5 ms·

Megaupload Worked On A Multi-Billion Dollar IPO

63 points by llambda 15y ago

nextparadigms 15y ago
I wonder if being a public company would've made it a lot harder for the US gov to call it "organized crime" or something silly like that.
- llambda 15y ago
  My feeling is the primary difference would have been that there would have been shareholders, apart from the legitimate users we hear about today, who would have been furious that their investment had been tampered with by the govt. So maybe in that sense it would have required the state to have a stronger case before taking action.
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  Hate to be the bearer of bad news but public companies engaging in crime is not uncommon.
  - peteretep 15y ago
    I think that was sort of the point; with credible economic backing, some types of crime are civil matters for the courts. Without them, those same crimes are criminal mafia pirating conspiracy wow.
  - s_henry_paulson 15y ago
    Yes, but when Goldman Sachs engages in fraud and damages the economy, they can plea bargain with the SEC for a paltry sum and never have to answer for their crimes.
- alan_cx 15y ago
  Not being an American I might have missed a huge example of the opposite, but I haven't seen the US gov shut down and destroy a public company. Sue them, yes, but destroy, no. So, presumably, had Megaupload gone public, my guess is that it would still exist, while being sued. It would still have resources to defend its self. What has happened here, or what was attempted here was the destruction of a business and the removal of its ability to fight back. I cant see that happening to a public company. OK, Megaupload can be argued to be shady, but surely the action against is is equally shady.
  - irunbackwards 15y ago
    Shady? What do you mean? This is America! Guilty until proven innocent!
  - hga 15y ago
    http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3529331 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3529331
hef19898 15y ago
If I remember well, there were rumors that Megaupload had plans for some streaming service of its content too (fact check me on that please). That would have been a threat to almost everyone in this sector, so I can imagine that some people were a little bit worried about a company like Megaupload becoming public. After that they would have been a member of the club, have a load of cash after the IPO and have a product and content to offer, I can imagine quite a few names who wouldn't have been happy with that.
- tomp 15y ago
  You mean, Megavideo?
  - hef19898 15y ago
    More like everyone making mony with content braodcasted or streamed in wht manner ever. :-) Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean you don't have enemies.
- gee_totes 15y ago
  Fact check: Megaupload was working on something called Megabox, which was a "DIY artist distribution service that would have completely disrupted the music industry." -- Tech Crunch http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/24/was-megaupload-targeted-because-of-its-upcoming-megabox-digital-jukebox-service/ http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/24/was-megaupload-targeted-bec... Opinion/Theories: I sincerely believe that Mega Upload was working on this product, as they were making connections with legit, mainstream artists. For example: -Swiss Beatz was the CEO of megaupload at the time of the shutdown (although he had just been named CEO 24 hours before) http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/swizz-beatz-revealed-as-silent-partner-ceo-of-megaupload-20120119 http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/swizz-beatz-revealed-... -Remember the Megaupload Mega Song that was taken down by UMG? Among the featured artists were Kanye West, Snoop Dogg, will.i.am, P. Diddy, Chris Brown. Here is the video, the song is actually pretty terrible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9caPFPQUNs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9caPFPQUNs
  - 15y ago
Xylakant 15y ago
If this is true, the whole case just got one notch more interesting. And IPO would mean that the company and it's business model would have to be vetted by lawyers and bank people, that's something someone with an illegal business model could not be interested in. So it could be cited as a fact that megaupload genuinely tried to have a legit (maybe shady) business.
pbreit 15y ago
How much of Megaupload's usage is downloading copyrighted content? This article is a little corny. "multi-billion $ IPO" and "reverse IPO" are mutually exclusive. The author spends most of the time talking about accountants and bankes when the primary issue is legal. And the author fails to recognize that such a tenuous business would have a hard time finding investors.
darksaga 15y ago
Saying because you want to go public, your company is legit is a pretty weak argument to me. There have been plenty of "shady" companies who've gone public. The one that comes to mind most recently is Weedmaps: http://bit.ly/ILSmST http://bit.ly/ILSmST
- aw3c2 15y ago
  Above obfuscated link is spam to some social news website. Actual link is http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/12/popular-marijuana-company-goes-public http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/12/popular-marijuana-compan...
- irunbackwards 15y ago
  How is WM shady? These are not moral issues, they are economic/social issues. (In my humble opinion, anyway.)

63 points by llambda 15y ago

I wonder if being a public company would've made it a lot harder for the US gov to call it "organized crime" or something silly like that.

llambda 15y ago
My feeling is the primary difference would have been that there would have been shareholders, apart from the legitimate users we hear about today, who would have been furious that their investment had been tampered with by the govt. So maybe in that sense it would have required the state to have a stronger case before taking action.
MatthewPhillips 15y ago
Hate to be the bearer of bad news but public companies engaging in crime is not uncommon.
- peteretep 15y ago
  I think that was sort of the point; with credible economic backing, some types of crime are civil matters for the courts. Without them, those same crimes are criminal mafia pirating conspiracy wow.
- s_henry_paulson 15y ago
  Yes, but when Goldman Sachs engages in fraud and damages the economy, they can plea bargain with the SEC for a paltry sum and never have to answer for their crimes.
alan_cx 15y ago
Not being an American I might have missed a huge example of the opposite, but I haven't seen the US gov shut down and destroy a public company. Sue them, yes, but destroy, no. So, presumably, had Megaupload gone public, my guess is that it would still exist, while being sued. It would still have resources to defend its self. What has happened here, or what was attempted here was the destruction of a business and the removal of its ability to fight back. I cant see that happening to a public company. OK, Megaupload can be argued to be shady, but surely the action against is is equally shady.
- irunbackwards 15y ago
  Shady? What do you mean? This is America! Guilty until proven innocent!
- hga 15y ago
  http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3529331 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3529331

hef19898 15y ago

If I remember well, there were rumors that Megaupload had plans for some streaming service of its content too (fact check me on that please). That would have been a threat to almost everyone in this sector, so I can imagine that some people were a little bit worried about a company like Megaupload becoming public. After that they would have been a member of the club, have a load of cash after the IPO and have a product and content to offer, I can imagine quite a few names who wouldn't have been happy with that.

tomp 15y ago
You mean, Megavideo?
- hef19898 15y ago
  More like everyone making mony with content braodcasted or streamed in wht manner ever. :-) Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean you don't have enemies.
gee_totes 15y ago
Fact check: Megaupload was working on something called Megabox, which was a "DIY artist distribution service that would have completely disrupted the music industry." -- Tech Crunch http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/24/was-megaupload-targeted-because-of-its-upcoming-megabox-digital-jukebox-service/ http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/24/was-megaupload-targeted-bec... Opinion/Theories: I sincerely believe that Mega Upload was working on this product, as they were making connections with legit, mainstream artists. For example: -Swiss Beatz was the CEO of megaupload at the time of the shutdown (although he had just been named CEO 24 hours before) http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/swizz-beatz-revealed-as-silent-partner-ceo-of-megaupload-20120119 http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/swizz-beatz-revealed-... -Remember the Megaupload Mega Song that was taken down by UMG? Among the featured artists were Kanye West, Snoop Dogg, will.i.am, P. Diddy, Chris Brown. Here is the video, the song is actually pretty terrible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9caPFPQUNs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9caPFPQUNs
- 15y ago

Xylakant 15y ago

If this is true, the whole case just got one notch more interesting. And IPO would mean that the company and it's business model would have to be vetted by lawyers and bank people, that's something someone with an illegal business model could not be interested in. So it could be cited as a fact that megaupload genuinely tried to have a legit (maybe shady) business.

pbreit 15y ago

How much of Megaupload's usage is downloading copyrighted content? This article is a little corny. "multi-billion $ IPO" and "reverse IPO" are mutually exclusive. The author spends most of the time talking about accountants and bankes when the primary issue is legal. And the author fails to recognize that such a tenuous business would have a hard time finding investors.

darksaga 15y ago

Saying because you want to go public, your company is legit is a pretty weak argument to me. There have been plenty of "shady" companies who've gone public. The one that comes to mind most recently is Weedmaps: http://bit.ly/ILSmST http://bit.ly/ILSmST

aw3c2 15y ago
Above obfuscated link is spam to some social news website. Actual link is http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/12/popular-marijuana-company-goes-public http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/12/popular-marijuana-compan...
irunbackwards 15y ago
How is WM shady? These are not moral issues, they are economic/social issues. (In my humble opinion, anyway.)