8 ms·
Government: we can freeze Mega assets even if case is dismissed
- rickmb 14y agoJust a thought: Megaupload is a Hong Kong corporation. There's no way the White House didn't have a diplomatic chat with the Chinese before demolishing a Hong Kong business, is there?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- lifeguard 14y agoSounds like something a king would do.
- mikehotel 14y agoOr a Chicago mayor - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meigs_Field#Demolition_and_Closure_by_Chicago_Mayor_Richard_M._Daley http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meigs_Field#Demolition_and_Clos...
- Foy 14y agoSounds like something out of Parks and Recreation, only weirder. Well... truth is stranger than fiction.
- mcantelon 14y agoRogue state. Imagine if China had done this to a US company.
- ktizo 14y agoGiven that this case required the cooperation of Hong-Kong police, they are now sort of entitled to. I would be very surprised if they do not at some point expect the favour to be repaid.
- rprasad 14y agoChina has done this to U.S. companies in China, repeatedly, over and over and over again. The U.S. was able to do this to a Hong Kong company only because it had an agreement with Chinese authorities (specifically, in Hong Kong as it is economically separate from the rest of the mainland) to do so.
- hobin 14y ago"China has done this to U.S. companies in China, repeatedly, over and over and over again." I'm curious. Can you can name a few examples?
- rprasad 14y agoThe only one I can name off the top of my head is Apex Digital (b/c it was HQ'd close to where I grew up). Apex was competing with a Chinese state-owned agency and rejected a buyout offer. Chinese officials arrested its CEO on fraud charges and tried to sieze the company's Chinese operating assets to give to the Chinese company. Eventually, Apex went bankrupt fighting the case. There are many more; the common thread is usually that these companies are competing with Chinese companies.
- Foy 14y agoKey phrase being "U.S. companies in China". Not "U.S. companies who don't operate in China".
- slurgfest 14y agoThat is not the meaning of "Rogue State" and never has been. US companies have to play ball in China in all kinds of interesting ways, as a matter of fact...
- alttab 14y agoCorrection: you think if you do it won't cost those responsible dearly. My bet is you don't fuck with the Internet.
- ihsw 14y ago'Don't fuck with the Internet' implies the internet is a threat, which it is not. It is a fragmented collection of small organizations which -- through it's natural fragmentation -- is no serious threat. The recent SOPA/PIPA circus is irrelevant, there were projects in progress by the US Government to implement SOPA/PIPA policies and they have not slowed down. Don't get confused, we have shown a large demonstration of disunity between the citizens and the government, but it's still no more than that -- a demonstration.
- alttab 14y agoYour attitude is not one of progress.
- zallarak 14y agoIt seems to be that America is slowly becoming less free; considering factors such as Obama's domestic assassination program, federal wiretapping and more. As an American, I still acknowledge we live in among the freer societies of the world. I still can't help but wonder why the government is increasingly imposing the way it is, history has always shown that repression of almost any form backfires in the long run.
- ars 14y agoDon't extrapolate too far. Wait for the Judges ruling first. It's the job of the prosecutor to claim anything and everything (as long as it's the truth) and let the judge sort it out.
- kbenson 14y agoIndeed. The hold-up appears to be because of the wording of the statute, that they need to be notified at their US address. That could point towards either a failure on the part of the legislators, or a conscious effort on their part to keep notices from being served on entities not under US purview. I suppose the judge could attempt to discern the intent of the law and make a ruling that goes with the spirit of the law, but it's noted in the article that the wording is fairly plain, and that doesn't leave a lot of room for interpretation. Also, I wonder how much people would be complaining about this if it was a drug cartel of some sort (with a corporate front) with seized US assets and a similar defense.
- Foy 14y agoAs far as I've read, Megaupload didn't have any U.S. assets. It was all in Hong Kong and Australia. You don't see the U.S. going into foreign countries (on different continents even) and dragging back people and their assets to charge under American law, do you? If a drug cartel is running it's operation in a country where it's not illegal to do so and something like this happened, then I would STILL be complaining about this.
- ihsw 14y agoAmerica was never as free as you thought it was, there was just no way to thoroughly challenge this undeclared freedom (and there definitely was no way to publicly do so as well).
- anigbrowl 14y agoOne wonders what prevents the government from simply providing notice to Megaupload's counsel, which does after have power of attorney and is thus presumably empowered to take notice as well. I haven't studied the ins and outs of criminal procedure though.
- WayneDB 14y agoThe government said... The government believes... The government suggested... The government also argued... The government claimed... Who is the government? I don't know! Nameless, faceless, omniscient, omnipotent. I'm afraid of the government. Does that make me a terrorist? Probably. Now, time for more mental masturbation to take my mind off the government.
- _delirium 14y agoUnfortunately this has been true for a while. For example, having drug-trafficking charges against you dropped doesn't automatically release all impounded property. There is some right to due process, but its precise extent is unclear: there has to be some kind of hearing at some point, basically, in which the seizure can be challenged. But it's actually possible for the government to seize the assets permanently after such a hearing, without a conviction. Some information here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/forfeiture/ http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/forfeiture/
- ktizo 14y agoThat's because it is often a separate case that is held against the property itself, so even if you are found innocent, your property might be found guilty.
- _delirium 14y agoRight, and it'll also be a civil forfeiture case, not a criminal prosecution, so there's a lower standard of proof. It does lead to some of my favorite case captions, such as Quantity of Books v. Kansas.
- avstraliitski 14y agoOther recent examples of the US' undemocratic use of its (arguably largely undue) control of financial networks include the blocking of Wikileaks and the pressure on Europe to give support to its bid to remove Iran from the SWIFT interbank settlement network (incidentally, from memory SWIFT - despite claiming to be an international organization headquartered in Belgium - always had a US president until 2007). All of these are unprecedented moves against international infrastructure that was formerly considered de-facto apolitical. Thus, dear wealthy American government-patrons: you cannot invade random countries in the world spouting free-market rhetoric whilst abusing the fundamental notions of democracy and fairness forever. Your time is coming, and it will be sooner than you imagine.
- dllthomas 14y agoHmm. I'm not sure I like it, but the title and comments here are a little misleading. The government has indicted MegaUpload, MegaUpload is arguing that they can't be served notice of those indictments, and the government is saying, "Well, until we can, we're not unfreezing the assets." MegaUpload's position doesn't sound ridiculous - "we're not a US company, why should we be subject to US law?" - except that they were doing business in the US (is that where the seized assets were? It sounds like they at least host some stuff out of Virginia).
- boyter 14y agoAt this point I don't care if Mega-upload is guilty or not. There has been enough cock-ups by the prosecution to throw this thing out of the courts. I sincerely hope that the US government pays for this incident and a result of that sets a precedent of following proper due process.
- vidarh 14y agoThe only way of fighting this is to not pay for media from any of the big sources. I don't care if that means abstaining from it or pirating it, but at this point anything we pay these people is contributing financially to a sustained attack on society.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- maeon3 14y agoWow, the justice system refuses to apply American law to a foreign company operating in a foreign nation, so what you do is go seize his person, and wait until he has an address in Prison, then presto! It's legal to apply American law to him. Imagine if Iran had pulled a stunt like this to some female CEO of a major corporation was in violation of Sharia law for exposing skin. We can't imprison them while they live in the foreign land, so lets bring them here and then we can apply justice. Am I missing something that makes this an ethical thing to do?
- slurgfest 14y agoExposing skin is pretty distant from what MegaUpload was accused of. (The validity of the charges is another matter, I just REALLY don't think it is correct to compare this to not pulling your hijab down far enough)
- sk5t 14y agoIt's not distant at all... why is providing a forum for users to make bytes/information available to each other categorically more villainous than showing a little ankle? Only your cultural perspective makes a Sharia infraction less severe than vague IP transgressions.
- iandanforth 14y agoWould editing the parent to say 'having sex with another man,' which is a capital offense, really change the substance of the argument?
- Foy 14y agoThe specific analogy aside, the fact is that the U.S. government is basically saying that no matter who you are, or where you are, if you violate American law you'll be brought to American justice, even if they have to drag you to America against your will first. If any other country in the world did this, there would be complete public outrage. From my point of view, American copyright and patent laws are very, very wrong. They largely miss their intended purposes. What's more, apparently even non-Americans on the other side of the world are at risk of being the target of these legal shenanigans. I cannot stress how RIDICULOUS I think this whole affair is. It's as if the prosecutors figure that Megaupload operates on the Internet, therefore it's operating in America and is subject to American law... is this another example of people who do not understand how the Internet works making major decisions about the Internet and it's future?
- SeanDav 14y agoThis has never been about the law or justice, it is all about politics, lobbying and money.
- dakrisht 14y agoWithout a doubt
- dakrisht 14y agoSo glad to see my tax dollars working for things like this. Like another user here said "this has never been about justice, the law" or what's right - it's all about lobbying, politics and $$$$ The sham organizations that are the RIAA/MPAA are so heavily vested in the government, they'll try anything and everything to create a controlled Internet/sharing system of "content" - which in and of itself is the vaguest definition of all time. All this SOPA/PIPA crap will never pass, we will always find a way for a free Internet. Total waste of time, a government making up bullshit laws along the way for something that will not only have zero effect on content sharing, but will actually increase it after angering tons of people. It's truly ridiculous when resources, energy and tax payer dollars can be spent on more important issues that our country needs help with. All these politicians in this country are a f-ing disgrace.
- stevedekorte 14y agoHad they used bitcoin, would the government had any power to do this?
- bryanh 14y agoConfiscate the bitcoin bank servers after confiscating the mega servers.
- raverbashing 14y agoWhat? No need, the password is likely 123456 Or just reset the machines, since they think Amazon works like other vps providers...
- vtry 14y agoWelcome to the police state. None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free
- hastur 14y agoThe lesson from this and other cases is simple: DON'T START A COMPANY IN THE U.S. DON'T KEEP YOUR ASSETS IN THE U.S. DON'T KEEP YOUR DATA IN U.S.-owned DATA CENTERS (That includes non-US data centers belonging to US companies, like Amazon AWS servers in Ireland.) Otherwise you're exposing your company and your users to the arbitrary, predatory practices of US "law enforcement" system, which happily does the bidding of US content industries.