5 ms·

First they come for the sites that are 90/10 pirate to legit. Seems reasonable. Then 80/20. Then 70/30. Now they're getting the process streamlined. How far wil

First they come for the sites that are 90/10 pirate to legit. Seems reasonable. Then 80/20. Then 70/30. Now they're getting the process streamlined. How far will they go? 20/80? 10/90? When will it be too much? When does it become unreasonable?

freehunter 15y ago
Slopes aren't always as slippery as you may believe. The point of this is that the site actively promoted and profited from piracy. This isn't Facebook with someone posting a few lines from a song, this is The Pirate Bay. Think of it like this: have you ever successfully argued to a cop that you only drive over the limit 10% of the time? What matters is the deliberateness of the speed you were doing when you got caught.
- noonespecial 15y ago
  The deliberateness has never once mattered when I was stopped for speeding. It didn't matter if I was aware of my infraction, or if it was intentional. Just the speed. It didn't matter if I only drove over the limit 0.001% of the time, I was still busted. That's what I'm afraid of. A world where 1 user-posted file that someone claims is protected results in arrests and the total loss of my site.
  - nerfhammer 15y ago
    Setting aside minor traffic infringements, intent is a very basic part of criminal law. As a counter-example, what if you hit someone with your car? Do you think it should matter if evidence exists that it was an accident or if there is evidence that you hit the person purposefully?
  - freehunter 15y ago
    Every time I've been pulled over, the officer asks "do you know why I stopped you?" If I claim I honestly don't know, there's a better chance that the fine may be reduced. Or going in the other direction, 10mph over while driving might garner a warning, while 10mph over with another car next to you doing the same speed would get your car impounded for street racing.
- aes256 15y ago
  How exactly has Megaupload "promoted" piracy? Rewarding people for uploading popular files does not constitute promoting piracy.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- vessenes 15y ago
  Actually the Press release claims that they nefariously DID NOT promote piracy and therefore promoted piracy, in some weird Kafka-esque turn of phrase. They purposely don't show download leaderboards, of (I have no doubt) infringing files. Interesting complaint.
- pbhjpbhj 15y ago
  >"This isn't Facebook with someone posting a few lines from a song, this i" No, this is YouTube with people posting whole movies.
molmalo 15y ago
Your comment reminds me of Martin Niemöller: First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak out because I was Protestant. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. I don't know when it will become unreasonable, but I don't want to get to that moment, just to realize there's no one to speak for us. They may start with piracy (OK, they are violating copyright), then why not libel, seems fair enough. And while we are there, why not stop this, and that. Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri had an excellent phrase that I always remember: The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
- troll24601 15y ago
  It's disgusting that you chose to reappropriate that quote in this context. If you read the indictment, it's clear that this was the purposeful monetization of pirated material. It wasn't a few users who uploaded some things. It was a criminal site, operating in bad faith, committing a multitude of crimes. You should seriously be ashamed of yourself for comparing those famous words to seven criminals (who have strong evidence against them) who are about to get a jury trial.
  - noonespecial 15y ago
    They're not "criminals" until after the trial. This is the problem people here are having with this. Site confiscated -> branded criminal -> trial. Is assbackwards.
    - troll24601 15y ago
      KIM DOTCOM is a convicted criminal. (securities fraud, embezzling, and some other crap) He's about to be tried again, for another crime. But he's already a criminal. The person I responded to was comparing mass genocide to the orderly trial of a criminal who is suspected of committing more crimes. That disgusts me. It casually trivializes massive horrors.
miek 15y ago
I agree with your thought process-- however, there is no reason to talk about what % of the service was used for piracy and what % wasn't. Non-owner/operator users should be viewed as completely separate from the owners and operators' and their actions. It doesn't matter if 99.9% of the users are pirating content, as long as the owners & operators were not engaging in illegal activities (including knowingly aiding pirates). The issue is that MegaUpload does't have the ability to determine what a user legally owns. With that said, even if MegaUpload complied with legally-sufficient take-down requests, I imagine those who were arrested could easily be nabbed for simply having pirated content on their personal/work boxes... that's probably the fallback plan. Side note- Google hosts a lot of pirated content on Gmail. It would be interesting to know how much pirated music is sent through Gmail in a day.
- troll24601 15y ago
  I'm pretty sure that the Feds didn't get copies of emails from Eric Schmidt saying that they need to fix the audio/video synchronization on the Sopranos... or that they need to rate-limit DMCA takedowns so they don't interfere with growth... or that they should ensure that when they do takedowns that they don't take EVERY copy down. It's a specious comparison, made possible only because almost nobody on HN bothered to read the indictment before they got mad.
  - miek 15y ago
    Thanks for letting us know; you are correct- I didn't see the indictment. I read the article quickly and came here to see what people were saying. I saw a lot of debate about "% of piracy," so I commented. Wow the executives were deep in blatant piracy. It's fair that the site was shut down. Amazing, not surprising though.
    - troll24601 15y ago
      Thank you. It's nice that at least ONE person recognized that maybe their uninformed reaction to a short article might not be 100% correct, and was willing to go read the indictment and learn a bit more.

freehunter 15y ago

Slopes aren't always as slippery as you may believe. The point of this is that the site actively promoted and profited from piracy. This isn't Facebook with someone posting a few lines from a song, this is The Pirate Bay. Think of it like this: have you ever successfully argued to a cop that you only drive over the limit 10% of the time? What matters is the deliberateness of the speed you were doing when you got caught.

noonespecial 15y ago
The deliberateness has never once mattered when I was stopped for speeding. It didn't matter if I was aware of my infraction, or if it was intentional. Just the speed. It didn't matter if I only drove over the limit 0.001% of the time, I was still busted. That's what I'm afraid of. A world where 1 user-posted file that someone claims is protected results in arrests and the total loss of my site.
- nerfhammer 15y ago
  Setting aside minor traffic infringements, intent is a very basic part of criminal law. As a counter-example, what if you hit someone with your car? Do you think it should matter if evidence exists that it was an accident or if there is evidence that you hit the person purposefully?
- freehunter 15y ago
  Every time I've been pulled over, the officer asks "do you know why I stopped you?" If I claim I honestly don't know, there's a better chance that the fine may be reduced. Or going in the other direction, 10mph over while driving might garner a warning, while 10mph over with another car next to you doing the same speed would get your car impounded for street racing.
aes256 15y ago
How exactly has Megaupload "promoted" piracy? Rewarding people for uploading popular files does not constitute promoting piracy.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
vessenes 15y ago
Actually the Press release claims that they nefariously DID NOT promote piracy and therefore promoted piracy, in some weird Kafka-esque turn of phrase. They purposely don't show download leaderboards, of (I have no doubt) infringing files. Interesting complaint.
pbhjpbhj 15y ago
>"This isn't Facebook with someone posting a few lines from a song, this i" No, this is YouTube with people posting whole movies.

molmalo 15y ago

Your comment reminds me of Martin Niemöller: First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak out because I was Protestant. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. I don't know when it will become unreasonable, but I don't want to get to that moment, just to realize there's no one to speak for us. They may start with piracy (OK, they are violating copyright), then why not libel, seems fair enough. And while we are there, why not stop this, and that. Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri had an excellent phrase that I always remember: The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.

troll24601 15y ago
It's disgusting that you chose to reappropriate that quote in this context. If you read the indictment, it's clear that this was the purposeful monetization of pirated material. It wasn't a few users who uploaded some things. It was a criminal site, operating in bad faith, committing a multitude of crimes. You should seriously be ashamed of yourself for comparing those famous words to seven criminals (who have strong evidence against them) who are about to get a jury trial.
- noonespecial 15y ago
  They're not "criminals" until after the trial. This is the problem people here are having with this. Site confiscated -> branded criminal -> trial. Is assbackwards.
  - troll24601 15y ago
    KIM DOTCOM is a convicted criminal. (securities fraud, embezzling, and some other crap) He's about to be tried again, for another crime. But he's already a criminal. The person I responded to was comparing mass genocide to the orderly trial of a criminal who is suspected of committing more crimes. That disgusts me. It casually trivializes massive horrors.

miek 15y ago

I agree with your thought process-- however, there is no reason to talk about what % of the service was used for piracy and what % wasn't. Non-owner/operator users should be viewed as completely separate from the owners and operators' and their actions. It doesn't matter if 99.9% of the users are pirating content, as long as the owners & operators were not engaging in illegal activities (including knowingly aiding pirates). The issue is that MegaUpload does't have the ability to determine what a user legally owns. With that said, even if MegaUpload complied with legally-sufficient take-down requests, I imagine those who were arrested could easily be nabbed for simply having pirated content on their personal/work boxes... that's probably the fallback plan. Side note- Google hosts a lot of pirated content on Gmail. It would be interesting to know how much pirated music is sent through Gmail in a day.

troll24601 15y ago
I'm pretty sure that the Feds didn't get copies of emails from Eric Schmidt saying that they need to fix the audio/video synchronization on the Sopranos... or that they need to rate-limit DMCA takedowns so they don't interfere with growth... or that they should ensure that when they do takedowns that they don't take EVERY copy down. It's a specious comparison, made possible only because almost nobody on HN bothered to read the indictment before they got mad.
- miek 15y ago
  Thanks for letting us know; you are correct- I didn't see the indictment. I read the article quickly and came here to see what people were saying. I saw a lot of debate about "% of piracy," so I commented. Wow the executives were deep in blatant piracy. It's fair that the site was shut down. Amazing, not surprising though.
  - troll24601 15y ago
    Thank you. It's nice that at least ONE person recognized that maybe their uninformed reaction to a short article might not be 100% correct, and was willing to go read the indictment and learn a bit more.