US "the Enemy" Says Dotcom Judge 469
First time accepted submitter Flere Imsaho writes "During the NetHui Internet conference last week, the NZ judge to hear the Dotcom extradition case was speaking on the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement and how the U.S. entertainment industry is pushing to make region code hacking illegal, when he said 'Under TPP and the American Digital Millennium copyright provisions you will not be able to do that, that will be prohibited ... if you do you will be a criminal — that's what will happen. Even before the 2008 amendments it wasn't criminalized. There are all sorts of ways this whole thing is being ramped up and if I could use Russell [Brown's] tweet from earlier on: we have met the enemy and he is [the] U.S.'"
And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Funny)
And even if your country doesn't have a DMCA (and they WILL soon, if not already), don't think for a second that the U.S. can't extradite you here for punishment anyway, or that your government won't fall to its knees like a trained lapdog when the FBI snaps their fingers and says "Put him on a plane."
The sooner you people accept that the U.S. is large and in-fucking-charge, the easier it will go for all of us.
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Insightful)
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Land of the Free
Home of the Brave
Repeat the phrase "Land of the free, home of the brave" with a straight face. Now, repeat until some one has to pick you up, off the floor with the laughter cramps preventing you from remaining upright.
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget:
Sharing is stealing.
Re: (Score:3)
Hate to bust you bubble but statistics are undeniable, you are worse off this year than last year and that has reflected the drop in quality of life over the last few decades. The water is getting hotter and hotter and before long they'll be making a lovely Cuisses de Grenouille out of you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frog_legs [wikipedia.org]. Lies about how good things are while ignoring that they we are well worse off in every regard for every year over the past decade is just bullshit and next year will be worse as wi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In some ways, perhaps. Certainly the availability and variety of things like food and material goods would be amazing to an ancient king (quality is a different story, that's more hit or miss). On the other hand, how many vassals do you have?
Re: (Score:3)
Who would have thought that with a little bit of time it would no longer be a satire?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Dogs don't have knees.
Of course they have knees. They're land mammals.
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:4, Funny)
Of course they have knees. They're land mammals.
But bees aren't land mammals.
Re: (Score:3)
Tell that to China. China literally owns America.
Nah. They just own those young Americans that will be paying off the debt.
Re: (Score:3)
Meaningless. There is no plan to pay off the debt, ever.
And there will be no such plan, ever. We're well and truly caught in the "living beyond your means" trap....
Re: (Score:3)
To be really fair, China only holds a very very reasonable amount of the US total debt. They only hold 27% of the foreign debt, which account for a low percentage of the total debt. So far.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, the higher the price of oil gets, the more domestic manufacturing we're going to see, regardless of the difference in labor costs.
Those behemoth Ultra Large Container Vessels [wikipedia.org] consume an enormous amount of fuel bringing their shit from Asia to the U.S., and short of discovering some huge untapped energy source, I don't see that being sustainable at all in the long term. To be honest, though, I think we're probably going to end up at war with China before that really becomes an issue over China's stock [wikipedia.org]
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:4, Insightful)
US oil is shit... it can still have many uses, like making roads, but the high quality oil is in the middle east. If you want a efficient oil refinery, you will use better oil.
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Interesting)
Those behemoth Ultra Large Container Vessels consume an enormous amount of fuel bringing their shit from Asia to the U.S., and short of discovering some huge untapped energy source, I don't see that being sustainable at all in the long term.
The ultra-large container ships do consume ultra-large amounts of fuel, but they also transport ultra-large amounts of stuff. In fact, the bigger the ship, the less fuel is used proprtionally.
It takes about 20 days to sail a container ship from the UK to China. Based the Wikipedia article for the Emma Maersk (new top of the line container vessel), that comes to about 57 to 123 gallons of fuel per 20 foot container.
A 20 foot container holds a LOT of stuff. For most domestic manufactured goods, the amount of fuel used per item shipped from China is tiny: much much less than the amount of fuel you will use to drive to the store to buy the item, or the amount of fuel used to deliver it to your house.
It's pretty safe to say that private use of cars will disappear long before high capacity long range shipping of goods.
preceded by sanctions and ever-increasing limits on Chinese imports that will help to encourage domestic production.
I expect the latter will happen very soon. I don't know why it hasn't already: China has effectively used government money to shut down the rest of the world's rare earth manufacturing. I'm not entirely sure why this didn't cause the introduction of tarriffs.
I doubt war will happen. It would be much cheaper to build domestic factories and (NB) re-open domestic mines. Then use subsidies/import tariffs to protect an important strategic industry.
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Interesting)
Which is roughly 1/2 to 1/3 the fuel capacity of a tractor trailer hauling one or two such containers. Basically, the fuel cost of trucking something a few hundred miles is more than the fuel cost of transporting it across the ocean via cargo ship.
Totally different story for rail, which is about 3-5x more efficient than truck, or about half the efficiency of cargo ship. But the U.S. mostly killed off its rail industry by subsidizing trucking. (The highways are paid for disproportionately by passenger cars - they pay about half the cost, while trucks cause most of the road damage which needs to be repaired. The average passenger car simply does not weigh enough to damage the highway appreciably.)
Re: (Score:3)
Didn't we already have this discussion, say, 50 years ago? That Toyota I used to own sure was a throw-away product, as are the Nissan, Suzuki and (1977!) Honda products I currently own.
Re:remember that raise you didn't get? (Score:5, Insightful)
Show me SOMETHING that is made inthe USA.
Ford? Nope China parts, Assembled in canada and mexico.
GM? as china as you can get.
Honda? Yes they are more american than any american car brand, but parts are still China
Computer? China
Beer? China... for the cans. Your all american Budwiser is in a China made aluminum.
China, china, china. NOTHING you buy in a supermarket or big box store is made inthe USA.
Want USA made? local small artisan or maker. is your only choice. What that does is makes my Coffee Cup go from $3.95 to $16.99. Any my glass drinking glasses, I cant get the $1.99 each china junk. I have to pay a glass artist $22.50 each for them.
I am fine with it, but all the "BUY AMERICAN" morons dont walk the walk but they shoot off their mouths.
BUY AMERICAN means you never set foot in ANY big box store. You buy your clothing from a local tailor. You ready to pay $35.00 for a t-shirt that a seamstress will make custom for you? Want new Silverware? $15.00 a piece from your local Metal Artist.
The biggest problem is these BUY AMERICAN loudmouths also ride Harley Davidson bikes, which are mostly China parts. The Loudmouths wont do what they say. It's why Harley's are all china parts and soon to be BUILT in china. It's why Indian went out of business. Because these LOUDMOUTHS dont do what they say others should do.
They wont pay the cost if buying all american.
Re:remember that raise you didn't get? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Weed is still an American commodity!
You'd like to BUY USA? Get a locally made bong and locally grown weed.
Mexican, mostly, as I understand it.
Re:remember that raise you didn't get? (Score:4, Informative)
I'm sorry, but just because the plastic containers aren't made in the US, that doesn't mean that the dairy processor in my city is outsourcing its work, or that the farmers they get milk from are outside the US.
We live in a global economy, and I would hate to have to revert back to only a local economy.
I love that I can get fresh produce year-round, and that I can wash it down with Scotch whisky.
Re:remember that raise you didn't get? (Score:4, Funny)
In the early '90s, Chrysler ran a huge "Buy American!" campaign. The radio and TV (at least where I live) was blasted with ads about buying "Made in America" rather than buying imports, and the local Dodge/Chrysler dealer took out a huge full page ad dredging up memories of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor FIFTY FREAKING YEARS AGO. Shortly afterwards, my dad bought a brand new Dodge Ram Charger (guess the ads worked, sigh...). I looked inside the door, and guess what was stamped in the door frame?
Wait for it...
"Made in MEXICO
Well...I guess Mexico IS on the North American continent, so *technically* it wasn't false advertising. But IMHO, it certainly was deceptive.
Friggen' hypocrites
I work automotive logistics (Score:3, Interesting)
I do logistics work for automotive parts manufacturers. Forgive me if I cannot post in an account. I will tell you what I know.
Ford? Nope China parts, Assembled in canada and mexico.
Various bits made in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and Canada. Shipped to various states, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Germany, and China.
Some vehicles are made local, some are not. Local variants elsewhere in the world are assembled there with parts made here.
GM? as china as you can get.
Nearly identical to Ford. More parts are shipped to Michigan from Germany, combined with local bits, then shipped various places. Inc
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Check out this article [fool.com] which debunks some myths.
Misconception: Most of what Americans spend their money on is made in China.
Fact: Just 2.7% of personal consumption expenditures go to Chinese-made goods and services. 88.5% of U.S. consumer spending is on American-made goods and services
Re: (Score:3)
Translation in a nutshell: "When you buy cheap, outsourced Chinese products by buying at Amazon and Walmart, you hurt the American economy by not supporting local producers and manufacturers. If local producers and manufacturers can't compete with those in places like China, the money going to China to purc
Re:remember that raise you didn't get? (Score:5, Insightful)
Quite honestly, the idea of "buy local" in a global economy doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. What's more "American" -- a car built by a Japanese company (Honda, Toyota, Nissan) but built in an American plant, or an "American" car that's built in Mexico? I won't even discuss how Chrysler is actually Daimler (German) - Chrysler (American). Or consider Eric Buell Racing's Buell 1100RS motorcycle? That's an American company, but it uses a Rotax engine (Austrian). How many American cars have Bosch components (German) or ECU's and sensors made in Taiwan? The boundaries get pretty grey, and it becomes difficult, if not downright impossible, to determine what is "American" and what is "imported" even if you want to.
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And the U.S. law is YOUR law now too (Score:5, Interesting)
Then buy NZ music (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:5, Insightful)
Or we could have a license-burning bonfire. That would be fun. I'll bring the marshmallows.
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, what, you were hoping to turn music into a form of property? That's cute.
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:4, Interesting)
but but but but but... we have the missiles!!
look at the warships!
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:4, Interesting)
Just wait until Peter Jackson or a delegate runs for office in NZ, and then there will be a re-focused priority on protection of intellectual property.
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:5, Interesting)
They say NZ's nuclear-free law extends only to their territorial waters--12 nautical miles from shore--not even out to the the 200 nautical mile "exclusive economic zone"; 12 NM hardly qualifies as a "long way" around NZ, particularly for a nuclear powered warship, which would typically not come that close to shore unless the ship was already going to port.
So, like most blahblah-free zones, it's basically just a feel-good measure. It's almost certianly more of an negative economic cost to business in NZ than anything else, since even diesel-powered US warships won't be able to visit NZ ports for provisions or other economic purposes, as the US Navy will refuse to confirm or deny that they have nuclear weapons on board any particular ship. Also, in the event of a natural disaster, the people of NZ might be in for even more hurt. The US Navy, more than any other force on the globe, is a massive resource for quickly sending out a great deal of logistical support for disaster relief. I wonder if they would suspend that policy in the event of a disaster, even though I hope that need never arises.
Re:That'll work fine in peacetime (Score:4, Insightful)
IF it looked like we were going down, you bet your ass we will launch nukes at you.
Yeah, about that foreign policy of "looking and acting like a crazy guy wearing an explosive vest and a loud ticking detonator". You guys might want to get that looked at sometime. It doesn't always endear you even to your friends.
Admittedly the USA is still - barely - the nicest of the paranoid meth-crazed explosive-vest-wearing gang-bangers on the global block... except for the occasional drunken bouts of violent rage... but that's not exactly a career path you really want to aspire to, y'know? Yes, you're still better than North Korea. But you have a bigger gun, and you're still swigging from the hip flask.
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't buy US produced music anyway. Its not like you make it all or far from it. The UK makes better music!
Re: (Score:2)
I started digging through my DVD collection. All my region 1 discs state "Licensed for sale only in the U.S." or something similar. If they say anything at all.
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry, that music may have been produced in the US, but contains ingredients taken from music produced elsewhere. Ergo, there is no basis to declare that US copyright laws should extend to other countries.
Re: (Score:3)
If you buy music produced in the US you buy it under the terms of the license. Don't like those terms? Buy music produced elsewhere.
You are confused a bit.
They don't need to buy NZ music, US needs to stop selling music in the NZ and expecting their laws to apply there.
then don't buy any music ever (Score:5, Interesting)
NZ brings in more money selling music in the US than the other way around. And there are plenty of NZ artists that are signed under Broadcast Music, Inc (BMI). NZ citizens currently benefits from the laws and organizations of the US. But I guess everyone eventually complains after making a deal with the devil.
Re:Then buy NZ music (Score:5, Informative)
If you buy music produced in the US you buy it under the terms of the license.
No. If I buy music (from any country) in Spain I buy it under Spanish laws. Anything else, feel free to shove up your ass, license included.
Re: (Score:3)
This is true when concerning local purchases, the labels need to sell music under local laws of where they sell it.
This is not true when you download the music from American file-sharers. The sharer violated US license, and you participate in violation of the same license by downloading the music from them. And by redistributing it, you continue violating the same license.
Of course if the sharer is, say, Spanish, and their law says they are legal to share the music, American labels can kiss your ass. You're
The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
I know that this is normally a forum to bash **AA, but the fact still remains that Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content. Never did he even attempt to stop this illegal activity, and at times, promoted it. People like to talk about how the rich make there fortune off the backs of the working class... this guy is your poster child.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This interview by Cambell paints a different picture about what Kim Dotcom actually does.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF48PjCtW4k
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Certainly he's a shady character, but last time I checked, this guy actually wanted to pay the artists [techcrunch.com]
Dotcom described Megabox as Megaupload’s iTunes competitor, which would even eventually offer free premium movies via Megamovie, a site set to launch in 2012. This service would take Megaupload from being just a digital locker site to a full-fledged player in the digital content game.
The kicker was Megabox would cater to unsigned artists and allow anyone to sell their creations while allowing the artist to retain 90% of the earnings. Or, artists could even giveaway their songs and would be paid through a service called Megakey. “Yes that’s right, we will pay artists even for free downloads.
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Interesting)
Certainly he's a shady character, but last time I checked, this guy actually wanted to pay the artists [techcrunch.com]
Dotcom described Megabox as Megaupload’s iTunes competitor, which would even eventually offer free premium movies via Megamovie, a site set to launch in 2012. This service would take Megaupload from being just a digital locker site to a full-fledged player in the digital content game.
The kicker was Megabox would cater to unsigned artists and allow anyone to sell their creations while allowing the artist to retain 90% of the earnings. Or, artists could even giveaway their songs and would be paid through a service called Megakey. “Yes that’s right, we will pay artists even for free downloads.
The above, if true, raises an interesting point. MegaUpload operated using the same model for years. Somehow, once they talked about creating a service that directly competed with iTunes -- and charging artists less for the privilege of selling their music via the MegaBox service, the FBI got quite frisky. Seizing servers, requesting arrest and extradition, freezing assets, etc. Now MegaUpload is no longer a threat to iTunes. I wonder what changed?
[Removes tinfoil hat]
I'm not saying that Apple owns the FBI, nor am I saying that these events weren't coincidental. It just gives you something to file away for future reference.
Re: (Score:3)
If I was going to don my Tinfoil hat for this one, I'd pin the culprits higher up the chain: RIAA for instance.
Apple/iTunes is, for better or worse, as close to an "old style" marketplace as you can get. The files easily traceable, proprietary, and all the powers that be get their cut of sales, while keeping all the starving artists starving.
A service like megabox would be counter to all of that. Most importantly, the powers that be would NOT get their free money, and we simply can't have that.
re: Dotcom - a "shady character" (Score:5, Interesting)
You know something? The more I read about Kim Dotcom, the more I get the idea "shady character" doesn't really fit him neatly. He reminds me much more of some of the "old school" computer geeks I knew from back in the mid 1980's and still run into occasionally. Many of them have a burning desire to make something of their lives ... to do something memorable, within the realm of what their talents are. They're a little eccentric or "off beat" by mainstream society's standards, sure. And maybe some of them are a bit guilty of being a little too materialistic. (But some of that simply comes with the territory of being interested in technology, IMO. If you spend much of your time working with computers and tech. - you develop an appreciation for all of those physical gadgets and devices that other people may not really have. It extends out towards all manner of complex machines and devices, too. Lots of I.T. hardware guys I know also get very interested in sports cars, for example. Even though they're not "gear heads" in the sense of putting in thousands of hours in someone's garage taking apart engines and transmissions? They appreciate the work that goes into building such a machine, and desire one of their own -- the same way they want the fastest PC out there, even if they don't really have a NEED for one that performs quite that well.)
Dotcom strikes me as all of the above, with a need to be recognized.... to be a "celebrity" of sorts, within his own circle of fellow geeks at least. (The fact he'd change his last name to Dotcom, alone, tells you how much he wants to be noticed as a "guru" in his field of interest.)
He was recently seen in photos hanging out with Steve Wozniak ... with Woz having nothing but good things to say about him. That's not quite what I'd expect if the guy was just your run of the mill online scammer, trying to make his fortune at everyone else's expense.
It's govt. and big media wanting you to think of this guy as something like a foreign leader of a drug cartel ....
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
I know it's popular to sound all level-headed and point out the law, but many of us think copyright law desperately needs an overhaul. I, for one, would like to see anything released over 10 years ago go into the public domain. Then, much of the Megaupload activity would've been legal.
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Interesting)
10 years is probably too short, but you're right that copyright laws are broken. I do like 10 years as a good number to work from.
I think copyright should be broken into personal and corporate copyright. Personal copyright is owned by the author. Corporate by a corporation.
Personal copyright should have a maximum 10 year exclusive license limit, after ten years the license should be renegotiated, and perhaps transfered to another publisher. He time limit for personal copyright should be Death or twenty years whichever is longer.
Corporate copyright should be free for 10 years. And then renewed in each country that the corporation wants to enforce it in for $10,000 for then next 10 years, then $100,000 for ten more years and so on. So:
0-10 years free ...
11-20 years $10,000 per country
21-30 years $100,000 per country
31-40 years $1,000,000 per country
If a company wants to bankrupt itself to keep a copyright that's fine but it'll quickly become too expensive for companies not to let copyrit lapse.
Breaking digital locks should not be illegal. You blame the lock if it gts broken, safes and locks are rated by how long it takes to break into them. Also you could look at it as a National Security question, if you my cryptography illegal, only crimals will be cryptologists. And then how are you going to secure your communications? Digital locks are a good way to train the next generation of cryptologists, and keep them practiced.
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
10 years is probably too short
Why? Justify that assertion. Is it not the case that the vast majority of profits for the vast majority of copyrighted works get made in the first 5 years after release, let alone the first 10? How is it a greater public good to help the odd outlier that is still going strong after 50 years make money, as opposed to letting many millions of people enjoy quality works for free once they've made a good profit (if they're ever going to)?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Attention: **AA does not represent the working class. Dotcom made his money off the backs of the already rich guys. Thus we frankly don't give a damn as long as he's given a fair trial in NZ for any crimed committed in NZ against NZ law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Providing a service that he got paid for is not making your money off the backs of the working class, weather it is illegal or not.
Dismantling companies and peoples pensions for profit, paying low wages, company towns, and monopolies are taking advantage of the working class.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Which is why he is the perfect bogeyman for this suit that will serve as a precedent to make online file storage illegal. But many overlook that when their judgement is clouded by their (however justified) personal dislike of Dotcom.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I know that this is normally a forum to bash **AA, but the fact still remains that Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content.
And the recording industry made their fortune by providing a product that was used to circumvent paying for artists playing their music live.
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
I know that this is normally a forum to bash **AA, but the fact still remains that Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content.
Sop do DVD and Blu-ray writer manufacturers, and blank media manufacturers. Also HD manufacturers. Also all Internet service providers. All these are used to "circumvent paying for content."
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
>>> Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content.
If he's such a horrible person, why was he able to get ~50 top-of-the-charts singers (and musicians and audio engineers) to perform a Megaupload song for him? If he really was hurting these people, they would have refused to do the ad. But instead they helped write, sing, and produce it.
I suspect your attack is without merit. Dotcom no more wanted to hurt people than does Googlemail or the Amazon Cloud (which is also used to share content w/o payment). If anybody is guilty here it's the U.S. government for overstepping its legal authority. Last I checked its juris diction ends at the border or the 14 mile oceanic limit.
Re: (Score:3)
"Musician" used to be a vocation like any other... I come from a musical family who remembers that time. Hell, there are societies who had/have whole castes devoted to musicianship (eg. the griots of west africa). The recording industry made most musicians obsolete, except for a few caged birds... and only a few of those ever make it big enough to escape, end up owning the rights to their own music etc... The musicians I know myself are part timers, academics and music teachers. The only professiona
Illegal but not necessarily wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
You seem to be treating legality in the area of copyright as a natural law of physics and carved on tablets of stone. Well it's neither, and everything is in a state of flux..
The law in this area was never subject to public approval in any country, and it runs totally contrary to how the VAST majority of people seem to feel about it when asked. Instead it was developed through intense lobbying of politicians by content creators in a completely one-sided manner. What's more, much of it was developed out of the public eye and turned into law through a process of direct bribery, particularly in the US where bribery is legal and called "campaign contributions".
So while you're factually correct in calling it "illegal" by US law, it's only "illegal" because this totally corrupt and non-democratic system has defined "illegal" to suit itself. It may be illegal in your country, but it's not illegal everywhere, and it's regarded as "wrong" by only a small percentage of the world's population.
Things aren't as clearcut as you make out.
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine the reaction in the US, if a US citizen was being investigated by a foreign government - say Russia - and the Russians sent the FSB over to shut down a US business, seize its assets and arrest that citizen prior to him being tried.
Thats what its like to live in another country that, through fear/intimidation - or massive bribery - allows the US to run roughshod over its own laws and basically do whatever the fuck it wants to whomever the fuck it wants because that individual is seen as a threat by some powerful US corporation or organization. If it was a rare occurrence it would still be wrong, but not much concern but its happening a lot more these days it seems.
Kim Dotcom is a scumbag (Score:4)
And yet the USA by their actions make him look saintly
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
"I know that this is normally a forum to bash **AA, but the fact still remains that Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content."
Right, and all car manufacturers made their fortunes by providing cars that were used to break the speed limit, all gun manufacturers made their fortunes by providing guns that were used to kill, and Apple made it's fortunes by making media players that were used to play pirated MP3s.
Similarly neither Ford, nor gun manufacturers, nor Apple have done anything to stop illegal speeding, illegal killing, or illegal downloading, and at times have "promoted" it.
Honestly, your argument extends to many industries, as the whole data loss fiasco has proven, Megaupload had many legitimate customers. The point being that the service he was providing was not illegal, not any more so than the industries mentioned above. The problem is that his industry is one that:
a) The US is spending a fuckton of money attacking at the behest of corporate interests
and:
b) Not as big as the likes of Apple, Google, Microsoft, or Ford, or whoever to have had the money and lobbying power to protect themselves
Re: (Score:2)
Any and every online storage system can be used for such. Even the owners of the pipes are making money on the theft of copyright. Maybe they should all be put out of business.
Or maybe not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
**AA
working class
Clearly our definitions of 'working class' are pretty disparate. The MAFIAA organizations that were most harmed by this are anything but working class, they're little more than middlemen that are using their immense wealth and every legal maneuver available to them to continue to justify their existence in an era when artists are eschewing the mainstream industry entirely and self producing more and more.
When the horse fell out of favor as the preferred method of transportation, the harrier became an endan
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:4, Informative)
" the fact still remains that Kim Dotcom made his fortune by providing a service that was used to circumvent paying for content."
Calling your opinion a fact , does not a fact make.
The fact would be that Kim Dotcom provided a service for file sharing, hosting and distribution. The files the clients of said service chose to share , host and distribute happened to contain content that they were not licensed to do so with. The clients are the criminals, not the provider of the service. This is the the technical and legal fact.
Since they can't prosecute a million people and possibly maintain their political office at the same time, the US (politicians and agencies) chose to go for the easiest and softest target in this case - namely , Kim Dotcom.
Why is he a soft target? He is a single identifiable individual, who is obese and rich from doing something that is borderline legal. The psychological impact of seeing a fat , pompous and rich man , who got that way doing something the common man is repeatedly told is a very very bad thing is rather irritating.
If you think there is even a shred of legality in the behavior of the US you are fooling yourself. Even if Kim Dotcom turned out to have facilitated crimes (which is debatable but may be alleged), the US did not stay within the law either. That just brings it down to a case of Might is Right. This is why this case should be an indicator to the US public that their system is going to the dogs.
"All murderers are punished unless they work in large numbers or to the sound of trumpets" - Voltaire. He said it best.
Re: (Score:3)
While I agree with your arguments, mostly, there is one place that I just don't get.
This is why this case should be an indicator to the US public that their system is going to the dogs
Do you really believe that the US is falling apart? It seems to me that around 99% of the problems we see today are mostly manufactured by various news agencies/websites to drum up viewers (or, rather, pointed out in grand fashion and made to seem much, much worse than they are – what’s the word? Oh, yeah, sensationalism). It seems to me that this alarmist “THE PRESIDENT IS A TYRANT”/”CONGRESS I
Re:The enemy among us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, I do think the US is falling apart. This is of course entirely subjective and based on my feeling of the trajectory of events in the last 20 years in the US. I don't live in the US, though I am 'involved' in the US being in a profession that is very international and am affected by US systems.
From the outside, irrationality seems to dominate US public opinion. US laws and rhetoric seem to drift further and further from ground realities. Especially so when concerning the nature of digital information, environmental issues , issues on religion and so on. And if anything can be considered to be the major sociological topics of our generation, I think the internet, environment and religion are the top three.
I may be - in fact hope to be, completely wrong in my pessimism.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, how was it circumventing paying for content? If you mean that he paid them directly (more profit directly to artists) instead of through the label, then yes.
Since when is it his job, even remotely, to monitor how people use his service if it's not a child porn issue? In no country on the planet does such a requirement actually exist except China, I suppose.
He has indeed tried to pay artists as highlighted by the anon post - in taking this down a number of artists *lost* a revenue stream for distributing
Re: (Score:3)
Well most of the working condition in China/India/... are illegal under US/EU law. Using this working force to build your widget is not illegal, it is not even considered immoral - it is considered a good think, even a very good thing. Doing it is not discouraged, it is encouraged. The closest to dodgy you get it is to use fiscal paradise and fiscal loopholes, but then people will just tell you that if it is legal, it should be done.
Sure technically that is not the same, it is more complicated, there are
Easy solution for Australia (And NZ?) (Score:2, Interesting)
It's at least true in Aus that it is illegal to lock things down to a region.
Make cracking the region locks illegal but make every region coded item illegal too. And put equal effort into persuit of the wrongdoers in each case.
Does NZ have the same law? Seems likely. In which case: sorted.
Re:Easy solution for Australia (And NZ?) (Score:5, Informative)
In the UK we have this thing called the Trade Descriptions Act 1968, which among other things prohibits misdescription of goods. A DVD-video must by definition comply with the DVD-video standard (Part 3, Book B and DVD Video Recording Book) or it CANNOT be referred to as a DVD video.
Now, people do still have choice over whether or not to purchase a barcode for a particular title. If one does purchase a DVD video, then he has a statutory expectation that that is what he is getting. There is NOTHING in the standards to cover region locking, CSS encoding, or any other restrictive mechanism. ANY DVD that employs any of these mechanisms CANNOT claim to be a DVD-video.
Having made the choice to purchase a barcode with the DVD-Video logo, if one then finds out that one cannot play that DVD in a standard, open-region player (lots of Chinese players are not region locked hence will play ANY otherwise compliant disc), then IMO there would be a case under 1968 (c. 29).
My boggle with the region coding thing is the fact that unless specified on the box that a player is region-free*, there is no indication whatsoever on the hardware or the packaging (or the manual!) that the player is region locked and to what region. This is clearly a violation of 1968 (c.29)?
*Since DVD-video units hit mainstream in around 1997, I've been aware of the region coding and studiously avoided region locked players, unless there was a clear-cut and simple way of jailbreaking them. The only player I ever had to jailbreak was a Meridian 586 (bought near the end of 1997 and cost a bloody fortune).
Stop using the word "US" (Score:2, Insightful)
We read "US" as "us", same as "we". It's the United States of America, not the United States.
And by the way, American means someone from America, not someone from the USA.
Re:Stop using the word "US" (Score:4, Funny)
Whooossshh.
You're totally missing the point. The famous quote is "we have met the enemy and he is us."
That is why it is a snarky (and accurate) turn of phrase to say "we have met the enemy and he is (the) U.S."
Relating to the old quote is meant to give context via the truth of the snarky new stating of it. It gives the statement more weight.
You're literally taking it to literally.... ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
>>>American means someone from America, not someone from the USA.
So what are we supposed to call ourselves instead? United Statesians?!?!? Until you can come-up with a better name, we'll just keep saying Americans. And US. And EU. And RF.
Re:Stop using the word "US" (Score:4, Insightful)
And by the way, American means someone from America, not someone from the USA.
Please, present me a single person from Canada or Mexico describing himself as "an American". Better, find me a single person from Brazil or Peru that presents himself as "an American". Furthermore, per definition you are correct, but the word "American" is also defined as a citizen of the USA.
Taking into account usage and accepting the fact that this usage definition of "American" is correct, I'd simply say that you are wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
I have a different take on the issue you're (sort of) raising.
It may be that the U.S. trade representative and his puppetmaster lobbyists are pushing these treaties, but I'm a U.S. citizen and these guys sure as hell don't speak for me.
We ceased to be a real democracy approximately when corporations became people.
Re: (Score:3)
What about us, eh?
It's all about who you know. (Score:4, Insightful)
Dotcom is a comparatively little guy who had his own service and when the sh-t hit the fan didn't have anybody else in his corner. His antics and courtroom theatrics aside, what separates him from Youtube? An 800 pound gorilla named Google. People upload copyrighted material to Youtube every day but Google somehow makes it all right.
Is Google more responsive to takedown notices than megaupload? Is there more infringing material on one service vs. the other?
My opinion is Megaupload's biggest problem in the end is they never made friends in high places.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, but the MAFIAA know they can't actually challenge Google and get away unscathed with the same pedantic antics. By the time the word litigation reaches their doorstep an army of layers will already be deployed via autonomous cars.
Re:It's all about who you know. (Score:4, Informative)
> Is Google more responsive to takedown notices than megaupload?
Google have been sued many times on this issue, and are definitely have state of the art capability in this area.
Re: (Score:3)
Google's Content-ID program lets companies submit their own content that is then matched against every single frame of every uploaded video using state-of-the-art recognition technology and lets them block it or make money off the ads.
Megaupload took down links on request.
Yes, it's different.
one of the most beautiful quotes I know. (Score:5, Informative)
-- Walt Kelly
I heard "we met the enemy, and he is us" a million times before I bothered checking out the full quote, and I think it's kind of a shame to truncate it like that.
(and yes, I know this is off-topic, I don't care :D)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I hope for your sake that you have the licence to redistribute that quote.
Re: (Score:2)
Or this panel [sandboxx.org], for that matter :/ But I learned on Slashdot that Germany doesn't extradite; so even if I go to jail, it won't be pound-me-in-the-ass prison. YAY!
Pirates dont care about region codes (Score:3)
The only people that are affected by region codes are people who want to want to watch foreign dvds often stuff that has never been released and never will be in other parts of the world. Often stuff purchased legally on vacation.
Re: (Score:3)
> Of course, expats don't exist.
Yes, the world is too small for this sort of bullshit.
My wife is from a family that has multinational roots. She was born in Chile; her grandparents were immigrants to Chile from England. She has relatives living all over the world. Who send us things.
She was raised in a bilingual household where both English and Spanish were spoken on a routine basis. She lived in Europe for several years as a student - and as a result of this background speaks several languages fluently.
Definition of enemy (Score:4, Insightful)
Suppose that some arab country starts accusing and claiming extraditions of women all around the world because them commited adultery. Or that Sweden do the same with all men all around the world that had sex with a sleeping woman. Or a country with a corrupt government, where shady men or private companies pushes laws for criminalize people that drinks coke or read certain books, that exports that laws to all the world and claims extradition for people breaking that laws elsewhere.
That is what is doing USA, and that is what other governments are letting them to do while signing "cooperating treaties". I suppose that yes, the enemy is us, or at least USA and the people in your government that signed that kind of treaty.
Re: (Score:3)
I completely agree that the US extradition case against Dotcom is flawed, but your analogy is also flawed.
All of the crimes you listed only effect people within the country that the laws apply to. Copyright is different, particularly when applied to copying things via the internet.
The **AA could make the argument that by facilitating piracy of their content online, Dotcom was hurting their sales within the US, and in fact was using US servers to do it.
A more accurate analogy would therefore be if someone in
Opportunities (Score:5, Insightful)
US Gov't + Entertainment Industry = team fail (Score:5, Interesting)
The whole system we have set up here where the Govt passes legislature helping out lobbyists (in this case is so broken it's not even funny. I wouldn't go so far to say we are the sole enemy, but we definitely are not helping the situation.
I am 25, and the majority of my friends are way too busy trying to wiggle out from debt or job hunting in a stagnant environment to make their voices be heard (unless wikipedia shuts down [reuters.com]). Seeing as it costs time and money to make sure you actually get a seat at the table, it seems to me that a huge number of our generation is grossly misrepresented.
Is there someone/something out there that is working to involve our young adults in foreign and domestic politics... as opposed to telling them what to do/not to do? I cannot put it as eloquently as Jon Stewart did [washingtonpost.com], but our problems are only going to expand if we let people who refer to our type as "nerds" run the country.
We need to either a. Set up a strong lobby group to oppose heavy handed corporate driven legislature or b. change the system in it's entirety.
Re:With enemies like that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, blah blah blah, he registered a US domain name. If we start using the Internet as a vehicle for applying our out-of-control legal code in other countries, we are just going to make more enemies.
Re:With enemies like that... (Score:4, Informative)
No, but if someone buys a DVD while abroad, and brings it home only to find out that they're not allowed to watch it (since the American copyright groups are pushing to have breaking the region encoding declared a criminal act) then they're expected to sit there with a dud DVD and not play it.
This isn't about getting the content without paying for them. This is about taking a good you bought, and using it where you live.
Breaking the region encoding just allows you to play a product you legally purchased, and legally brought home without waiting for the same product to be re-released where you live.
America is basically trying to export laws which strip the right of first sale and other fair use rights they already enjoy.
There's a huge difference between that and what you describe.