Why the feds smashed Megaupload
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
Why isn't the media playing up this angle more? It writes itself.
Yes, people will start claiming PIPA and SOPA are unnecessary, and they may be taken of the table. Hurray!
Of course, this now means that much of the evil stuff in PIPA and SOPA is already reality, but instead of being angry about it, we're now breathing a sigh of relief.
In the mean time, the feds will start taking down sites left, right and center, and across the globe, without any form of due process. And we'll be cool with it, because things could have been so much worse with PIPA and SOPA...
We're not seeing "infringers charged" here. Megaupload is gone. The entertainment industry has been playing judge and jury, with the feds as their executioners, and the justice department giving it a thin veneer of legal process.
PIPA and SOPA are more of less a reality without the laws actually being passed. That in itself is way scarier than the actual content of those laws. And thanks to this wonderful sleight of hand, it will now be perceived as if it were a good thing.
Maybe not yet checkmate, but definitely: check.
"All this bill does is codify existing practice" was the same argument used in that case. "And anyway, there are rigorous procedures in place."
Rigorous secret procedures, that is. Kind of like the rigorous procedures that pertained to water-boarding.
"The Congress shall have Power (1)... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts (2), by securing for limited Times (3) to Authors and Inventors (4) the exclusive Right (5) to their respective Writings and Discoveries (6)" (Article I, Section 8)
(1) This is a grant of power, not a mandate. Congress may exercise it, but is not compelled to do so.
(2) The goal is for the public benefit, not for private gain. It is meant to advance our knowledge and culture, not provide a permanent rent-seeking scheme.
(3) There is nothing "limited" about "life of author + 70 years"; the life of the author is technically indefinite, and furthermore 70 years is on the order of a person's life expectancy. The original term of copyright in this country was 14 years from date of publication.
(4) In no way is this protection afforded to publishers, producers, distributors, or other people whose contribution to the work is laborious but not novel. Novelty is subject to protection, not labor.
(5) Nowhere is there a requirement for violations of this "exclusive Right" to be crimes; nor is the government charged with enforcement of it. Copyright was meant to be a civil, not criminal, matter.
(6) The recording of a musical production or motion picture is not a "writing or discovery" and is thus not technically subject to these protections to begin with.
As I understand it, all of these limitations have been overridden by various treaties signed by the United States. Nevertheless, if you're going to use the Constitution as the source of your argument, it's best to know that what we have and what was intended are two drastically different things.
1. It just takes enforcement of current laws, not passing of new ones, to fight piracy.
2. This really proves that SOPA is the result of heavy lobbying by companies that think passing a bill fixes their problems, because if the US government saw piracy as such a problem, there would be way more takedowns of companies like Mega Conspiracy and way less censorship bill-passing.
Given the connections between Megaupload and major celebrities affiliated with the recording industry, and between the industry and government officials, it'll be very hard to draw conclusions from any of this until far more facts come out, if ever.
The process has to be balanced between catching the criminals and public good. Right now there are laws in place and due process to stop pirating. Megaupload showed they worked.
The target of those bills is greater than just online piracy, I think you'll find they are capable of being used for all sorts of counterfeiting and unorthodox competition. For example theres a site that has been a buzz with some of my friends, selling knock off games workshop models. Those laws can be used to block those sites as well.
Its all about maximising profits, and protecting markets. Hence the current methods eat into said profits to enforce and are unacceptable for profit creation.
The feds took a long time to gather the evidence they needed for a warrant before they took Megaupload down.
Under SOPA, all that would be needed is the accusation of copyright infringement alone.
That's a pretty important distinction.
Think of how many copyrights could have been saved if only some new draconian laws had allowed swifter actions.
Yep well I consider it a small price to pay, if the alternative is handing some of my liberty along with internet security over to the government and/or the entertainment industry.
Now obviously I'm not the one paying the price, so I do understand why "content owners" are not satisfied with the status-quo..
It's really amazing how things have changed at the top regarding copyright infringement, that they treat copyright infringers as some of the most wanted criminals. What's next? Sending the drones after them? Giving the chair to the Megaupload or ThePirateBay's founders? It's becoming really ridiculous.
And thus far they're about as effective at impeding my access to copyrighted content as they are impeding my access to illegal drugs. Fortunately trying to limit access to copyrighted material doesn't drive people's money to possibly terrorist organizations, but that's another issue.
Seriously:
1) Google "watch 30 rock online"
2) Click first link
3) Click "Search links" for newest episode of 30 rock
4) Go to second to last page of results (just because the first and last page of results are always fake, as a rule - you always shoot for the middle)
5) Click random link
6) Watch Dove Soap ad
7) Watch tonight's episode of 30 Rock
Replace "30 rock" with pretty much any other TV show (at least one that's been over for more than 30 minutes) or movie, and the same approach will get you to a working video, though you may have to click a few fake links before finding a real one.
Is there a solution to this? Idunno. I do know that the "overseas" thing is a total red herring - in this particular example, that "first link" that I clicked was sidereel.com, registered to the Rovi Corporation in Santa Clara, CA. Completely and utterly within the jurisdiction of the US government, and clearly linking to pirated versions of almost every TV show that's on the air right now, and pretty much nothing else. If linking to content was such a clear and easily prosecutable crime, I'd think they'd be taking down sites like that, too, rather than leaving them active.
I can't help but wonder if perhaps there's not such a legal consensus on how criminal sites like Sidereel are, and that's why they're trying to go after the endpoints that sites like this point to instead, as well as passing laws that would specifically make linking to them illegal.
However, none of these people were actually found guilty. Ninjavideo was a plea deal, and the TVShack guy hasn't faced trial yet.
Interestingly for the TVShack case, a similar website was found to not be distributing TV shows in the UK in 2010[3]. Despite this, the first ruling was for the extradition of the TVShack admin.
[1]: http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jan/13/tvshack-student-fo...
[2]:http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/facebook-pos...
That's how bad it is, and I assume it's because of how easy it is to throw up megaupload clones and a blog with links.
Well, not yet at least. But if they continue making the penalties more and more draconian then only the hardened criminals will get into that lucrative space and the money will be going to violent groups.
I think it's because of that facility that they are seeking more effective methods of mitigating the proliferation non-authorized distribution of copyrighted material.
Many people are arguing the same thing. Access to unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material is trivial. Their methods at controlling the floodgates are ineffective. They quite realize that and that's why they're attempting to have congress pass a blunt tool. They want to have a control mechanism which is as easy for them to use as it is for people to find illegal content. I don't thin they're going to get it, but I believe that's the motivation behind their efforts.
They want some symmetry.
So the law of America and desires of the copyright cartel trump every other country's laws?
Overall this seems like a big orchestrated F U to the opponents of SOPA (the Internet).
Really if they provided us, what we all are screaming for - better access and selection to their product on the Internet, MegaUpload and future services wouldn't be a concern. Ridiculous!
Updated: Further some of those behind MegaUpload are artist's of the RIAA.....
___
The list is awesome. They probably compiled very similar lists in 1917 in Russia about the possessions of capitalist pigs: the lists justified expropriating the listed grossly excessive goods into hands of workers and peasants.
That's what the article implies: they were too thick and therefore got expropriated. Raskulachili!
If Megaupload had played ball and used some of that cash to buy a few Representatives and maybe a Senator or two, they'd probably be fine.
That's how business works today.
-delete your chat logs and email -don't have sensitive(incriminating, personal) information in logs at all (see 37sig story) -don't use your own (illegal) product -"outsource" the code to a "separate" entity, obfuscate it, claim ignorance and trade secret -donate to senators, judges, prosecutors, presidents
All pretty obvious, I'm sure you can think of more, if your Mazerati depends on it.
So if my site doesn't have a search engine, I'm at risk of being seen as purposely concealing what my users are doing?
...seriously? Because the Wikileaks files wouldn't have made it out into the world without the pirate bay? Please.
And what does their choice of license plate have to do with their guilt or innocence, anyway?
I mean, they arrested the graphic designer!...
If profits do not increase, then Megaupload did not impact profits.
If I recall, the pirate bay "thumb their noses at international laws, all while pocketing significant advertising revenues from trafficking in free, unlicensed copyrighted materials." as well.
That's heartless. What about the millions of people who have decided they are entitled to free entertainment for life? What are they going to do with all that free time that they won't be spending in front of a TV stuffing their faces with cheetos? They'll be lost, adrift!
The medium change, but the crime appears to have remained essentially the same.
There were two interesting things to me:
1) the email from Kimble to PayPal where he was clearly trying to cut off PayPal to his competitors whilst keeping it for himself; trying to convince PayPal that they shouldn't do business with those other guys.
2) the type of evidence they have makes me wonder if it was an inside job, or perhaps even a setup by a competitor who hacked into their systems. It doesn't feel like a case the FBI would pick up without a strong bootstrap.