So the Judge has re-written the law himself because congress didn't write and include it in the law themselves. This judge or anyone else for that matter cannot think on what congress should/would have done with regards to what they write in law in or not. It is for the matter of congress and congress alone to write the law etc. and no one else. If congress wanted "It is doubtful that Congress would stamp with approval a procedural rule permitting a corporate defendant to intentionally violate the laws of this country, yet evade the jurisdiction of United States' courts by purposefully failing to establish an address here." then congress should have written it in the law in the first place but they didn't. The judge is making the law up as what he has stated is not written in law. Still they can serve Kim Dotcom when he steps foot on US once he is extradited but I believe that the extradition will be refused as all the Illegal action committed by US and NZ with regards to illegal warrant, illegal search and raid and illegal transfering of data to the US and now the illegal spying will no doubt add weight in the extradition hearing that Kim Dotcom will not get a fair trail due to the illegal acction by the US and NZ. I am sure that a lot more revelations and further illegal action will be revealeed in the forthcoming weeks of illegal action committed by both the US and NZ. If there is no extradition then there will be no court case and Kim Dotcom will not be found guilty (if he is guilty) and if he is found to be guilty without his presence then that will show what a kangroo and injustice of the US judiciary system is.
If you should happen to pay this settlement then there is nothing to stop the company in question say 6 months down the line to send you another another letter asking for more money and with pointing out them by them that as you have previously paid us we will use this as evidence of guilt that you have settled out of court. Pay up this new amount or fact court action. Extorntionist blackmailer strikes again and will continue to extortinate the same people who pay up over and over again for more and more money because they now have them in trapped in their web.
Google should comply with this DMCA regarding Bing and take the link down. Should Microsoft complain then Google should point out that they were doing there job in taking the link down as required by the DMCA.
But Megaupload will not be going away when Megabox takes off in the next few weeks it will be another thorn in the side of Hollywood that they will so desperately want to remove which they will not be able too. All this publicity that Meguapload that is generating will no doubt ensure that Megabox becomes a success.
Kim Dotcom will not be extradited and if is not extradited then there will be no court case and he won't be found guilty and sent to jail. All the ILLEGALITY with regards to illegal search warrant, illegal raid, illegal transfering of data from NZ to the US and now the illegal spying etc. will add weight to ensure that the extradition will be refused. The US DOJ can scream and shout, spit and spat all it wants to get Kim Dotcom extradited but it wont help them.
Mini-Me, Dr. Evil may still be heading to an all expenses paid vacation to the Super Max in Florence, Colorado but Kim Dotcom is not going to be a visitor as he won't be extradited.
So you have seen and read all evidence and documentation with your own eyes or are you just reading and thinking that everything in the Indictment must be true?
None of the Evidence and documentation given and stated in the Indictment or gathered by the FBI etc has been proven as actual fact or proved as true in a court of law. It is so easy to trawl through documentation and take out all the shit and dirt from it to show that the person is guilty etc when in actual fact the person is innocent. The FBI can trawl through Little Red Hiding Hood and make her come across to be a psychotic schizophrenic murdering psycopath but on seeing all the film she is just a sweet innocent girl.
If the FBI HAD already sezied control of the servers then there would be no way that Kim Dotcom could have destroyed any of the evidence if the servers were already seized. So why the need for a SWAT style response etc. when NO way could the evidence be destroyed as it was already seized. FBI or whoever are just trying to come up with something to jusify the fact when the fact couldn't have happened being as they already took care of it beforehand.
"I don't see how the case is not a success so far for the U.S. Dotcom et al. are all indicted and awaiting extradition."
Dotcom et al has NEVER been served with an indictment. Megaupload has never been served with an inidictment because it cannot be served with one because the company is based outside of the US and a foreign company cannot be served under US law which is my understanding. If an indictment cannot be served because it is a foreign company according to US law then who is at fault for not getting an indictment served.
""For example, in January – in one of the largest criminal copyright cases in U.S. history – the Department indicted two corporations and seven individuals with operating an international organized criminal enterprise responsible for massive worldwide online piracy of numerous types of copyrighted works, through Megaupload.com and other related sites.""
Megaupload has never been served with an indictment so how can it be indicted when it hasn't and so far can't be indicted. How can you call it being indicted as successfull when it hasn't been served as per stated in the US court and so far can't because it is outside of the US which is being argued in US court right now. The mind boggles.
"It appears that the RIAA and MPAA are pretty scared about this possibility. They've filed quite the amicus brief in the case claiming that buying goods overseas and selling them in the US is the equivalent of piracy. No joke:"
Well in that case the RIAA and MPAA should start bribing the US government to ban all countries imports and trades with the US from entering the country to be sold. They should also bribe the US government to create an internet wall of US and ban all non US websites from being accessed too. This should stop people importing goods into the US to be sold and therefore no more piracy.
This of course will never happen because if the US created a great internet wall of US and stopped all imports and trades then there will be lots of jobs destroyed and the US economy will totally suffer.
I wonder if the DOJ in the Megaupload case will file for voluntary dismisall if it transpires in the extradition hearing next year (for which the DOJ etc. have now been told that they now have to/must give fuller discloser of evidence etc.) that Kim Dotcom and co. cannot be extradited. I bet that if Kim Dotcom and co. wins against extradition and cannot be extradited that should the DOJ file for voluntary dismisal of Megaupload that it will refuse to give back all the assets and monies seized from Kim Dotcom.
Crimestoppers has joined with FACT to make it as easy as possible for you to report criminal activity related to the manufacture, distribution and sale of pirate DVDs as well as people using the internet to make stolen films and TV programmes available.
"It can cost hundreds of thousands of pounds to prosecute an infringer, especially in cases such as this where the crown refuses to prosecute."
That sentance really made me laugh. According to the MPAA piracy costs them Millions. So to prosecute someone would only cost tens of thousands of pounds and yet they still loose millions. So money is still lost to the MPAA even when they do prosecute lol
(untitled comment)
(untitled comment)
(untitled comment)
(untitled comment)
(untitled comment)
And what is to stop this so called "the content owner" lying with stating that the copyright belongs to them when it doesn't.
Re: 5 in 1?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Re: Re:
Re: Re:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
None of the Evidence and documentation given and stated in the Indictment or gathered by the FBI etc has been proven as actual fact or proved as true in a court of law. It is so easy to trawl through documentation and take out all the shit and dirt from it to show that the person is guilty etc when in actual fact the person is innocent. The FBI can trawl through Little Red Hiding Hood and make her come across to be a psychotic schizophrenic murdering psycopath but on seeing all the film she is just a sweet innocent girl.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Re: Re:
Dotcom et al has NEVER been served with an indictment. Megaupload has never been served with an inidictment because it cannot be served with one because the company is based outside of the US and a foreign company cannot be served under US law which is my understanding. If an indictment cannot be served because it is a foreign company according to US law then who is at fault for not getting an indictment served.
(untitled comment)
Megaupload has never been served with an indictment so how can it be indicted when it hasn't and so far can't be indicted. How can you call it being indicted as successfull when it hasn't been served as per stated in the US court and so far can't because it is outside of the US which is being argued in US court right now. The mind boggles.
Re: Clearly Apologism
(untitled comment)
Re: I have been wondering something for awhile now
(untitled comment)
Well in that case the RIAA and MPAA should start bribing the US government to ban all countries imports and trades with the US from entering the country to be sold. They should also bribe the US government to create an internet wall of US and ban all non US websites from being accessed too. This should stop people importing goods into the US to be sold and therefore no more piracy.
This of course will never happen because if the US created a great internet wall of US and stopped all imports and trades then there will be lots of jobs destroyed and the US economy will totally suffer.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
(untitled comment)
http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/report-it/
Re: Thank you to all our supporters
That sentance really made me laugh. According to the MPAA piracy costs them Millions. So to prosecute someone would only cost tens of thousands of pounds and yet they still loose millions. So money is still lost to the MPAA even when they do prosecute lol
More comments from Corby >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Corby.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt