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.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
BDFL - Memuneh
59188 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10421

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Subscriber

  Reply # 1456275 23-Dec-2015 20:46
3 people support this post
Send private message

Finch:
blakamin:
Finch: I was listening to talk back today on the radio and somebody rung up and made a good point.

Whats the difference between Megaupload and big companies using their own online storage programs? EG Microsoft and Google.

Megaupload was full of links to movies etc, but you cant tell me there is not a single link on OneDrive or Google Drive that links to a movie/album/TV Show etc?

Shouldn't Google/Microsoft (And other companies) all be made to take the online storages down?

Because Microsoft, Google and Apple strip links to pirated material when asked, but he paid people who linked to it thru megaupload? ie: people that pirated and had lots of downloads got PAID to keep the links active and busy.

Maybe so, but that doesn't stop somebody from re uploading it.



But Microsoft, Google, Dropbox actively pursue and remove links when a DMCA notice is received, as many times as needed. And these companies don't pay for people to upload and keep things on their servers.

Very different stuff.





903 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85
Inactive user


  Reply # 1456291 23-Dec-2015 20:57
Send private message

Him being extradited is seriosuly wrong.We all know that the us is not a legit system and theres now way in hell hes going to get a fair trial over there.
I may not agree with what ever he has done but this is a joke for him to be taken over there.Swat team invading his home for internet crimes?All paid for by the hollywood fat cats and they control the us justice system 

 
 
 
 


739 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 63


  Reply # 1456295 23-Dec-2015 21:06
9 people support this post
Send private message

I am surprised people seemed more concerned about what Dotcom did or didn't do rather any unanswered questions about the govts role in all this

Here is a good and impartial summary of the unanswered questions

Onward
11419 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5143

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1456301 23-Dec-2015 21:18
3 people support this post
Send private message

I am happy to let the Courts decide this.




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

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


734 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted

  Reply # 1456303 23-Dec-2015 21:29
3 people support this post
Send private message

xlinknz: I am surprised people seemed more concerned about what Dotcom did or didn't do rather any unanswered questions about the govts role in all this

Here is a good and impartial summary of the unanswered questions


Personally I think he's slimy, and he was most definitely making money off copyright infringement.

However what concerns me about this case is that he is being charged in a Civil lawsuit stateside, for which US law says cannot be a reason for requesting extradition and which the courts have refused to hear evidence about or consider. On top of this was the real shady actions from all 'Official' entities involved, including the OTT raid, accidental release of HDDs to the FBI, refusal to allow expert witnesses to be summoned from the US, the list goes on. This whole thing has been a horrendous waste of public money, made a very public mockery of our justice system, and even worse the only reason that doesn't feel forced is to pander to the US and by extension Hollywood.

Edit: Forgot the mockery bit, rather important that




Homebuilt High Performance Desktop: Windows 10 Professional (x64)
Toshiba Encore Write 2: Windows 10
Nokia 930: Windows Phone 10
Samsung Tab4 7": Android Lolipop
XBL: CruciasNZ
PSN: CruciasNZ
Steam: Lienhart2005


2069 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 505


  Reply # 1456304 23-Dec-2015 21:32
6 people support this post
Send private message

freitasm:
Finch:
blakamin:
Finch: I was listening to talk back today on the radio and somebody rung up and made a good point.

Whats the difference between Megaupload and big companies using their own online storage programs? EG Microsoft and Google.

Megaupload was full of links to movies etc, but you cant tell me there is not a single link on OneDrive or Google Drive that links to a movie/album/TV Show etc?

Shouldn't Google/Microsoft (And other companies) all be made to take the online storages down?

Because Microsoft, Google and Apple strip links to pirated material when asked, but he paid people who linked to it thru megaupload? ie: people that pirated and had lots of downloads got PAID to keep the links active and busy.

Maybe so, but that doesn't stop somebody from re uploading it.



But Microsoft, Google, Dropbox actively pursue and remove links when a DMCA notice is received, as many times as needed. And these companies don't pay for people to upload and keep things on their servers.

Very different stuff.



MegaUpload disabled all links which they were asked to. They even gave all members of the MPAA access to disable any link they like. However the file wasn't always 'deleted'.

Each time a file was uploaded, It was hashed using an MD5 or similar. If there was a file with that hash already on mega upload, the link simply became a link to the existing file and the file wasn't deleted unless all links to it were removed. This was a great way to save disk space on the servers. It would be unfair to delete the file itself as someone may have purchased that song/video file and there is nothing wrong with storing it there, (You didn't have to share a file on Mega Upload, you could just use it as cloud storage like the way we use OneDrive etc for today.)

The rewards system rewarded users who uploaded popular files, It was copyright neutral,This was limited to under 100mb, a movie is at least 600mb.

As someone mentioned above, The racketeering and money laundering allegations only stand if the copyright one does.

The extradition treaty requires that the criminal offence is valid in both countries. 

The appeal they have filed today is on the basis of Copyright Act 1994 Section 92B which is about Internet service providers not being liable for the actions of their users.

Here are two radio interviews performed today which you may find interesting
https://t.co/xUXxDgeP9l
https://t.co/lk576ucZ4E

412 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 64


  Reply # 1456312 23-Dec-2015 22:03
14 people support this post
Send private message

I'm disappointed that a large number of posts in this thread have been based on a like or dislike for the defendant and not whether or not laws were broken.

Kim Dotcom is being extradited:
 - Because of the actions of his users
 - who were potentially breaking a law that isn't a law in this country

I'm not saying Kim is pure and innocent.  I'm saying that he set things up in a way that SHOULDN'T make him liable for the actions of others.

It blows my mind that someone can be extradited for breaking a law in a country where they've never been. 

17518 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2122

Trusted

  Reply # 1456313 23-Dec-2015 22:04
Send private message

I guess in a way, the trial is never going to stop here. If judge sides dotcom, judge gets bad rap and uncle sam appeals. If judge uses a "liberal interpretation of the exTradition treaty", he gets to breathe another day and dotcom appeals.

739 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 63


  Reply # 1456314 23-Dec-2015 22:07
2 people support this post
Send private message

CruciasNZ:
xlinknz: I am surprised people seemed more concerned about what Dotcom did or didn't do rather any unanswered questions about the govts role in all this

Here is a good and impartial summary of the unanswered questions


Personally I think he's slimy, and he was most definitely making money off copyright infringement.

However what concerns me about this case is that he is being charged in a Civil lawsuit stateside, for which US law says cannot be a reason for requesting extradition and which the courts have refused to hear evidence about or consider. On top of this was the real shady actions from all 'Official' entities involved, including the OTT raid, accidental release of HDDs to the FBI, refusal to allow expert witnesses to be summoned from the US, the list goes on. This whole thing has been a horrendous waste of public money, made a very public mockery of our justice system, and even worse the only reason that doesn't feel forced is to pander to the US and by extension Hollywood.

Edit: Forgot the mockery bit, rather important that


Who has made a mockery of justice system, dotcom and or the govt [and its agencies who acted illegally] ?!

The same agencies that continue to act illegally

Read this rather damning view of those that uphold the justice system

The govts role in this is as questionable as dotcom activities










2838 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1479

Subscriber

  Reply # 1456346 23-Dec-2015 23:23
3 people support this post
Send private message

GeoffisPure: I'm disappointed that a large number of posts in this thread have been based on a like or dislike for the defendant and not whether or not laws were broken.

Kim Dotcom is being extradited:
 - Because of the actions of his users
 - who were potentially breaking a law that isn't a law in this country

I'm not saying Kim is pure and innocent.  I'm saying that he set things up in a way that SHOULDN'T make him liable for the actions of others.

It blows my mind that someone can be extradited for breaking a law in a country where they've never been. 


Quoted for truth.

Who next, it's no big secret that a certain NZ ISP used to run a DC++ hub that was a notorious piracy hub in NZ back in the days of free national traffic, and I've repeatedly heard (albeit it hearsay) that the CEO/Owner of the day supported its existence. MANY NZ isp's refused to forward on pre section 92 piracy notices. Given the latest Cox decision in the US, they are surely as guilty of breaking US copyright law as Dotcom is. Do we extradite them all?




Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

 

Thinking about signing up to BigPipe? Get $20 credit with my referral link.


JWR

730 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 236


  Reply # 1456351 23-Dec-2015 23:28
4 people support this post
Send private message


What concerns me most about this affair, is that any Kiwi could be extradited to the USA to face their injustice - even if they have never visited that country.

All that is required is some charge from the US.

It doesn't really matter what you think of Kim Dotcom as a person (not a fan). But, what applies to him - applies to the rest of us.

10191 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1636

Trusted

  Reply # 1456353 23-Dec-2015 23:36
Send private message

GeoffisPure: I'm disappointed that a large number of posts in this thread have been based on a like or dislike for the defendant and not whether or not laws were broken.

Kim Dotcom is being extradited:
 - Because of the actions of his users
 - who were potentially breaking a law that isn't a law in this country

I'm not saying Kim is pure and innocent.  I'm saying that he set things up in a way that SHOULDN'T make him liable for the actions of others.

It blows my mind that someone can be extradited for breaking a law in a country where they've never been. 


When this came to light there was support for him. Popular. Outcast. Sympathy. Now there isn't. Fact. He is charismatic, cool in a funny sort of way. 
But is he as white as white can be? Methinks not, as does an increasing many. To me, its been a great story, but it is tainted. If some say they US is tainted, ok, but so is KDC

gzt

9164 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1291


  Reply # 1456357 23-Dec-2015 23:53
2 people support this post
Send private message

To some extent we lose control of our own copyright law if we allow this kind of extradition to take place and I think that is worth thinking about. My preference would have been telling the USA yeah we understand your concerns but this action carries too many risks for our sovereignty so you need to find another way to approach this issue. Direct usa fbi to nz police cooperation on this issue made a debacle of our sovereignty and legal processes and I really would not like to see this ever again for these kind of cases.

10095 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3094

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1456358 23-Dec-2015 23:57
3 people support this post
Send private message

JWR:
What concerns me most about this affair, is that any Kiwi could be extradited to the USA to face their injustice - even if they have never visited that country.

All that is required is some charge from the US.

It doesn't really matter what you think of Kim Dotcom as a person (not a fan). But, what applies to him - applies to the rest of us.


Yes, this idea that the USA can make a law which they have a right to try any citizen of anywhere else under, ignoring the simple fact that whilst ignorance is generally no defence, how can anyone know the laws of every other country in the world?

Imagine the logical extension - people suddenly being extradited because they had broken a law in Albania, or Uzbekistan, or Iceland. There are states in the US where certain sex acts are technically illegal - can we look forward to salacious trials of couples from around the world for offending the legal morals of the Deep South?

I have no problem with the US seeking to prosecute KDC in New Zealand under NZ law if he broke it. Anyone can bring private prosecutions. I have no problem with them extraditing people who actually commit crime IN the USA and then flee.

I do however have a problem with them simply deciding people anywhere in the world may or may not have broken some US law and reaching out to pluck those people from wherever they are.





2959 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 840

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1456360 24-Dec-2015 00:04
Send private message

JWR: what applies to him - applies to the rest of us.

Why? Are each of us individually carrying out business with US citizens?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

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 »

New Zealand government to create digital advisory group
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:47


Australia datum changes means whole country moving 1.8 metres north-east
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:39


UAV Traffic Management Trial launching today in New Zealand
Posted 12-Dec-2017 16:06


UFB connections pass 460,000
Posted 11-Dec-2017 11:26


The Warehouse Group to adopt IBM Cloud to support digital transformation
Posted 11-Dec-2017 11:22


Dimension Data peeks into digital business 2018
Posted 11-Dec-2017 10:55


2018 Cyber Security Predictions
Posted 7-Dec-2017 14:55


Global Govtech Accelerator to drive public sector innovation in Wellington
Posted 7-Dec-2017 11:21


Stuff Pix media strategy a new direction
Posted 7-Dec-2017 09:37


Digital transformation is dead
Posted 7-Dec-2017 09:31


Fake news and cyber security
Posted 7-Dec-2017 09:27


Dimension Data New Zealand strengthens cybersecurity practice
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:27


Epson NZ launches new Expression Premium Photo range
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:26


Eventbrite and Twickets launch integration partnership in Australia and New Zealand
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:23


New Fujifilm macro lens lands in New Zealand
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:16



Geekzone Live »

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



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.