUpload really shut down?

BY Shauna Myers

(UPDATE: Forbes covered this story a day after this was posted. Awesome guys! (http://goo.gl/KnsW7) )

In December of 2011, just weeks before the takedown, Digital Music News reported on something new that the creators of #Megaupload were about to unroll. Something that would rock the music industry to its core. (http://goo.gl/A7wUZ)

I present to you... MegaBox. MegaBox was going to be an alternative music store that was entirely cloud-based and offered artists a better money-making opportunity than they would get with any record label.

"UMG knows that we are going to compete with them via our own music venture called Megabox.com, a site that will soon allow artists to sell their creations directly to consumers while allowing artists to keep 90 percent of earnings," MegaUpload founder Kim 'Dotcom' Schmitz told Torrentfreak

Not only did they plan on allowing artists to keep 90% of their earnings on songs that they sold, they wanted to pay them for songs they let users download for free.

"We have a solution called the Megakey that will allow artists to earn income from users who download music for free," Dotcom outlined. "Yes that's right, we will pay artists even for free downloads. The Megakey business model has been tested with over a million users and it works."
So the implication being made, is that the FBI might have closed down MegaUpload because MegaUpload were planning to release an unrelated free radio business that might compete with the music industry. I think it is a stretch. There is an assumption that:
a) The music industry feels threatened by a new business venture that has had very little field experience, which they could easily just emulate themselves if they felt it was a viable business strategy (despite it sounding very high risk and potentially unstable, on paper).
b) That the entire music industry is single minded about this, despite Spotify, i-tunes, radio stations and record companies all run by different folks.
c) That this "centralised" music industry has the FBI in its pocket, or enough influence to make the FBI spuriously charge MegaUpload.
d) Even if they wanted to close MegaUpload for the reason suggested, how exactly would that prevent the owners from creating this new, seperate "Box" company label?

I think it is a case of people looking too hard to find a pretext, so that they end up placing a disproportionate ammount of weight on vague theories, rather than the more concrete motive being put up by the FBI (that MegaUpload were committing serious crimes to begin with).