Anti-Piracy Group Already Demanding That Kim Dotcom's New Mega Service Be Shut Down

from the but-of-course dept

Thu, Jan 24th 2013 4:03am — Mike Masnick

This probably isn't a huge surprise, but with the launch of Kim Dotcom's new Mega cloud drive system, many in the entertainment industry have assumed that he must be relaunching Megaupload and a way to infringe. However, it seems pretty clear that Mega is quite different and mostly resembles other well known legitimate services, like Google Drive, Dropbox and Amazon's cloud offerings. Still that hasn't stopped some in the "anti-piracy" community from trying to shut down the site already:

Robert King is the lead figure behind StopFileLockers (SFL), an anti-piracy group dedicated to bringing file-hosting services to their knees by strangling their finances. Last year King claimed his group had a hand in disrupting the cash flow to hundreds of sites and actually shutting down dozens more. Now he has a very big scalp on his mind.

King, an Australian and adult industry player, says that StopFileLockers have just begun a “campaign to have the payment processing of all Mega resellers terminated.”

Apparently waiting for actual evidence of infringement, or even specific liability for Mega, is too much to ask. This is silly. While we may have doubts about how Mega is running, shutting it down without even understanding what it's about seems incredibly short-sighted. Plenty of successful legitimate companies have been built out of those who were earlier sued for "infringement." Isn't it worth at least making sure he's breaking the law before insisting he must have done so?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: anti-piracy, cloud storage, copyright, kim dotcom, legality, robert king
Companies: mega, stopfilelockers

103 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ninja (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 2:40am

This shuldn't surprise anyone. The MAFIAA operates on a system of guilty upon accusation which is basically how DMCA notices work. I'm sure they wish they could put Dotcom in jail with a single notice too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:18am
  
  Re:
  Isn't that what they did? A phone call to their buddies at the DOJ?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 9:08am
  
  Re:
  I was hoping ol Mike would post an article about this news.. And i'm somewhat in agreement here.
  
  I happened to see, live, the press video where Kim Dotcom staged a fake raid on his new service.
  
  During the video, Kim said something I thought was interesting. Kim said that a few weeks prior to the raid, Megaupload was contacting movie studios, telling them that they were going to come to Hollywood to discuss how a new technology could provide distribution in exchange for ads.
  
  He kinda joked a bit, and said something to the likes of "Hollywood and the FBI knew we were going to be in Los Angeles in a few weeks. But instead of waiting to pick us up at the Airport, they grandstanded and decided to raid his home in New Zealand prior to coming to LA instead".
  
  I guess this is how Hollywood works. If you have a competing product to distribution, they'll shun you, or if you already have a userbase, they'll stage a raid before you can negotiate a business deal, which leads to legitimacy.
  
  This isn't difficult to do. The Los Angeles Federal Building, with FBI is about 2 miles from Hollywood area. I wouldn't be surprised if using contacts, the FBI office performed some research and used Federal Taxpayer Dollars to head to New Zealand.
  
  Still, I see it as pretty easy to enforce and extradite a citizen of another country by being an attorney, and walking into that office asking for extradition prior to being able to ink any deal.
  
  The way copyright was enforced was quite telling of the way investigations work, and likely how the Hollywood Studios take advantage of the people in the federal office there, and go on a wild goose chase.
  
  I watched the entire press video, and Kim Dotcom had additional projects in the works for independent artists and movie producers to create and distribute their works, while making a little more money than the model Google uses.
  
  It's an exciting time for Mega and their company. By encrypting the data before it leaves the browser, the FBI and MPAA shouldn't have any issue with it.
  
  When I interviewed at Sony Pictures for a database admin role, I learned that the attorneys themselves, write up the sales contracts. They are frequently incorrect, and often the attorneys who negotiate the deals, likely over a martini in West Hollywood, where everything is a show, Sony often has trouble delivering back-catalog content. I interviewed with a couple of SVPs for that role.
  
  Anyways, let's face the facts. Hollywood and LA can't seem to develop systems that are mission critical. The last platform developed in LA was MySpace, and well, we all know what happened when they got bought out-- the developers all went to the beach for a little party and haven't come back!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
techinabox (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:12am

Who cares?
King's group certainly doesn't care if a service is legal or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- gorehound (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:11am
  
  Re: Who cares?
  I do not care ! Fuck You MAFIAA !
  Never going to give you a dime anyways so you can just go extinct.
  Be about time to see you gone ! Greedy and Corrupted Industry with a real Dark History.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
PaulT (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:13am

Well, they might as well make these accusations - they're almost certainly based on the same level of evidence as the ones they make against most other services and users. Why wait for the evidence when the evidence you'll later produce will either be faulty or non-existent.

"StopFileLockers"

That makes about as much sense as "StopFTPServers", both in terms of what it will realistically do to stop piracy and in terms of the perfectly legal operations they haven't considered that they're trying to attack. Paid entertainment industry shill, at least he's honest about it upfront.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jameshogg (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:35am
  
  Re:
  Or StopTheInternet.
  
  What people like this really wish is that the internet was just never invented, never mind the DVD Disc Reader and Hard Drive, and we didn't have to think about the implications of these things and we ought to bury our heads in the sand about the fact that copyright is not the utopian solve-everything solution that we all thought it was.
  
  The internet is basically a giant copying machine, and they will have to get over it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Real Michael, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:00am
    
    Re: Re:
    Anything involving cloud computing immediately gets attention from governments, especially ours, who want unfettered backdoor access. Of course, since they consider digital content to be "property" then that effectively makes what they're doing invading others' private property. But I digress.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:01am
  
  Re:
  Apparently they do not need evidence.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rikuo (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:15am

So Average_Joe, bob, hasn't_got_a_clue

How is this in any legal, moral or ethical? This piece of news is from the 21st, just two days after the site went live and when it was still basically inaccessible because of the huge amount of traffic. There is no way that King here detected any infringement from the service at that time. So now, we're at the point where we don't even bother saying there's infringing data on the network. We're now at the point where "Eh, I'm gonna shut you down, just because".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:58am
  
  Re:
  We all know that what King is doing is immoral and unethical (and without evidence, probably illegal too).
  
  Unfortunately, you won't get that reply from the usual suspects, because they love fighting for what is wrong.
  
  Anything that passes as acts of intimidation against what they mistakenly percieve as "thieving", they will advocate for, a metaphorical War *for* Terror.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Real Michael, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:04am
    
    Re: Re:
    Analogy: If I open a storage area for people's use, should I be held responsible for what people choose to store? Is nobody allowed to have online storage space nor share anything without the government and copyright cartels monitoring their every move?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:24am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I don't think he was arguing against Rikuo but rather agreeing with him. He said what KING is doing is immoral and unethical, not Dotcom.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 25 Jan 2013 @ 2:03am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I was, rather. Should have clarified. Sorry.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 25 Jan 2013 @ 2:05am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        By which I mean I was agreeing with Rikuo. This is really getting to be a bad habit.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:11am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Do banks and financial institutions have a duty to guard against money laundering in the financial system?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:26am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        No, no they do not.
        
        In fact, they also apparently they also can actively engage in crafting money laundering aids and advise others on how to launder money properly if HSBC is any indication.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:37am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Not when they are the ones doing it
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Richard (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:16am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Do banks and financial institutions have a duty to guard against money laundering in the financial system?
        
        No - they have a duty to perform a series of checks and other procedures on behalf on the government.
        
        These are designed to guard against money laundering.
        However they do not have a duty to take the law into their own hands to do it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Rikuo (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 10:50am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Funny you should mention that...
        
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maqSFuI7Uf4
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - HSBC, 24 Jan 2013 @ 12:18pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        +funny
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - art guerrilla (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:13am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      excellent point...
      people who own mini-warehouse places are NOT found liable for whatever illegal crap people store in them; why should an online 'place' which offers analogous storage be liable ? ? ?
      
      i did finally manage to sign up, and decided i'll use it as a backup plan: started uploading all my music (100% 'legal', if that even exists any more) and other files...
      
      if i use this and/or dropbox/whoever for a couple cloud backups, i feel better about that than the non-existent backups i'm *supposed* to do at home on a billion DVD's...
      
      my shit is 100% legal, bitchez, better not take it down ! ! !
      
      art guerrilla
      aka ann archy
      eof
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - The Real Michael, 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        If I had an account, I would upload my (self-made) music and maybe some pictures or something. It's just storage space, no more good or bad than a hard drive, usb stick or whatever. When you think about it, sites such as YouTube, SoundCloud and others are just glorified storage lockers themselves.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Real Michael, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:07am
    
    Re: Re: P.S.
    Oh, and please don't go the morality route. The people in the music industry are anything but moral.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rikuo (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:19am

Not only that, but the Mega launch video? Taken down by GEMA...
http://torrentfreak.com/mega-launch-video-removed-from-youtube-by-music-rights-outfit-13012 4/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Real Michael, 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:55am
  
  Re:
  GEMA knows that they're protected by the German government and can therefore get away with doing whatever they want with impunity. Kim's lawsuit will probably be shot down. GEMA thinks that they own both the artists and the rights to everything they do automatically.
  
  Do the math. Music labels and artist/performance rights organizations = SCAM
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:25am
    
    Re: Re:
    Does that stand for Society for Commercialism Against Musicians? Because Icould totally see that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- fb39ca4 (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 9:37am
  
  Re:
  GEMA is MEGA with some letters rearranged.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:23am

The entertainment industry has adopted the modern politician approach to dealing with problems, tackle the means and ignore the cause.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disgusted, 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:47am

Actually I hope these idiots continue the campaign. The American public is finally becoming aware of the effects of the gross overreach of the DOJ, and the purchase of politicians and laws by the "entertainment" industry. If it happens enough, and the media makes enough noise about it, the public may start yelling at Congress to "Do Something" about them, instead of the other way around. Not likely, but it would be nice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:03am
  
  Re:
  "laws by the "entertainment" industry"
  
  laws by the moneyed interest industry
  
  ftfy
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:19am
    
    Re: Re:
    Agreed. The entertainment industry is just one example of this sort of corruption. I fear that little progress can be made on this front until Citizens United is overturned.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:07am
  
  Re:
  The media will never do anything about it. If you look at the SOPA PIPA debate and rebellion, it took shutting down government phone switches before any news organizations even mentioned it. When they did speak it was seriously misleading. These are news organizations that rely on things remaining as they are.
  
  The more likely scenario is, in the next 10 years we will reach the point where enough people are getting their news from alternate sources, to tip the tide. Google plus, Facebook, blogs, RSS feeds, etc will all play their part.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:39am
    
    Re: Re:
    "The media will never do anything about it."
    
    Because they are owned
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:17am
  
  Re:
  If it happens enough, and the media makes enough noise about it, the public may start yelling at Congress
  
  Sadly that scenario fails the moment you realise who "the media" actually are...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:49am

Why can't anyone spell cronnectly anymore?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bigpallooka (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:41am
  
  Re:
  I blam da gonvament!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Berenerd (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:43am
  
  Re:
  Because the government is spending all the education money on fighting for Anti-Piracy
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:53am

Am I mistaken or did most of the porn players not seem to care about copyright so much until they saw an opportunity to make money trolling? It seems to me that the majority of their focus has been traditionally on cranking out a large volume of cheaply produced and largely disposable content that where they are always looking at the short term sales. Apart from acquired sex tapes of various celebrities, which is something completely different, longer term copyright issues never seemed to me to be something that was a part of their business model, that is until they saw money in becoming trolls. Am I wrong about this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 4:56am
  
  Re:
  And no. No pun was intended in the use of the phrase, "cranking out a large volume".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:11am
    
    Re: Re:
    You don't mean pun, you mean double entendre.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:00am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Why can't it be both?
      
      That's what she said.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- anonymouse, 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:55am
  
  Re:
  The fact that there is a humongous amount of pron on the internet is a problem for the industry. Damn those people that just give porn away for free :)
  
  In fact this could be exactly what is needed to close down the porn industry.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 9:45am
    
    Re: Re:
    I'm pretty sure a large portion of it is put there by the industry itself.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- chasingstar, 7 Feb 2013 @ 6:58pm
  
  Re:
  Masquerading as "anti piracy" Robert James King owner of stopfilelockers accepts donations for illegal files. Then uploads illegally named files to unsuspecting legitimate file lockers to eliminate what he thinks is competition to manwin (porn tube). His slander of paypal has not gone un-noticed & pages of his site have been force terminated. The entire site including coldcopy.com should be removed & blacklisted.
  King is NOT a licensed copyright entity therefor is perpetrating fraud.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:26am

this guy has simply took a page out of the DoJ book. what is evidence needed for? he has simply said 'the site must be infringing, it's run by Dotcom. i dont like him! i dont like the site! i dont like cyberlockers or cloud services! they must be stopped!'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
rw (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:42am

Stop Payment
Maybe someone needs to setup a site dedicated to bringing anti-piracy groups to their knees by strangling their finances.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JamesF (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:47am

"Isn't it worth at least making sure he's breaking the law before insisting he must have done so?"
Mike, you should check out the history on this website - there are a number of articles that prove that actual evidence is considered an irrelevance by these people

;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:47am

Did anyone really not see this coming?

The thing is, if Mega got shut down you would also have to shut down Dropbox/Google Drive/Skydrive/iCloud/Ubuntu One etc.

Mega is first and foremost a cloud storage service. Yes, some users will use it to share copyright material but, as I have said many times, technology is neutral - it is the activities of the users that is legal or illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- silverscarcat (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:56am
  
  Re:
  "technology is neutral - it is the activities of the users that is legal or illegal."
  
  now if only we could apply this rationale to all technologies out there.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:53am
    
    Re: Re:
    As a general rule cloud systems are "technology neutral", so I do not vilify same merely they might be used to facilitate copyright infringement. However, the law is not swayed by proclamations of technological neutrality. It concerns itself with what is actually transpiring. Almost certainly there are cloud systems that operate with the bounds of the law and provide a valuable service to its customers. Unfortunately, there are some that in the past have attempted to claim they are merely cloud systems, when in fact they are being used as conduits for illegal activities and the operators of such services well know this is the case and choose to look the other way at best, and participate at worst. It is services of this type that have been the focus of litigation against certain cloud service providers.
    
    Given KD's past practices, it should come as no surprise that there are some who are not being at all unreasonable in wondering if this new service is simply more of the same, distinguished only be the addition of encryption.
    
    Only time will tell, but until it is demonstrated that Mega is not merely a form, fit, function equivalent of how Megaupload was run, the questions and concerns will continue into the future.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:28am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      If the laws are solely concerned with what is actually transpiring, then why are vast swathes of Wall street still employed, and not in jail?
      
      Why are vast swathes of the Department of Justice(sic) not in jail for defrauding the courts?
      
      Oh wait, there are special super-secret courts for that! /s
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 10:10am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I agree wholeheartidly....but instead of messing with the sites that are in your face.... go after the onion sites.
      These people should be more concerned with the dark web than bloody copyright infringment.
      I call hypocrites, because....the dark web/onion was designed and run by the US Navy for secrecy across the web, only now its run by the criminal element and a haven for pedos...only that doesn't affect their cash flow right? Better go after the guys sharing digital files with no essence that cost nothing to reproduce endlessely.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - nasch (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 3:33pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Given KD's past practices, it should come as no surprise that there are some who are not being at all unreasonable in wondering if this new service is simply more of the same, distinguished only be the addition of encryption.
      
      Wondering is one thing. Calling for it and every other file locker to be shut down is something else entirely.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - AssHat, 24 Jan 2013 @ 9:56am
    
    Re: Re:
    Yeah, like guns.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
G Thompson (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 5:57am

This is actually my comment placed on Mr Kings site a few days ago, that only now got through the moderation process on there. I think it speaks about what I personally and professional think about Mr King's allegations, hearsay, and intent to damage Mega et.al

It was in response to the Editors (King???) comment stating "There have been uploads to Mega and files from Mega are being shared on piracy sites including warez and cracking sites" on an article that paints an Australian company [Instra Corporation Pty Ltd] as being a part of unlawful and illegal activities that Mega is supposedly authorising.
G Thompson January 22, 2013 at 4:21 pm
I hope you�re prepared for a whole lot of actions against yourselves under both Australian and NZ tort laws. Especially telling would be a tortuous Interference class action by all customers of Visa and/or MasterCard within Australia (and NZ though that would be a separate jurisdictional claim) both with the card providers as vicariously liable joined parties to yourselves as the main respondents for initiating such interference with no lawful authority.

As for the allegation that uploads are being shared on so called warez and cracking sites that is for a court to decide and action can only be initiated by authorised representative agents of the copyright holders and not yourselves. And for suggesting that there has been some unproven, based on your allegations, impropriety with the intent to cause harm to MEGA�s business can lead you into the area of Australia�s and NZ defamation laws [ask your solicitors about Gutnick ] with no ability to hide under the US�s first amendment protection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:07am
  
  Re:
  Payment processors can drop anyone if they have a good faith belief that the TOS is being violated. Guess what's part of the TOS?
  
  Glad to see you don't limit yourself to embarrassing legal conjectures on TD alone.Stupidity such as yours deserves a wider audience.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - saulgoode (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:02am
    
    Re: Re:
    Payment processors can drop anyone if they have a good faith belief that the TOS is being violated.
    Mr Thompson's post wasn't about the actions of the payment processors, it was about the actions of Mr King. If you write a libelous letter to the newspaper, you are held responsible for the publication of that letter (the newspaper may or may not be, but nonetheless...).
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - G Thompson (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:24am
    
    Re: Re:
    Read the comment above this one for one part of my answer.
    
    As for your assumption that payment processors can not be held vicariously or fully liable, this is proof positive that you have no understanding at all of Australian laws under both Consumer Trade statutes and Banking statutes to which my whole comment is in context to. ie: King is Australian (though that actually doesn't matter too much) and more importantly the Payment provider that he is trying to interfere with IS Australian.
    
    A TOS is not the be all and end all that you think it is in countries other than the USA (not even there).
    
    As for embarrassing legal conjectures, well.. I'll leave that to others to explain why you should now be called " kettle"
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Berenerd (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:54am
    
    Re: Re:
    Good faith belief is more than just someone saying "THEY BAD YOU BAN NO COOKIE 2 WEEK" It would take proof and an actual court filing. Then, if no court case comes up in a certain amount of time they must reinstate said company. Unless you are talking some other payment processor that I have never come across.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - nasch (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 3:45pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Good faith belief is more than just someone saying "THEY BAD YOU BAN NO COOKIE 2 WEEK" It would take proof and an actual court filing.
      
      I think good faith belief is somewhere in between those two.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lord Binky, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:02am

The Simple Response
Pics or it didn't happen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Berenerd (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 9:00am
  
  Re: The Simple Response
  We can't do pics cause that would be CR infringment
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:02am

Apparently waiting for actual evidence of infringement, or even specific liability for Mega, is too much to ask.

Oh sure, one of the biggest infringing sites in the world re-invents itself by adding in a feature to enhance its willful blindness and culpability andthey're owed the benefit of the doubt? If I didn't already know you we such a shameless piracy apologist, I'd swear you were the biggest rube I've ever heard of.

Only governments needs evidence- not private entities. No company is forced to process payments nor place ads with a firm they consider shady.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:15am
  
  Re:
  [Proof Needed]
  
  Accusation of Mega being an infringing site is not sufficient.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:42am
    
    Re: Re:
    But but pirates !!111
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:24am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You mean "Butt Pirates!" right?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:33am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        NO! Why would I pay $30 for that dreck! There's hardly any "Butt" in it!
        
        1/5, now go back to your Dropbox and your SkyDrive
        
        /parody
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:52am
    
    Re: Re:
    Are you also a global warming denier?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:24am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Have you found anything infringing on Mega yet?
      
      Tell you what. I think you're in possession of something infringing at your house. I don't need proof; my accusation is enough because I think you're enough of an asshole. The least that should happen is your house getting trashed.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Lowestofthekeys (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:31am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I'm not, but global warming is not the result of one factor just as drop in sales is not the result of just piracy.
      
      The fact that you choose to focus on just piracy instead of considering everything that contributes to the loss of revenue for the entertainment industries makes you sound ridiculous.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gwiz (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:41am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Are you also a global warming denier?
      
      Personally, I am neither a global warming denier or acknowledger. The earth naturally attempts to balance itself and has done so for millenniums. Not enough data for me to make a claim either way.
      
      But, I will say when I walked out my car this morning here in Midwest US, global warming seemed like a distant memory to me.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - PaulT (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 3:14am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "But, I will say when I walked out my car this morning here in Midwest US, global warming seemed like a distant memory to me."
        
        Not to derail the thread, but it's called "global" warming for a reason. I'm sure there's someone in the Australian heatwave they've been experiencing recently that would disagree with you on your anecdotal localised experiences ;)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        JamesF (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 3:31am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        In addition, its often called "Global warming" because it was first noticed as a warming trend, however, it is more accurately called "Climate change". There are greater extremes at both ends of the scale as a result.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Gwiz (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 5:08am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Not to derail the thread, but it's called "global" warming for a reason. I'm sure there's someone in the Australian heatwave they've been experiencing recently that would disagree with you on your anecdotal localised experiences ;)
        
        Yeah. I was just trying (failing?) to be humorous.
        
        I like alluded to, I really don't think there is enough data. There are theories that too much methane gas from dinosaur farts caused the ice age that wrought their demise. The earth is constantly trying to balance itself. Looking at global climate change strictly from humankind's time-line is the wrong scale in my opinion. It needs to be viewed from the entire time-line of earth's existence and most of that data is extremely lacking.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 5:43am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "There are theories that too much methane gas from dinosaur farts caused the ice age that wrought their demise."
        
        Erm, I don't think I've ever heard that, and isn't scientific consensus that it was an asteroid impact that wiped them out (possibly followed by an ice age caused by the fallout from said asteroid)? I've heard theories that modern day herd animals such as cows are contributing to current warming trends, but never dinosaurs?
        
        "Looking at global climate change strictly from humankind's time-line is the wrong scale in my opinion."
        
        Luckily, most scientists will take into account geological and ice core data going back many thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of years to make their conclusions. It's true that a wider view needs to be taken, but the real effects depend on whether you're talking about the survival of the planet or of human beings - the planet will take a lot more to wipe it out than we will. The data available definitely stretches back to before mankind, however, although it's arguably not as complete as some more recent data.
        
        My opinion on the subject is that it's difficult to make exact predictions, but warming is happening. It's warming at a faster rate than "normal" for most cyclical changes that have happened in the past, and that happens to coincide with a massive rise in certain gases in the atmosphere due to industry that have a warming effect.
        
        We can argue over what to do, the ultimate effects and whether the warming is truly man made or just a part of a natural cycle, but I think the data's definitely there to know that it's happening.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Gwiz (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 6:58am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Erm, I don't think I've ever heard that, and isn't scientific consensus that it was an asteroid impact that wiped them out (possibly followed by an ice age caused by the fallout from said asteroid)? I've heard theories that modern day herd animals such as cows are contributing to current warming trends, but never dinosaurs?
        
        Yeah, I didn't say it was a wildly accepted theory. But the asteroid strike theory is also just theory too, just more accepted.
        
        I really didn't mean to wade this deep into this stuff - I find it's too much like debating politics or religion and people have very headstrong opinions about it. Like I said, I really hold neither side as accepted fact yet.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 7:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "But the asteroid strike theory is also just theory too, just more accepted."
        
        Yep, that's science unfortunately - until someone invents a time machine, we can only make observations based on our current understanding of the evidence available. There's a lot of hypotheses out there, but unless I missed something there's only one generally accepted theory. Someone might come up with a better hypothesis that gets more widely accepted, but I don't think it'll be dinosaur farts ;)
        
        "Like I said, I really hold neither side as accepted fact yet."
        
        Yeah fair enough, it's interesting to see different subjects come up here though. I'm also not completely on one side, but I tend to find the pro-climate change arguments a hell of a lot more compelling.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        nasch (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 6:47am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The earth is constantly trying to balance itself.
        
        Besides what Paul said, what is this trying you keep referring to? The earth isn't trying to do anything, it's just physical and chemical reactions taking place.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Gwiz (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 7:03am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Besides what Paul said, what is this trying you keep referring to? The earth isn't trying to do anything, it's just physical and chemical reactions taking place.
        
        I was referring to the observation that nature and the environment are always pushing towards balance. Ocean currents and weather itself are the result of the earth trying to mediate it's temperature across it's surface.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        nasch (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 8:00am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I was referring to the observation that nature and the environment are always pushing towards balance.
        
        But they're not. Some climate feedback systems are negative, but others are positive.
        
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_feedback
        
        Ocean currents and weather itself are the result of the earth trying to mediate it's temperature across it's surface.
        
        Again, it's not trying to do anything, that's just thermodynamics, heat moving from warmer areas to colder ones, and other processes. Unless you're really claiming the earth is alive and is making decisions about this stuff, in which case I'll just shut up now.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Gwiz (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 8:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Again, it's not trying to do anything, that's just thermodynamics, heat moving from warmer areas to colder ones, and other processes. Unless you're really claiming the earth is alive and is making decisions about this stuff, in which case I'll just shut up now.
        
        Lol. No. It's just me not using the correct terminology really. I was using "trying" as shorthand for the thermodynamic processes and whatnot, that's all.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - DannyB (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 12:15pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No. I am not a global warming denier. Why do you ask? How is it relevant?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:23am
  
  Re:
  "Oh sure, one of the biggest infringing sites in the world re-invents itself by adding in a feature to enhance its willful blindness and culpability andthey're owed the benefit of the doubt?"
  
  Citations needed for, well, pretty much everything you said. But...
  
  "a shameless piracy apologist"
  
  ...given that you're going straight on to the debunked lies I won't assume you're going to give them.
  
  "No company is forced to process payments nor place ads with a firm they consider shady."
  
  No, and no 3rd party should be forcing them to stop payments just because they don't like it either.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:51am
    
    Re: Re:
    No, and no 3rd party should be forcing them to stop payments just because they don't like it either.
    
    How is a puny operation "force" global powerhouses like Visa to do anything?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - PaulT (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:02am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Quick! If you grab a net, the point flying directly over your head might still be rescued!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - G Thompson (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:32am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The only net I think he needs is the one held by the guys in white coats who will come to take him to that special place :)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 10:38am
    
    Re: Re:
    No, and no 3rd party should be forcing them to stop payments just because they don't like it either.
    
    Pity you don't apply any of your "shoulds" to people unlawfully taking the valuable creative output others without compensating them.
    
    Spare me the moral outrage, it's totally hollow when you have none of your own.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 2:04pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      He just knows how useless it is to complain about piracy on tech blog.
      
      Apparently, you have yet to learn that.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:16am
  
  Re:
  "Reinvents"? Aficionados are already pointing out the security flaws in MEGA. There's effectively nothing that MEGA does that isn't already in the market, and oddly enough you actually think MEGA is a threat. A threat that you need to use a child pornographer to champion your cause against.
  
  How's your campaigns for Evan Stone and Andrew Crossley coming along, by the way?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:30am
  
  Re:
  Only governments needs evidence- not private entities. No company is forced to process payments nor place ads with a firm they consider shady.
  
  Keep thinking and believing that because what American law in regards to Banking, Contract and Consumer Rights (or in actuality the lack of) the rest of the world must do and have exactly the same thing.
  
  uhuh
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Paul Keating (profile), 25 Jan 2013 @ 4:39am
  
  Re: Too Much to Ask
  @AC, You are not thinking clearly.
  
  Influencing another to cease a pre-existing business relationship is itself prohibited in many jurisdictions. It is called "Interference with Contract". In this case if this RUBE is stupid enough to actually contact payment providers, he should see himself on the receiving end of a lawsuit - and the sooner the better IMO. He is nothing but a modern day vigilante.
  
  And, while it is true that a company may choose with whom it does business, this is only generally the case. Case in point, the refusal to do business with people of color is improper regardless of the reason.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
BreadGod (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:39am

Robert King can best be described as the "No" man who hates change and does his damnedest to stifle innovation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
relghuar, 24 Jan 2013 @ 6:59am

Isn't it worth at least making sure he's breaking the law...
Of course not, silly :-/
This has nothing to do with the law, it's just about showing all those mother-f#%#ing internet thieves who's the Boss!
If Dotcom can just start again and not get his life destroyed, those f$^#ers might start to think they don't actually have to pay us for our great and absolutely indispensable services!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dataGuy (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:00am

Seen it in the movies
Evidence? We don't need no stinking evidence! We have the government in our pockets....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:25am

Everyone needs to stop all this pesky innovation. Think of the legacy industries cash flows!

/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:31am

Everyone who's surprised raise your hand.

...anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
quawonk, 24 Jan 2013 @ 7:48am

Dotcom embarrassed them and "rubbed it in their face" with Mega, and that's what they are responding to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- anonymouse, 24 Jan 2013 @ 11:08am
  
  Re:
  He actually said that he is going to destroy the business model they have at the moment, and he said he will do it legally by creating an environment where real content creators can benefit by getting 85% of all profits generated from their content. I dont think he is doing that at them moment his movie/music/tv site is where he is going to get them if they do not come to some agreement with him.
  
  He has managed to play on his arrest and the subsequent circus that is the evidence and illegal actions by those attacking him. He has the eyes of the world on him and as can be seen by the amount of people who signed up and the amount of traffic his site has already got i doubt he will have a problem opening a new site which is free to everyone and works by using advertising to pay content creators.
  
  He said he was coming for Hollywood and I suspect this MEGA site is only the first step in doing that.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
thepi, 24 Jan 2013 @ 9:07am

I guess this makes Chris Dodd the Queen of Hearts
Verdict first! Trial later.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
weneedhelp (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 11:29am

Mega
The privacy Company

Bigger. Better. Faster. Stronger. Safer.

They turned him in to the six million dollar man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 8:24pm

Well its trendy in porn right now to blame everything but ones own short sightedness for falling revenue.

Porn used to push tech forward, VHS did not get market penetration (heh) simply because you could get Disney tapes. Now you could order discrete plain packages and not have to go to the video booths or porn film houses.
The problem is they sat back on their laurels and got fat.
The internet showed up and they assumed they could charge the same for a stream of half the running time of a tape.

Some nice lawyers explained to them it was because filesharers were robbing them blind and tubesites were stealing their money. Not that they had priced themselves out of the market, many of them were using ancient DRM tech that would not work for many possible customers, and that they were churning out cookie cutter films.

Amateurs scare the hell out of them, the average cell phone shoots with almost as much quality as what they were using. Amateurs are making money on the tubesites offering previews and low cost full length features. They can whip up a video in a day meeting any demand a consumer has if the price is right.

This is more of 'the internet owes us money because we refuse to adapt' that we've seen from the music industry, the movie industry, the book industry... with that many examples of your doing it wrong I am confused why they can't figure out they are doing more harm than good to themselves.

I look forward to someone making an iPorn service, ala itunes. Where people can input the stars they like and buy the clips they want for a buck or 2. No 100 hoops, no special drm only works on windows vista player... Who ever builds that site is going to be rich... its a shame none of the players in the industry want to bother. Instead they think they can litigate or force the problem out of business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
btrussell (profile), 24 Jan 2013 @ 11:46pm

Porn is legal and covered by copyright.
Prostitution/soliciting is illegal.

Why does a camera make it legal?

Sheeit! All .com has to do is film his servers in operation and claim to be making a movie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]