Kim Dotcom claims to have evidence Joe Biden ordered the shutdown of Megaupload | Hacker News Reader

Kim Dotcom claims to have evidence Joe Biden ordered the shutdown of Megaupload

torrentfreak.com

34 pointsveesahni16 comments

Can we get some neutral coverage on this guy once in a while? Why always torrentfreak?

I haven't seen anybody else cover the story.

That's because there rarely is a story, there's just TorrentFreak whose business is pandering to digg (once upon a time), reddit, hn, etc and the people on them who want to believe they're saving the world one pirated movie at a time.

The really sad part is it works just as well on hn as it ever did on digg.

Well, if this actually turns up like Kim says it is, then it WILL be a story (right?).

Wow. Do Democratic VPs always run the Internet? (In case you're wondering about partisanship, there's only been one Republican VP since the internet really took off, and he was busy running the world...)

Then that's a sign the credibility is a bit lacking.

Basically, in his position, Dotcom is free to spout off whatever he likes, he would have a hard time getting himself in any deeper. That does not mean anything he says is worth anything.

That's because Torrentfreak is willing to make a huge full-page story with a linkbait title specifically written to rile Reddit up instead of actually reporting the story.

I don't think there can be neutral coverage of this. Everybody is on one side or the other. Dotcom, before MegaUpload's shut down, was already a polarizing figure. Now, he is even more polarizing because of the way everything went down.

When the MegaUpload stories begin to blur into politics is when I just stop reading and caring.

the interesting thing about megaupload as i understand it is, that even though they are protected by the digital millenium copyright act, there was something different in their service. they try to prove that they were knowing that copyright infringement did take place?

so as i understand megaupload, there were many many links pointing to the same failes, as they wanted to minimze same uploads, meaning that they got takedown notices for links rather than content. in a nutshell: they removed links instead of content afaik, and there they differ from rapidshare and others... can somebody help me out if this is the case? (i never used megaupload but as i understand it that was there working model)

As far as I recall, they were not protected as internal emails disclosed not just knowledge of piracy, the company actively encouraged it from within.

"Romney is simply the better bet for a free Internet."

Didn't Romney say something to the effect of 'Porn should be banned on the internet'?

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)[1]: Signed into law by President Clinton on October 28, 1998. I don't care what your politics are but the Democratic party is not the party that wants to stop the Republicans[2] from shutting down the Internet as we know it. Most people on HN probably think they do, however.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A...

[2] This presupposes that the Republican Party want to shut down freedom on the Internet.

For all the blather that gets thrown around about the DMCA, the safe harbor provision is what basically allows a large number of the biggest sites on the internet to operate. Do you think we would have a YouTube without it?

Who knew the DMCA banned porn? Not me, that's for sure!

If the porn is copyrighted then the DMCA will allow the content owners to send a DMCA notice for each copyright infringement. That's the law and now you know it.

First Waco, then Megaupload.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com