6 ms·

Megaupload case: New Zealand court wants FBI evidence

69 points by sdoering 14y ago

brink 14y ago
> Prosecutors allege that pirated movies and other content shared through his site cost copyright holders more than $500m (£322m) in lost earnings, making it one of the biggest cases of its kind. I doubt the point / accuracy of this statement. Those who downloaded the content would have just gotten the content somewhere else. As much as the FBI would like to, you really can't point the finger at Dotcom for this loss of revenue.
- jstalin 14y ago
  Correct. They're probably trying to calculate that number by assuming that every person who downloaded something copyrighted would have otherwise purchased it. Pure bunk.
- lindenr 14y ago
  That's not the point. This whole case has been just testing the water for the FBI - seeing how far the public (and the NZ government) will let them go. Whether they have grand designs for after Dotcom nobody knows (conspiracy!), but this case is clearly about more than all that money copyright holders supposedly lost (I'm in agreement with you on that - I doubt they would have lost any less without MU).
  - sageikosa 14y ago
    I never suspect conspiracy when incompetency is much easier. Men with badges hiding behind organizations often forget the scope and source of their vested powers.
    - lindenr 14y ago
      I doubt there is a conspiracy behind this; I just left the comment (too?) open to the possibility.
    - Wingman4l7 14y ago
      "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
  - awakeasleep 14y ago
    I'm intrigued by the FBI presence off US soil. I thought they were a domestic-only agency.
    - kaffiene 14y ago
      As a NZ citizen, I'm furious about it. I don't mind the request for extradition, I hate the use of FBI agents in NZ, the heavy-handed nature of the raid, the ignorance of due process but mostly the fact that the FBI illegally removed items of evidence from the country. That's arrogant and offensive as well as illegal.
snowwindwaves 14y ago
I was recently in new Zealand and friends in their late 40s and early 50s were upset by the raid on a new Zealand citizen by foreign authorities, in new Zealand. Some of them used mega upload and some hadn't heard of it prior to the raid. NZ told the us navy they didn't want their nuclear ships in the Harbour, which makes no sense to me, but does show that they have a spine. I wouldn't be surprised if the Mpaa doesn't get their way on this one.
- protomyth 14y ago
  NZ does make quite a bit of money from the film industry, so that might affect things. http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/screen-industry http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/screen-industry
- tzs 14y ago
  Dotcom is not a New Zealand citizen. He is a resident alien with some extra restrictions due to his extensive criminal background (for example, he cannot own land in New Zealand). If he wanted to become a New Zealand citizen, the criminal background could be a big hurdle.
- knz 14y ago
  Some context on the nuclear free policy in NZ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealands_nuclear-free_zone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealands_nuclear-free_zone It's an important part of the New Zealand national identity. There has been talk of allowing nuclear power generation but given how geologically unstable the country is most kiwis seem content to maintain the current policy.
  - archangel_one 14y ago
    Nuclear power generation isn't extremely practical for NZ, because it normally comes in large chunks which we don't have the population to support in most places. Plus we've got like 70% hydro or something anyway, so we're already doing relatively well as far as burning fossil fuels for power goes.
grecy 14y ago
>In June a judge ruled that the warrant for the initial raid on his mansion and the way evidence was seized were illegal. It's amusing the case still exists at all when it's clearly been identified the raid and evidence seizure were illegal. I wonder why we even have laws when the authorities can so blatantly ignore them without consequence.
- corin_ 14y ago
  The legality of something such as evidence seizure effects how it can be used in court, not necessarily the whole case if they have other evidence they can use instead.
- ncallaway 14y ago
  The FBI seized his server farm independently on the raid on his house. I don't think they actually have much _evidence_ that they plan on using from the raid; I think the main action out of that was his arrest.
- sp332 14y ago
  Unlike the USA, a lot of jurisdictions allow evidence to be used in court even if it was collected illegally.
gitarr 14y ago
I am surprised the NZ courts didn't have the evidence to begin with. How could they decide over the validity of the extradition request without it?
- ncallaway 14y ago
  Apparently the NZ courts came to the same critical question that you did. In all honesty, it seems ridiculous that the FBI thought they could withhold evidence.
vulcano 14y ago
Video footage from the raid, with court footage of Dotcom on the stand. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMas0Wc0sg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMas0Wc0sg snowwindwaves: "which makes no sense to me" It would if you lived in, say, Tahiti. One of NZ's best assets is it's environment. It's directly linked to the dairy industry and other agri-business which is resonsible for keeping the country financially soluble. Is it worth keeping NZ and its waters clean? From a business perspective, yes. As for nuclear power plants, NZ is (vulcanologists correct me if I'm wrong) the world's second most seismically active country, next to Iceland. I believe on the whole (i.e. not just in the span of your short lifetime or recent events) it's more active than Japan. Moreover as someone else said, there are alternative sources of power that are just as appealing. Hydro provides most of the country's energy. Fossil fuels seem more lucrative as an export than as a domestic solution. However coal use in some areas is still very popular as a means of heating the home.

69 points by sdoering 14y ago

brink 14y ago

> Prosecutors allege that pirated movies and other content shared through his site cost copyright holders more than $500m (£322m) in lost earnings, making it one of the biggest cases of its kind. I doubt the point / accuracy of this statement. Those who downloaded the content would have just gotten the content somewhere else. As much as the FBI would like to, you really can't point the finger at Dotcom for this loss of revenue.

jstalin 14y ago
Correct. They're probably trying to calculate that number by assuming that every person who downloaded something copyrighted would have otherwise purchased it. Pure bunk.
lindenr 14y ago
That's not the point. This whole case has been just testing the water for the FBI - seeing how far the public (and the NZ government) will let them go. Whether they have grand designs for after Dotcom nobody knows (conspiracy!), but this case is clearly about more than all that money copyright holders supposedly lost (I'm in agreement with you on that - I doubt they would have lost any less without MU).
- sageikosa 14y ago
  I never suspect conspiracy when incompetency is much easier. Men with badges hiding behind organizations often forget the scope and source of their vested powers.
  - lindenr 14y ago
    I doubt there is a conspiracy behind this; I just left the comment (too?) open to the possibility.
  - Wingman4l7 14y ago
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
- awakeasleep 14y ago
  I'm intrigued by the FBI presence off US soil. I thought they were a domestic-only agency.
  - kaffiene 14y ago
    As a NZ citizen, I'm furious about it. I don't mind the request for extradition, I hate the use of FBI agents in NZ, the heavy-handed nature of the raid, the ignorance of due process but mostly the fact that the FBI illegally removed items of evidence from the country. That's arrogant and offensive as well as illegal.

snowwindwaves 14y ago

I was recently in new Zealand and friends in their late 40s and early 50s were upset by the raid on a new Zealand citizen by foreign authorities, in new Zealand. Some of them used mega upload and some hadn't heard of it prior to the raid. NZ told the us navy they didn't want their nuclear ships in the Harbour, which makes no sense to me, but does show that they have a spine. I wouldn't be surprised if the Mpaa doesn't get their way on this one.

protomyth 14y ago
NZ does make quite a bit of money from the film industry, so that might affect things. http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/screen-industry http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/screen-industry
tzs 14y ago
Dotcom is not a New Zealand citizen. He is a resident alien with some extra restrictions due to his extensive criminal background (for example, he cannot own land in New Zealand). If he wanted to become a New Zealand citizen, the criminal background could be a big hurdle.
knz 14y ago
Some context on the nuclear free policy in NZ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealands_nuclear-free_zone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealands_nuclear-free_zone It's an important part of the New Zealand national identity. There has been talk of allowing nuclear power generation but given how geologically unstable the country is most kiwis seem content to maintain the current policy.
- archangel_one 14y ago
  Nuclear power generation isn't extremely practical for NZ, because it normally comes in large chunks which we don't have the population to support in most places. Plus we've got like 70% hydro or something anyway, so we're already doing relatively well as far as burning fossil fuels for power goes.

grecy 14y ago

>In June a judge ruled that the warrant for the initial raid on his mansion and the way evidence was seized were illegal. It's amusing the case still exists at all when it's clearly been identified the raid and evidence seizure were illegal. I wonder why we even have laws when the authorities can so blatantly ignore them without consequence.

corin_ 14y ago
The legality of something such as evidence seizure effects how it can be used in court, not necessarily the whole case if they have other evidence they can use instead.
ncallaway 14y ago
The FBI seized his server farm independently on the raid on his house. I don't think they actually have much _evidence_ that they plan on using from the raid; I think the main action out of that was his arrest.
sp332 14y ago
Unlike the USA, a lot of jurisdictions allow evidence to be used in court even if it was collected illegally.

gitarr 14y ago

I am surprised the NZ courts didn't have the evidence to begin with. How could they decide over the validity of the extradition request without it?

ncallaway 14y ago
Apparently the NZ courts came to the same critical question that you did. In all honesty, it seems ridiculous that the FBI thought they could withhold evidence.

vulcano 14y ago

Video footage from the raid, with court footage of Dotcom on the stand. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMas0Wc0sg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMas0Wc0sg snowwindwaves: "which makes no sense to me" It would if you lived in, say, Tahiti. One of NZ's best assets is it's environment. It's directly linked to the dairy industry and other agri-business which is resonsible for keeping the country financially soluble. Is it worth keeping NZ and its waters clean? From a business perspective, yes. As for nuclear power plants, NZ is (vulcanologists correct me if I'm wrong) the world's second most seismically active country, next to Iceland. I believe on the whole (i.e. not just in the span of your short lifetime or recent events) it's more active than Japan. Moreover as someone else said, there are alternative sources of power that are just as appealing. Hydro provides most of the country's energy. Fossil fuels seem more lucrative as an export than as a domestic solution. However coal use in some areas is still very popular as a means of heating the home.