6 ms·
New Zealand court rules Kim Dotcom can be extradited to US
- forrestthewoods 11y agoThis probably goes against popular HN opinion, but good. I'm glad. He's a scumbag who profited TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS off content that he knew to be copyright infringing. He deserves prison time.
- drdeca 11y agoWhat are your views on how it relates to the sovereignty of a nation?
- forrestthewoods 11y agoNew Zealand is a sovereign nation. One that has laws which established residency for Kim Dotcom. And one that has signed international treaties with other sovereign nations. New Zealand has used their own judicial system to reach this decision. They are behaving in accordance to their own laws and agreements they were willing participants to. In short, there's nothing wrong here. Not in the slightest.
- zorpner 11y agoDon't conflate lawful/unlawful with right/wrong -- it always leads to incoherent positions.
- forrestthewoods 11y agoI've not.
- it_learnses 11y agoYes you have.
- eliudnir 11y ago- I'm glad. He's a scumbag who profited TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS off content that he knew to be copyright infringing. He deserves prison time. Riiiiight.... Not conflating at all....
- forrestthewoods 11y agoIt is my opinion that Kim Dotcom's actions are both unlawful and wrong. They could have been unlawful but not wrong. Or lawful but wrong. Or even lawful and not wrong. However it is my opinion that they are simultaneously unlawful and wrong. Both the unlawfulness and wrongness are arguable on their own terms and merits without reference to the other. You're free to disagree with me. You may hold a different opinion. That's perfectly fine. However a dissenting opinion does not mean I conflated the situation. It does not mean that I'm acting irrationally. It's simple a different opinion. I don't mind downvotes for disagreeing with the HN HiveMind.
- vacri 11y ago> I don't mind downvotes for disagreeing with the HN HiveMind. When you have to hedge your comments like this, it's generally because your arguments are weak.
- 88e282102ae2e5b 11y agoYour opinions by themselves are irrelevant. I care why I should agree with you. Convince me. Give it a try. That's the point of HN. If I just wanted to hear what strangers think without any discussion of the larger issues, I'd be on reddit. So NZ has laws and treaties. Great. Should they? What's the tradeoff? Is the prosecution of someone who is clearly guilty allowing a greater evil to occur? Is the copyright system and corporate influence of governments a problem? I would have loved to hear the answers to any of these questions, but what I got was essentially "he is a criminal" and "laws shouldn't be broken". Sure.
- throwawaykf05 11y agoMost people would agree that profiting off somebody else's labor without their permission and without remuneration is wrong, and hence it is correct that it is unlawful. I see no incoherence in this particular case. Unfortunately, to many on HN, when people freely take the information created by content creators it's "disruption of outdated business models", but when the NSA freely takes their own information it's an "invasion of privacy". They simply don't realize that everybody would like to control the spread of information that is significant to themselves. This is why certain laws exist, yet they denounce some laws (such as copyright) as "wrong". The cognitive dissonance is astounding.
- philliphaydon 11y agoAs a kiwi. This entire case makes me sick. This should have been thrown out of court a long time ago. This is a political move and nothing else. It's NZ on its knees sucking off the United States. From day 1 it's been illegal. Hidden process, and laws changed to make the process more legal. I hate my country now.
- craigds 11y agoThis is exactly how I feel about it. It's not just this case obviously. I used to be proud to be a New Zealander, but the last 5-10 years have made it dreadfully obvious we're actually being operated by foreign and commercial interests, and local/national leaders have no interest in changing that. Sure, it's probably not as bad as certain other places, but it no longer fills me with pride. I'm tired of this country :(
- vacri 11y agoI went to NZ in January, and I was a bit sad how much traction the LotR films had gained as 'proxy for kiwiness'. From the airline to the airport to posters and promotional material everywhere; on city streets, in supermarkets... it almost felt like LotR had become part of the national psyche, that LotR was NZ, rather than something cool that NZ had done. I imagine it's waned a bit by now, though.
- feelix 11y agoAs another kiwi I couldn't agree more. It has been sickening to watch NZ bend over backwards to serve the USA. This has nothing to do with copyright infringement, and everything to do with bending over for the USA to maintain its benefits.
- forrestthewoods 11y agoWould you rather your country act as a safe haven to criminals in exchange for money?
- philliphaydon 11y ago
- xupybd 11y agoWhat he did should not be legal here. But he may have been clever enough to be at least in the grey area of the law. At least the law in NZ. From a strictly moral standpoint, he was ripping off the copyright holders no doubt and should not have been able to get away with it. The problem is he is getting extradited on these parts of the treaty: Receiving and transporting any money, valuable securities, or other property knowing the same to have been unlawfully obtained. … Obtaining property, money, or valuable securities by false pretenses or by conspiracy to defraud the public or any person by deceit or falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether such deceit or falsehood or any fraudulent means would or would not amount to a false pretense. I'm not sure you can argue that he did that, and if that is the case, you have to ask what is going on here? Of course, there is much to this that I don't know, but still it's a bit fishy.
- bmh_ca 11y agoThe name for the concern about infringement upon sovereignty by arresting a citizen, in this case, in another state is "extraterritoriality". There is a presumption against extraterritoriality. In other words, it is presumed that in a sovereign state the laws of other sovereigns do not apply. The exception to the presumption against extraterritoriality is agreement among states or a reciprocal judicial respect. The agreement is usually a treaty. The reciprocal respect is called "comity". There are other exceptions to the presumption against extraterritoriality, but I do not think they apply here. I have not looked at the details, but New Zealand and the U.S.A. must have an extradition treaty or otherwise the judge determining extradition believes that the judicial system in the U.S.A. is "comparable" (i.e. comity applies). The case looks appealable. So long as the independence of the judiciary is not impugned, neither is the sovereignty of New Zealand, and they may extradite as they feel fit.
- Mandatum 11y agoI don't believe copyright infringement should be extraditable.
- philliphaydon 11y agoIt's not. It's the other charges they slapped on top to justify it.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoAhh, so they're fraudulently charging him in order to justify it. Why haven't the US attorneys responsible for this been disbarred?
- fixermark 11y agoBecause the charges aren't fraudulent. They're dependent upon the secondary copyright infringement charge, but racketeering and money laundering are quite serious.
- leereeves 11y agoWhy should racketeering and money laundering be more serious than the underlying crimes? Those charges seem serious because they're associated with organized crime, but that's not the case here.
- jay_kyburz 11y agoShould be locked up next door to the guys that started YouTube.
- colindean 11y agoWhat was the method for determining the value of the loss?
- BinaryIdiot 11y agoConsidering there isn't a way to calculate the amount of money lost due to piracy in any accurate way it's essentially a made up number. Are the people who downloaded their content from mega likely to purchase the content if it isn't available from mega or is it more likely they'd use yet another piracy service?
- ikeboy 11y agoI believe they were referring to the profit by Megaupload, not the loss by infringed-upon rights-holders.
- nawtacawp 11y agoHow does the prison term benefit those who were the victim of his crime? imho Seems more of a civil rather than criminal issue. I guess the threat of prison could be seen as a deterrent to others.
- foxylad 11y agoI must admit I'm surprised at this verdict. I agree he probably has broken US copyright law, but the crown also broke several laws while conducting the case - data from his servers was sent to the US without legal authorisation, for instance. From a non-legal perspective, many Kiwis are uneasy at the level of force that the police used in the raid, and also at just how far NZ police bent over backwards at the behest of an overseas commercial entity.
- xupybd 11y agoYeah, that is the thing, as a Kiwi, I'm very uneasy about the influence of US law in NZ. I've got no problem with dot com going to Jail, but under the laws of the countries he does business in. They are stretching the extradition treaty pretty far on this one. No one is saying Kim is a saint, but I'd like to think as a New Zeland citizen my country would not give me up the US for breaking US laws, while on NZ soil.
- specialp 11y agoI think people here do not really remember or weren't around when Kim Dotcom was not internet hero of piracy, but he was "Kimble" with a website showing him in jets and with women. He has basically lived his whole life with schemes of dubious legality all to profit himself. He stole credit card information, and ran pump and dump schemes. I don't really like how the arm of US law is so long, but I also do not like Kimble very much either. He was too blatant and when you run a piracy scheme where everyone and their grandmothers can easily access it, it is going to be a matter of international diplomacy. The entertainment industry is a large export for the USA, so when it gets to a certain scale there will be diplomatic pressure. He was greedy and is now paying the price. Edit: In before the extolling the legitimate use of Megaupload... Let's face it, a vast majority of the business, traffic, and links there were for pirated content. If it were not for the proliferation of pirated content on there, he would have made a fraction of the money he made.
- murricaFsckYeah 11y agoGoogle (youtube) profits from "piracy", and yet they still are there. In fact, you could "pirate" anything and use cloud services to store illegal content. But no one is blaming the companies that provide "cloud" services for this piracy... All of this is what people call "hypocrisy".
- downandout 11y agoAnd Google has made billions from infringing content through YouTube. Are you going to say that Larry and Sergey should be arrested too?
- fixermark 11y agoThere are significant differences. For starters, YouTube worked with the government to establish a framework for making copyright management even vaguely tractable online where it wasn't before. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807622?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807622?hl=en Kim Dotcom, in contrast, basically tried to thumb his nose at several hundred years of intellectual property law shared among the former members of the British Empire. That's not going to win you any friends among those who enforce those laws.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago> Kim Dotcom, in contrast, basically tried to thumb his nose at several hundred years of intellectual property law shared among the former members of the British Empire. That's not going to win you any friends among those who enforce those laws. You would think not existing in the jurisdiction would be enough. Apparently not.
- lazaroclapp 11y agoIntent is a thing that exists in law. But then again, so is jurisdiction...
- trhway 11y ago>He's a scumbag who profited TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS off content that he knew to be copyright infringing. He deserves prison time. i'm sure that scumbag violated a lot of Saudi Arabia and Russian laws too (until of course he has all these years been a model Muslim as well as Russian patriot simultaneously). Why do you think infringement of US copyright takes precedence over violation of the Saudi Arabia or Russian laws? "He's scumbag who laughed at a caricature about prophet Mohammad. He deserves prison time." - does it sound ok to you?
- iaw 11y agoThis just feels like a waste of taxpayer money, is Kim Dotcom worth extraditing?
- ikeboy 11y agoHe made $100 million via (alleged) illegal copyright infringement. If that isn't worth it, how much would be?
- toomuchtodo 11y agoDevil's Advocate: Has anyone been prosecuted for the 2008 economic collapse? And you don't even have to extradite someone from NYC. But a few hundred million from a guy in New Zealand? Nail him to the cross so the MPAA gets what they want.
- csseinpoont 11y agoThere is no legitimate rule of law, only a tool of violenence to destroy those who oppose the state. You see the same narrative play out over and over again, strange how so view refuse to see the truth.
- the_hangman 11y agoA simple Googling will help you answer this query: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/04/magazine/only-one-top-banker-jail-financial-crisis.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/04/magazine/only-one-top-bank...
- saurik 11y ago(That was assuredly a rhetorical question, and while this article shows that one person did, it almost demonstrates the point more than refutes it...)
- throwawaykf05 11y agoSo your argument is, a bunch of guys got away because of a shortcomings in the law, so we should let this guy get away too?
- barney54 11y agoThis reminds me of a fantastic picture of Kim Dotcom: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/kim-dotcom-is-totally-stoked-to-get-his-cars-and-money-back/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/kim-dotcom-is-tot... It is over-the-top and ridiculous--just like Kim Dotcom.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- grmarcil 11y agoThis is actually a still from this also-fantastic video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf3bjKwwlMM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf3bjKwwlMM TL;DW: A lap of the infamous Nurburgring Nordschleife in Kim Dotcom's fleet of three Mercedes Benz CLK DTMs. The drivers are Kim Dotcom, his CMO from Megaupload, and Formula 1 World Champion Kimi Raikkonen. From the video description: "The production involved 30 cameras, 100+ crew, 2 helicopters, 2 camera cars and one fixed wing aircraft." Edit: The pic you linked is probably not a still from the video, technically speaking, but a promo shot done on site the same day.
- ChuckMcM 11y agoThe thing I like about that video is how he re-creates scenes from the Konami game.
- DyslexicAtheist 11y agoAnd he actually owns a custom made "work-bed": https://thequickword.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/the-restaurant-at-the-end-of-the-universe-ft-kim-dotcom/ https://thequickword.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/the-restaurant... forget standing desks :-D
- Mandatum 11y agoThe New Zealand government spent $5.8M NZD prosecuting a man for a law that holds a maximum fine of $150,000 in the country he's being prosecuted in. Bollocks.
- tptacek 11y agoI'm not sure I'm reading this right, but criminal copyright infringement has much worse penalties than that in the U.S.
- meric 11y agoIf U.S. citizen who does not reside in New Zealand who is not a New Zealand citizen broke an New Zealand law while living in the U.S. operating a U.K. operation, I don't think he will be extradited to New Zealand. If I wanted to be subject to U.S.'s laws I'd go to the U.S. The content owners should be forced to file lawsuits in Hong Kong or New Zealand. Otherwise it'd be as if New Zealand and Hong Kong are mere U.S. satellite states, like East Germany to the Soviet Union.
- vacri 11y agoWelcome to 'international treaties', the new kind of law that you can't change by simply voting in a different party.
- tacos 11y agoWelcome to 'contract law', the old kind of law that you can't change by voting in a new CEO. Not sure that I want President Trump being able to nullify the 1947 Paris Peace Treaties. There are clear procedures for modifying and ratifying treaties for good reason.
- tim333 11y agoTechnically he's being extradited for copyright infringement, racketeering and money laundering. I doubt they could have extradited him for copyright alone. Whether he is actually guilty of the last two is debatable.
- bediger4000 11y agoI've got to say that this looks like it was fixed to me. The judgement was predetermined at the behest of the US government and the MPAA, a commercial entity. I confess that I'm not well traveled, and that I've never been to the Southern Hemisphere, but how independent is the NZ judiciary?
- philliphaydon 11y agoWe are completely independent. But that doesn't stop our political leaders from bending over to make a good impression with the United States. I wouldn't be surprised if the United States threatened trade agreements to have things bent in its favour.
- xupybd 11y agoNormally they are pretty good here, but there have been a growing number of law changes that seem to favour the MPAA. It seems like there are a few strings being pulled.
- lololomg 11y agoWikileaks found some evidence of this, if I recall correctly?
- jstoiko 11y agoThis is the end of the dotcom era.
- Malstrond 11y agoI thought that when House of Coolness got busted, but he came out on top by offering user data to law enforcement.
- beedogs 11y agoExtradited for copyright infringement. Brilliant. This is what we've come to.
- tacos 11y agoShady guy, shady service, shady investigation, shady trial, shady judgement, shady result. Did I miss anything?
- clamprecht 11y agoJust a source or an argument.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- Natsu 11y agoIt isn't possible to downvote articles on HN.
- xupybd 11y agoUnrelated, but does `Bollocks` mean anything to people outside of NZ?
- codezero 11y agoYes. Most people from the United Kingdom and the US will recognize this vernacular. I'm saying this in response to your question, I don't expect all English speakers to understand it.
- johnloeber 11y agoIt's a common expression throughout the commonwealth, since it is British in origin (and quite old, to boot). It's uncommon in the US.
- girvo 11y agoYes, in Australia and the UK it has a lot of meaning.
- pheroden 11y agoLiterally, it means testicles, but more colloclially it means bullshit in every English speaking country I know of. edit: Apparently not. Just messaged my American buddy, and he thought it might be a wig for cows... So, maybe not Americans.
- sanswork 11y agoNot Canada either but def Australia
- schrodinger 11y agoI'm an American, and I think most Americans would recognize it as meaning "bullshit"; I certainly did. it's not commonly used but it is commonly understood.
- DrScump 11y agoI'm an American; it strikes me as an overloaded expression, used to imply both "bullshit" and "testicles", plus whatever the Sex Pistols were on about in their album title... ... yet in C. S. Forester naval stories, it clearly refers to steers or bulls. So, I can only conclude that it is a random operator used to confuse colonials.
- csseinpoont 11y agoLol, the evil empire strikes again. These corrupt people who control the government understand nothing but power and violence.
- csseinpoont 11y agoLol, reflexive down votes from those who defend state power and corruption, way to go HN.
- 88e282102ae2e5b 11y agoConsider the possibility that people would downvote you even if they agree with you, just because your comment contributed nothing to the conversation. Comments like the parent just lower the signal to noise ratio of this thread. Have you ever known HN users to be government sycophants?
- xupybd 11y agoI think it's more the way you went about it. You kind of just threw out an opinion but didn't really add to the conversation.
- Pyxl101 11y agoPlease review the Hacker News guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face-to-face conversation. Avoid gratuitous negativity.
- csseinpoont 11y agoI do say such things in person, when did mods become the politeness police? And who am I insulting, corrupt government officials, those with the dubious morals required to work for the government?
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- revelation 11y agoThe precedent here being that you may be extradited to a country you have never even visited on the basis of something on the internet. If your country is friendly with Uganda, try not discussing your nontraditional sexual orientation online. There's a bigger picture here. We desperately need to rethink what laws and in particular which jurisdiction applies. The previous approach ("all of them, all of the time") has produced any number of nonsensical results and tremendous damage in the form of forum shopping.
- grecy 11y agoThis is the slippery slope that terrifies me. It's also not worth mentioning online you drink alcohol unless you want to be extradited to certain middle eastern countries. Females might not want to mention online they've had sex before marriage unless they want to extradited to certain countries. Americans might not want to mention online they have semi and fully automatic weapons unless they want to extradited to Canada/Australia/UK/Etc. etc. etc. etc. The list is endless when a country a person has never been to can have anyone in the world extradited for something they did online which breaches local laws.
- murricaFsckYeah 11y agoI doubt this has is particularly related to "Internet"... It has a lot to do with american imperialism, the kind of imperialism that they will always deny. You see, even before Internet, the US extradited some people based on bullshit arguments, while conveniently ignoring the very same crimes committed by their own friends. It's rather obvious that they are showing off their power.
- ubhibbd 11y agoWho else has the guts to speak the truth? This is an abortion of justice, a naked use of force by a corrupt government looking to destroy someones life on behalf of powerful corporations.
- reddytowns 11y agoAnybody and everybody on the internet has learned to whine, err "speak the truth", about nearly everything. That doesn't mean they accomplish much.
- ubhibbd 11y agoApparently calling the US government corrupt gets you banned now on HN
- murricaFsckYeah 11y agoWhy do you hate america so much?!?!
- whiteboarder 11y agoThe people who break copyright laws are heros, not criminals. The whole reason the industry is moving forward is because of people like him, the pirate bay, and nabster. If it weren't for rampant copyright infringement, the industry would still be stuck in the dark ages.
- dang 11y agoThis is a dupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10781610 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10781610.
- asdfzxc 11y agoOnly Russia fights on...