Some Megaupload suspects get time in court

Four of the Megaupload team who were arrested on piracy charges Thursday in New Zealand had a brief court hearing on Friday. NZHerald.co.nz reports that Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom (previously Kim Schmitz and Kim Tim Jim Vestor) along with Bram van der Kolk, Finn Batato and Mathias Ortman, appeared at the North Shore District Court in Auckland.

The suspects' lawyers asked the judge for bail for their clients, which was opposed by the US lawyers who are seeking to extradite the suspects for alleged pirating activities. The judge in the case, Judge David McNaughton, ruled on Friday that the suspect be held in jail until Monday when they will get a bail application.

The three other men that were charged in the case, Julius Bencko, Sven Echternach and Andrus Nomm, remain at large as of this writing.

Meanwhile, more information has been revealed about the raid itself, which involved 76 local New Zealand law enforcement officials along with four FBI agents. The raids hit 10 addresses in New Zealand, including Dotcom's massive mansion in Coatsville. The raid also seized a large car collection at the mansion worth a total of over NZ$6 million. One of the cars was a NZ$500,000 Rolls Royce Phantom Drophead Coupe.

Over NZ$10 million in assets were also seized from various financial institutions in the raid. The police believe there could be even more money from Megaupload to be found in other financial institutions.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Intel CEO hints at Windows 8 tablet production status

Next Story

Microsoft admits to video playback issue with Xbox 360

31 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

So basically to get away with this, just don't have servers in the US, a .com domain name or reside in a country where the government will bend over to the US for a "free trade deal".

djdanster said,
So basically to get away with this, just don't have servers in the US, a .com domain name or reside in a country where the government will bend over to the US for a "free trade deal".

thats it! the NZ government likes to call the US "Daddy" while getting slap on the ass!

Soldiers33 said,
stupid americans think they own they world, just all need to die and get lost and sort out their trillions of debts.

hahahaha

OK so here is what the whole case is about:

Megaupload is being sued for not properly taking care of DMCA requests, They always took care of them. The companies and agencies have said that the reason they are being sued is that they only took down the link for the content that was in the request and not actually removing the files. They are claiming that Megaupload had multiple links to the files. This will prove extremely hard to prove in court as it is more likely that multiple people uploaded the same file hence the multiple links. That would mean that the copyright holders were demanding that Megaupload searched their enter cluster for any files related to the request which is not a part of a DMCA request at all and therefore a request would have to be submitted for every link to be taken down. Copyright holders don't like that and now Megaupload is dead.

Tyler Morrison said,
OK so here is what the whole case is about:

Megaupload is being sued for not properly taking care of DMCA requests, They always took care of them. The companies and agencies have said that the reason they are being sued is that they only took down the link for the content that was in the request and not actually removing the files. They are claiming that Megaupload had multiple links to the files. This will prove extremely hard to prove in court as it is more likely that multiple people uploaded the same file hence the multiple links. That would mean that the copyright holders were demanding that Megaupload searched their enter cluster for any files related to the request which is not a part of a DMCA request at all and therefore a request would have to be submitted for every link to be taken down. Copyright holders don't like that and now Megaupload is dead.

BTW how can the FBI sue you! If you are being SUED you don't get police knocking at your door. The five-count indictment, which alleges copyright infringement as well as conspiracy to commit money laundering and racketeering, described a site designed specifically to reward users who uploaded pirated content for sharing, and turned a blind eye to requests from copyright holders to remove copyright-protected files.

And though the company is based in Hong Kong and Dotcom was living in New Zealand, some of the alleged pirated content was hosted on leased servers in Virginia, and that was enough for U.S. prosecutors to act.

Here is my source http://www.usatoday.com/tech/n...load-arrests-FBI/52697186/1 and if you want to see the court papers, http://static2.stuff.co.nz/files/MegaUpload.pdf

There is nothing about being SUED!

It doesn't really make sense to me why the US thinks they can be extradited to the USA to be tried there, these people are not US Citizens and thus USA law doesn't apply to them, if they have broken the law in their respective home countries (pretty likely they have) then they should be tried there, NOT in the USA!

Inklin said,
It doesn't really make sense to me why the US thinks they can be extradited to the USA to be tried there, these people are not US Citizens and thus USA law doesn't apply to them, if they have broken the law in their respective home countries (pretty likely they have) then they should be tried there, NOT in the USA!

Sorry, that doesn't wash. If they indeed had servers in the US, then some of the infringing and illegal activity was occurring in the US, the physical presence (or lack thereof in this case) of a human being in the US is not relevant from what I can gather. So why should these people not be tried in the US as well as their native country?

from what i have read, there servers are based in Hong Kong, and there are some servers in the US and that's how they got them. Also there are emails that show, if a user uploads content that got more hits they would (the uploader) would get more money from Megaupload. im 50/50 about this, while i think they are making money off pirated software, well then you should get busted, but the NZ government shouldn't be getting involved in US problems.

ragey said,
Correct.but the New Zealand Government signed in a very non "workable" anti piracy law dubbed "skynet Law" http://www.stuff.co.nz/technol...infringement-notices-issued
Also The new zealand Government like the left wing party is weak & more into sucking to the U.S for a free trade deal.

Yes i know about the skynet law! i live in NZ and have to put up the current government! Also what is interesting is how the US help the current government put the skynet law though.

I'm fairly certain they didn't need that kind of force to get a legitimate business owner to appear in court. A strongly worded letter, public notice or hell even an e-mail would've done it.

They deserve to go down for it. fair enough people pirate for reasons such as "can't afford to pay for a film" but these guys made a profit off people downloading the pirate material. they should of filtered it out just like youtube. they knew what they were doing.

I support piracy but I hate the fact that people make money off it. that's wrong.

Shocked at the arrests on this side of the planet,problem is what about the tycoons behind rapidshare,filesonic, mediashare & all the hundreds of upload sites.Rapishare was the first i related to years ago,you have a premium account & you get points for users downloading from you

It would be a lot easier for them to move their servers to countries that just don't care. Example: Russia, Estonia etc.

In many cases FBI can just suck on their own turd when it comes to piracy in Russia.

Also doesn't it work somehow like this: A person can not be deemed quilty until the verdict has been announced? So seizing their property (exept the servers) is actually against the law itself. No news here, move along.

alwaysonacoffebreak said,
It would be a lot easier for them to move their servers to countries that just don't care. Example: Russia, Estonia etc.

In many cases FBI can just suck on their own turd when it comes to piracy in Russia.

Also doesn't it work somehow like this: A person can not be deemed quilty until the verdict has been announced? So seizing their property (exept the servers) is actually against the law itself. No news here, move along.

There servers are based in Hong Kong, and there are some servers in the US and that's how they got them.

They shouldn't be liable for pirating, all they are doing is hosting a service for anyone to upload and download. They should be chasing down the pirates not the people who are supplying a service for LEGIT files too!

Just greedy corporations hitting the easiest targets they can, they're going to just destroy the web as we know it. I'm not for pirating, but I'm also not against it when they market so much music and film at people/kids who cannot afford it and are made to REALLY want it.

The problem here is that they are actually hosting the pirated material and are probably deemed responsible for filtering such stuff from their own service.

Neobond said,
The problem here is that they are actually hosting the pirated material and are probably deemed responsible for filtering such stuff from their own service.

Yeah that has weight but it shouldn't be down to the host, it's just an easy target for these media corps to hit. Another one will only pop up. They're supposed to be the big guys with the brains running the system, though with everything these judges/corps do, they just appear to be senseless and greedy...

Why not set up a department to filter these sites or try to work with the sites in question to filter pirated files.

Piracy will ALWAYS be a problem while there is such a huge divide between the rich and the poor as long as they hit the poor with heavy marketing for stuff they can't afford. Bringing debt and piracy.

Neobond said,
Makes me wonder if cloud services can also be held liable?

Well exactly. Any service which allows you to store content can be used to infringe copyright.
Dropbox
Box.net
Google Docs
Your own email account etc etc

Neobond said,
Makes me wonder if cloud services can also be held liable?

I'm still wondering why ebay and amazon marketplace aren't liable? If they allow the selling of possibly counterfeit goods, then surely they are breaking the law. Obviously the only way to stop it would be for everything to be posted to amazong/ebay, them to thoroughly check each and evey item for legitmacy and then post them off.
I'd love to see that in court actually, amazon/ebay telling the companies suing to **** off or pay a few million that it'd cost to actually do that.

Neobond said,
The problem here is that they are actually hosting the pirated material and are probably deemed responsible for filtering such stuff from their own service.

That's what "they" say, but after reading the following I'm not so sure..

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 direct to consumers and allowing artists to keep 90% of earnings.

We have a solution called the Megakey that will allow artists to earn income from users who download music for free. 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. You can expect several Megabox announcements next year including exclusive deals with artists who are eager to depart from outdated business models.

Source: http://torrentfreak.com/from-r...load-and-kim-dotcom-111218/

Neobond said,
The problem here is that they are actually hosting the pirated material and are probably deemed responsible for filtering such stuff from their own service.

Of what I've read though, the staff always took DMCA takedown requests seriously and followed them through, which AFAIK means that for all intents and purposes, they're obeying the law. That said, IANAL, so don't quote me.

~D~ said,

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 direct to consumers and allowing artists to keep 90% of earnings.

The problem is that most artists no longer own their own songs. The studios where they record, their sponsors, etc actually have ownership of most of the song. Giving 90% of the earnings to the artists means if the artists aren't paying the people who actually own the copyrights, it is still copyright infringement and illegal.

SPARTdAN said,
...

It's all a sham really... When file hosts go down, the pirates will move elsewhere and bring down the next host. The pirates are even suspected of being insiders for bringing down a file host's competitors. Take out the pirates, not the hosts... oh but wait, then people will cry out anti-privacy for individuals. Guess you can't win... Make all IP free. Make money by selling hats or shirts.... get out in the world and get active.