Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.




Awesome
4859 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

# 154187 20-Oct-2014 16:37
Send private message

I'll probably get a lifetime ban for the name I am about to mention, but......

I saw another Kim Dotcom article today about the NZ court ordering him to hand over details of his assets to US movie studios.

I'm just curious, along with all the other chargers against him being bought by the US government and private companies, what gives the NZ courts jurisdiction to make such orders? I thought that's what the extradition process was all about. If you are accused of a crime in a country that NZ has an extradition treaty with, don't they have you extradite you there to face those charges rather than using NZ courts as a proxy?




Twitter: ajobbins


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2
4150 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1158640 20-Oct-2014 16:50
Send private message

As part of the initial extradiction applicetion, there was a decision made by the NZ courts to grant the seizing of KDC's NZ assets, 

Subsequent to this when the "studios" started to see KDC throwing money around again, ( funding the internet party, 5 mil bounty for evidence helping him etc) they figured that he must have stuff hidden away they was not seized (but should have been)

So they asked the NZ courts to have KDC provide a list of assets, so they can argue over where the Internet party money and others might have come from,

As with all court cases between parties that have significant means, the only real winners are the lawyers,



Awesome
4859 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158649 20-Oct-2014 17:08
Send private message

wellygary: As part of the initial extradiction applicetion, there was a decision made by the NZ courts to grant the seizing of KDC's NZ assets, 

Subsequent to this when the "studios" started to see KDC throwing money around again, ( funding the internet party, 5 mil bounty for evidence helping him etc) they figured that he must have stuff hidden away they was not seized (but should have been)


But aren't the studio's suing under a separate civil case, unrelated to the original seizure and extradition? I would have thought the studio's would have to apply to a US court for a civil lawsuit, which would not have any jurisdiction over someone who isn't in the US or a US citizen.




Twitter: ajobbins


 
 
 
 


14323 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158652 20-Oct-2014 17:17
One person supports this post
Send private message

leave it to the Courts, and encourage the Government to get him removed from NZ as soon as possible




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

There is no planet B

 

 




Awesome
4859 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158665 20-Oct-2014 17:24
5 people support this post
Send private message

KiwiNZ: leave it to the Courts, and encourage the Government to get him removed from NZ as soon as possible


Ignoring who the accused is for a moment, I am trying to understand how the courts are allowed to ask on behalf of American interests for alleged breaches of american laws by someone who is not in America, is not an american citizen and the charges aren't related to (and do not qualify for) an extradition request.




Twitter: ajobbins


14323 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158666 20-Oct-2014 17:26
Send private message

ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: leave it to the Courts, and encourage the Government to get him removed from NZ as soon as possible


Ignoring who the accused is for a moment, I am trying to understand how the courts are allowed to ask on behalf of American interests for alleged breaches of american laws by someone who is not in America, is not an american citizen and the charges aren't related to (and do not qualify for) an extradition request.


One would have to know the full details of the case to comment on that. 




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

There is no planet B

 

 




Awesome
4859 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158680 20-Oct-2014 17:39
Send private message

KiwiNZ: One would have to know the full details of the case to comment on that. 


I wouldn't have thought so. I'm interested in the legal mechanism that allows NZ courts to act at the behest of US organisations enforcing US laws in New Zealand more so than the specifics of this case.




Twitter: ajobbins


14323 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158682 20-Oct-2014 17:42
Send private message

The details, the filed papers etc etc would give the basis that the court decided that it could hear the case.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

There is no planet B

 

 


 
 
 
 


gzt

10953 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1158698 20-Oct-2014 18:01
One person supports this post
Send private message

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/dotcom-loses-bid-keep-assets-hollywood-studios-bd-164225

I don't understand this either. I can speculate but I don't understand it.

In either case the civil suit is what the industry should have pursued in the first place instead of calling in favors with first the US and then the NZ government with all the spying and black helicopter crap.

gzt

10953 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1158703 20-Oct-2014 18:10
Send private message

ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: One would have to know the full details of the case to comment on that. 


I wouldn't have thought so. I'm interested in the legal mechanism that allows NZ courts to act at the behest of US organisations enforcing US laws in New Zealand more so than the specifics of this case.

I will speculate that the asset seizure in regard to the extradition in regard to the charges of alleged conspiracy to violate the copyright of company xyz - allows party(s) xyz some opportunity to present before the court on the subject of those assets.

The chain of law and precedent would have to be extremely complete to allow that to happen without challenge. But who knows, maybe there is some legality of that process still to appeal.

2161 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1158706 20-Oct-2014 18:13
Send private message

I too am interested in this

 

Kim has said before that that they did take away all of his assets, and the ones he has now are new ones he has earned with new business's like MEGA, not related to the old megaupload case

This is also something that happened recently htp://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-dismiss-141013/

1567 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 1158722 20-Oct-2014 18:35
5 people support this post
Send private message

There's a very simple answer to the OP's question: the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1992.

This is a NZ statute, passed by the NZ parliament, which codifies NZ's obligation towards other countries in terms of assisting their investigation of domestic criminal offences and/or prosecutions which may nonetheless have certain linkages to assets/persons based in NZ. NZ authorities are also in turn empowered to seek similar assistance from other countries that are also signatories to various international conventions listed within the Act. In some cases, countries may enter into bilateral agreements where they agree to provide each other the sorts of assistance I described earlier.

In simple terms, American courts/authorities don't have jurisdiction in NZ. The NZ government agrees to assist them either through international, collective agreements or bilateral agreements and the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act sets out the kind of assistance which we may provide. If people aren't happy with the scope of assistance that's being provided, petition Parliament to change the Act. For myself, as a lawyer who's reasonably familiar with the Act (but am by no means an expert) and have read the various judgments, whilst I am not always a fan of the US nor am I a fan of some of the police conduct vis-a-vis Dotcom, I happen to think our courts have done an admirable job of keeping a balanced perspective and keeping the powers-that-be in check.

Contrary to all the brainless media hype and ravings by the legally ill-informed, the general concept of providing this sort of mutual assistance in criminal cases is well enshrined in the law of most civilised countries.







Awesome
4859 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158727 20-Oct-2014 18:43
Send private message

dejadeadnz: There's a very simple answer to the OP's question: the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1992.

This is a NZ statute, passed by the NZ parliament, which codifies NZ's obligation towards other countries in terms of assisting their investigation of domestic criminal offences and/or prosecutions which may nonetheless have certain linkages to assets/persons based in NZ. NZ authorities are also in turn empowered to seek similar assistance from other countries that are also signatories to various international conventions listed within the Act. In some cases, countries may enter into bilateral agreements where they agree to provide each other the sorts of assistance I described earlier.

In simple terms, American courts/authorities don't have jurisdiction in NZ. The NZ government agrees to assist them either through international, collective agreements or bilateral agreements and the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act sets out the kind of assistance which we may provide. If people aren't happy with the scope of assistance that's being provided, petition Parliament to change the Act. For myself, as a lawyer who's reasonably familiar with the Act (but am by no means an expert) and have read the various judgments, whilst I am not always a fan of the US nor am I a fan of some of the police conduct vis-a-vis Dotcom, I happen to think our courts have done an admirable job of keeping a balanced perspective and keeping the powers-that-be in check.

Contrary to all the brainless media hype and ravings by the legally ill-informed, the general concept of providing this sort of mutual assistance in criminal cases is well enshrined in the law of most civilised countries.



Thanks for that - great information, just the answer I was looking for.

But aren't the charges civil, rather than criminal? Does that make a difference?




Twitter: ajobbins


5089 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1158759 20-Oct-2014 19:27
4 people support this post
Send private message

ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: leave it to the Courts, and encourage the Government to get him removed from NZ as soon as possible


Ignoring who the accused is for a moment, I am trying to understand how the courts are allowed to ask on behalf of American interests for alleged breaches of american laws by someone who is not in America, is not an american citizen and the charges aren't related to (and do not qualify for) an extradition request.


They've had him charged with money laundering in the US, which is a crime.

Of course, ignoring who he is, those who are cheering on from the sidelines hoping he'll get chucked out sooner rather than later are thereby tacitly approving of it being perfectly appropriate to arrest someone accused of helping someone else copy DVDs by sending in military-armed police in helicopters at dawn, and also that they're quite happy to pay the additional garnish on all their internet and cloud service fees that will be the inevitable result of his (inevitably successful) prosecution.




iPad Pro 11" + iPhone XS + 2degrees 4tw!

 

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


2161 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1158811 20-Oct-2014 20:20
Send private message

SaltyNZ:
ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: leave it to the Courts, and encourage the Government to get him removed from NZ as soon as possible


Ignoring who the accused is for a moment, I am trying to understand how the courts are allowed to ask on behalf of American interests for alleged breaches of american laws by someone who is not in America, is not an american citizen and the charges aren't related to (and do not qualify for) an extradition request.


They've had him charged with money laundering in the US, which is a crime.

Of course, ignoring who he is, those who are cheering on from the sidelines hoping he'll get chucked out sooner rather than later are thereby tacitly approving of it being perfectly appropriate to arrest someone accused of helping someone else copy DVDs by sending in military-armed police in helicopters at dawn, and also that they're quite happy to pay the additional garnish on all their internet and cloud service fees that will be the inevitable result of his (inevitably successful) prosecution.


They obviously just added money laundering and racketeering on to make it look worse, and because you cant extradite someone for copyright infringement. Isnt extradition meant for terrorists and stuff. In my opinion its gonna blow up in hollywoods face (if he gets a fair trial that is). He said he would go to the USA voluntarily if he was allowed the same bail that he would get here, but they said no.

MegaUpload had plenty of legitimate users. Yes some people may've used it for bad things but you cant really blame him for that, when they took down links when ever asked.

3469 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1158828 20-Oct-2014 21:02
Send private message

This Crown Law Office page expands a little further on what's already been said by dejadeadnz. We have a mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) with the US, amongst others.

 1 | 2
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter and LinkedIn »



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Chorus to launch Hyperfibre service
Posted 18-Nov-2019 15:00


Microsoft launches first Experience Center worldwide for Asia Pacific in Singapore
Posted 13-Nov-2019 13:08


Disney+ comes to LG Smart TVs
Posted 13-Nov-2019 12:55


Spark launches new wireless broadband "Unplan Metro"
Posted 11-Nov-2019 08:19


Malwarebytes overhauls flagship product with new UI, faster engine and lighter footprint
Posted 6-Nov-2019 11:48


CarbonClick launches into Digital Marketplaces
Posted 6-Nov-2019 11:42


Kordia offers Microsoft Azure Peering Service
Posted 6-Nov-2019 11:41


Spark 5G live on Auckland Harbour for Emirates Team New Zealand
Posted 4-Nov-2019 17:30


BNZ and Vodafone partner to boost NZ Tech for SME
Posted 31-Oct-2019 17:14


Nokia 7.2 available in New Zealand
Posted 31-Oct-2019 16:24


2talk launches Microsoft Teams Direct Routing product
Posted 29-Oct-2019 10:35


New Breast Cancer Foundation app puts power in Kiwi women's hands
Posted 25-Oct-2019 16:13


OPPO Reno2 Series lands, alongside hybrid noise-cancelling Wireless Headphones
Posted 24-Oct-2019 15:32


Waikato Data Scientists awarded $13 million from the Government
Posted 24-Oct-2019 15:27


D-Link launches Wave 2 Unified Access Points
Posted 24-Oct-2019 15:07



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.