5 ms·
Kim Dotcom claims to have evidence Joe Biden ordered the shutdown of Megaupload
- TylerE 14y agoCan we get some neutral coverage on this guy once in a while? Why always torrentfreak?
- jonursenbach 14y agoI haven't seen anybody else cover the story.
- TylerE 14y agoThen 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.
- benologist 14y agoThat'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.
- joelrunyon 14y agoWell, if this actually turns up like Kim says it is, then it WILL be a story (right?).
- cafard 14y agoWow. 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...)
- tptacek 14y agoThat'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.
- phereford 14y agoI 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.
- logn 14y agoFirst Waco, then Megaupload.
- ari_elle 14y agothe 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)
- illuminate 14y agoAs far as I recall, they were not protected as internal emails disclosed not just knowledge of piracy, the company actively encouraged it from within.
- wrathsu 14y ago"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'?
- smashing 14y agoDigital 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_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A... [2] This presupposes that the Republican Party want to shut down freedom on the Internet.
- TylerE 14y agoFor 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?
- sampsonjs 14y agoWho knew the DMCA banned porn? Not me, that's for sure!
- smashing 14y agoIf 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.