The eejit profile , 8 Jun am. Not the point. The MPAA shouldn't be involved in any criminal case, save as a possible witness, never mind having access to the data that MU isn't being permitted to access. Which, if you have been paying any attention, is in those same filings that you claim to have read. Anonymous Coward , 8 Jun am. I think the NZ judge that is going over this indictment disagrees with you. Quite a bit, in fact. No extradition is likely to happen unless it can be proven that NZ laws were broken.
They haven't been presented any evidence of such. You know, that stuff you think they don't need to look at? G Thompson profile , 8 Jun am. NZ's jurisdiction in this case is not as narrow as you think, Yes the extradition case has specificity that can not be gone outside of, though that too is currently changing into what the NZ judiciary expect instead of what the USG expect by whom they believed to be 'on their side" nothing could be further from the truth since it seems equality at law is not something the USJ is used too If as you state you are only going by what is currently being made public then your allegations are just that allegations, and allegations based on hearsay and opinion are NOT even allegations, just wild speculation based on your lack of understanding of international jurisprudence.
Being US-Centric is what has gotten the USJ into this mess in the first place, my advise to you is not to fall down into the same trap. As for the rest of what I have stated below in further comments in relation to detinue, Malpros, etc this is why the MPAA need to be very very careful and the USJ into what they are doing. Oh and the US indictments that came from a Grand Jury.. There is no need for a third party of any sort in NZ to look at anything Are you stating that the NZ courts are a third party to this?
If so, you really need to go back to basic sovereignty law and think again. If not then the only other third party is the MPAA which means you have just totally made my argument for me. Vincent Giannell , 7 Jun am. I have a feeling that Megaupload users are gonna sue MPAA for taking down the site once they get their files back.
Interesting legal theory. Since it was the government that took the site down, how do you figure the MPAA has liability for the government's action? Because they claimed and provided "evidence" in order to push ahead with a criminal trial. So, theoretically, both can be sued. Thanks for the faith-based assessment, Perry Mason.
Care to cite an actual case for us? I said, "theoretically", and here's how. IF the MPAA made a knowingly false statement in order to obtain the warrants and federal court Writs required for the seizure, and then subsequently deliberately failed to maintain evidence which was later required in the court, after which the case was thrown out, the MPAA could be liable for damages to those who used MU for legitimate purpsoes.
IF the MPAA made a knowingly false statement in order to obtain the warrants and federal court Writs required for the seizure, and then subsequently deliberately failed to maintain evidence which was later required in the court, after which the case was thrown out, the MPAA could be liable for damages to those who used MU for legitimate purposes.
And theoretically, time travel is possible. Case law or statute are the underpinnings of legal theory. Yours is nothing more than a piracy apologist fantasy, not a theory. Lauriel profile , 7 Jun pm. An honest question, because I don't know much about the law here - but would anti-SLAPP cases, and cases such as Oracle's suit against Lodsys for being a patent troll, count as prior case law? The way criminal statutes work 'should' instantly stop SLAP situations, though this does not mean malicious prosecutions do not happen, and there are avenues for that in New Zealand not sure about US laws - one would hope an appropriate avenue is available.
Whilst you are at it look up transferred malice which might also apply in this situation in which the USG themselves could be liable since no immunity under NZ as well as the MPAA.
Wow, I'm a piracy apologist now? No, I'm pointing out what's possible under current laws, in theory. In practice, well, life is atranger than fiction. If the US Government and the US Courts allow the MPAA to have standing on this Criminal matter, since that is basically what the MPAA are stating here in other words who's the prosecution actually working for then Detinue charges and others could most definitely be levelled at the MPAA who have no qualified immunity since they are not a legal authority.
So, lets gets this straight. Yeah, that makes sense. The eejit profile , 7 Jun am. Anonymous Monkey profile , 7 Jun am. Alana profile , 7 Jun pm. It makes even more sense in the context of this data being paramount to Mega's defense showing just what a bunch of greedy, lying, fascist twats the US and MPAA are acting in this charade.
Jeremy Lyman profile , 7 Jun am. Anonymous Howard , 7 Jun am. Carpathia most likely does not own the facilities where some or all of the servers are located, which means they are paying another company for rackspace, network connections, power, cooling, etc.
If Carpathia owns the physical servers, those servers could be reprovisioned for other purposes and can't be used for income generating purposes. However they still have to pay storage costs, insurance and the servers which would normally be re-provisioned are losing value since they are sat gathering dust. John Doe , 7 Jun am. Don't you just love how the MPAA is calling the shots? It's almost as if there is a new Sheriff in town.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it. Those files contain proof of infringement, especially when the user cashed a check from Megaupload as the heavy users did. Only the clean users-- and I doubt there are many -- will come forward. And there's no reason to waste time wondering whether anyone infringed by mistake, perhaps by sticking copyrighted clipart in a Word document.
The game was quite obvious at Megaupload. No one cares about incidental infringement, it's all about the massive infringement that made enough money to create that mansion. Lowestofthekeys profile , 7 Jun am. Megaupload cashing in is a completely separate issue from what the article outlines. The big problem here is the MPAA is now acting as the enforcer for content that's not even theirs, and they're still limiting people's access to their own creative content.
No bob, the MPAA is not doing any favors is trying to cover their butts against PR disasters, they are starting to understand that there are real people being services that use those and not all of them are aware that they are pirates in any sense and if they do realize how ridiculous copyright really is, it is just another batch of people voting for the pirate party somewhere.
Remember Germany, that has the most idiotic copyright laws on the face of the planet maybe behind only to Japan which has those laws more like window dressing since they enforce nothing and are very afraid of public scrutiny of those laws which they use very selectively to harm competitors that try to enter the market.
Um, OK I know for certain that there are legitimate files stored on those servers and are waiting judgment, but you can't Know what, screw it. You can say that I am wrong and say that, no matter if there are legitimate files, every file stored under Mega's name has some proof of infringement and others are going to present their case to say "you're wrong.
If you can dig up anything that could save your behind and prove us wrong, then There's no point in telling someone like you to shut up, no matter how many people tell you too. I'm certain even the freaking president can't tell you to shut up! There's no way of keeping you silent, Bob. And now I'll do you a favor: I'll shut up for the time being. Cory of PC profile , 7 Jun am. But considering what the majority of Mega's traffic was about infringing files , the MPAA is pretty much bang on here wanting some protection.
They want the users who want the files to identify themselves, and claim their files are not infringing. Few users were actually uploading, the top downloaded files were hidden or disguised off the lists to make it appear that they were not the top files, and only one of the top or so files was apparently a legal distribution of anything.
Significant for me would suggest "mostly" or "almost always", and that just doesn't add up here. You can look at the ripples through all the file sharing chat boards and stuff to know just how much infringing material was taken down this way.
It's shocking that you can't see it. And not all of the files were infringing. Which contradicts the DoJ filings. Moreover, digital crack and physical crack are two completely different things: one is an MMORPG, and the other is a highly addictive drug. So you are fine with every public service making sure there is no drug users among their clients by forcing everybody to take a test right?
Oh that is right you can't do that. Why should you be able to do that in cyberspace is a wonder though. It means 'important. When you insist on a numbers game you lose. PaulT profile , 7 Jun pm. Utter ass water. The actual proof of what was and wasn't infringing is, conveniently enough, hosted in the very servers at question here Hi Paul, lick any good boots today?
For the claiming process, if you have material at, say, a storage locker company that goes bankrupt, you would be required to prove that the contents of a given locker is yours. Yes, it would be at your expense. Why would it be different here? It's even more fun here, considering the anonymous factor, which means that people will not only have to prove it's theirs, but prove that they have account access.
At their expense, yes. Why would it be any different online from the real world? You only have to look at the incredible ripples through the file sharing communities online as mega got shut down.
Chat boards with tens of thousands of posts all pointing to infringing material, suddenly rendered useless. Tons of traffic being fed to mega from pirate sites, all so that people could get paid for downloads. It's all there, you only have to open your eyes and step back from licking Mike's boots long enough and you might actually see it.
Oh wait, you don't WANT to see it. That's different. That might have been in part because of what's commonly referred to as a "chilling effect", because, in spite of being fully legal services , they did not want to be branded falsely as criminals. For a legitimate business, that's usually very bad news. His videographers film games and upload them to MegaUpload as an easy way to transfer the video to Goodwin, who edits and posts them on his website.
He was storing video on MegaUpload as well as on an external hard drive, but last week his hard drive died. Legitimate users like Goodwin aren't the only ones who lost out. As the minutes tick by, the chances of Megaupload regaining its former position diminish, according to Bowman. Follow Nancy on Twitter at idgnancy. Nancy is a freelance journalist who started writing about mobile phones just in time to cover the transition to digital.
Here are the latest Insider stories. More Insider Sign Out. Sign In Register. Sign Out Sign In Register. Maintain backups of any data on devices that you can see and touch. Robert Miller. What about ecommerce or info web sites? You cannot very well see and touch computer, external hard drive, 2 usb data backups, laptop — all destroyed by fire or in a case of theft or natural disaster. Who is going to steal your stuff, provided well encrypted Leo says 12 digit passwords in Drop Box or Sugar Sync?
A good cloud company maintains its own backups on different located and well-encrypted servers just in case of their own down-time, hacking, disaster etc. They are professional and they have to be. They serve a very useful function indeed. Recently had to replace two that died almost simultaneously, so I wonder just what IS the ultimate medium for storage?
What is the be-all and end-all for storage? Is there anything that will last the course? I too wish for the answer to that best backup solution question. Years back I bought a Magneto-Optical cartridge drive Fuji DynaMO , which seemed technologically to be the best possible long term storage. Unfortunately, the drive and cartridge cost was a bit high, and the device did not sell well enough for it to be kept up-to-date. So its 1. But they did seem very reliable!
But even there, I have read back some of those that were only a year or two old, and sometimes get warnings that the data could not be completely read.
0コメント