“This Mega takedown was possible because of corruption on the highest political level, serving the interests of the copyright extremists in Hollywood,” he says. “Mega has become a re-election pawn.”
The sad thing is, as flamboyant a character as he is, he's probably right.
[1] http://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-lashes-out-against-corrup...
Procedural errors indicate to me that someone put a "rush" on the case and the results were sloppy.
Mission accomplished.
It seems extremely likely the government could have proved that Megaupload was built on copyright infringement. But instead they're just going to come out discredited, making it harder for such actions to succeed in the future.
All that's happened here is that they've taken down one player among many, and their ability to get the rest is lessened. That's not what they wanted here.
1. the intimidation factor of the US government willing and able to do anything to any company over "intellectual property", including foreign ones, even if it falls well outside the legal jurisidiction of any state.
2. forcing the hand of foreign jurisidictions to expedite US government processes to carry out these types of activities on pain of economic issues, e.g. the infamous trade blacklists, or other on-going diplomatic relations.
3. the acquisition of assets and resources for the federal governments budget (this runs into billions every year that is siezed).
4. minimum total resource usage for highly effective results means that very little political or judicial capital risks being spent. Someone somewhere in government has likely benefitted greatly from this outcome or certainly will in future even just for the potential to recreate the same type of results.
5. the creation of precedent that causes jurisidictions formulating their own domestic rights and justice system around new technology to reconsider what is the norm or what is pragmatic based on global "standards" or actions. This is particularly strong pressure for English-speaking/Anglo countries.
All this without judicial oversight and no domestic political repurcussions because of the accepted plutocratic culture of the US.
If this had been the actions of China or Russia against a US company, e.g. against Google/Youtube, I wonder how people would have felt then...
TL;DR. One could say this is about as "ideal" as it gets: "we, the US government, can get you anytime, anywhere, for anything with little effort or reason - laws are irrelevant".
People who feel themselves sufficiently hidden from the US government, or just don't care, are going to come along and create a raft of similar services to fill the same space.
SOPA has turned into CISPA. So its not like they stopped trying to coerce their way into legislation.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/04/12/expert-new-ci...
Consider that protest has now been classified as a low level form of 'terrorism' according to the DHS. How easy will it become for someone who is sharing a leaked rip of the next upcoming 'blockbuster' a cyber criminal? (It will likely be an issue raised by all the proponents of SOPA and PIPA whose IP/Hollywood lobbyists are wine-dining as we speak.)
You make the deadly assumption that they intend to enforce the letter of the Law as its 'clearly defined,' and nothing more. You also clearly neglect just how tightly bound Corporate and State alliances are, I would argue they are one in the same, you do realize that insider trading is legal for Congress/Senate members, right?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57323527/congress-trad...
Was the more interesting bit for me. This could actually have serious ramifications. Kim seems devoted.
Not in the least. It's a very real possibility.