Join 3,415 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Kim DotCom Fights Back
June 28, 2012 8:12 AM   Subscribe

Kim DotCom Search Warrant Ruled Illegal

Timeline here. DotCom is taunting the FBI via twitter, and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has come to the defense. More here. [previously, previously]
posted by snaparapans (32 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite

 
Man, if he's partying right before possible extradition, just think of the all-out hookers and drugs fest that's brewing up about now on the DotCom estate.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:18 AM on June 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


Taunting the FBI never brings out their better side.
posted by Mad_Carew at 8:20 AM on June 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


It's always kind of amazing that the guy who pretty much co-invented the mass-market tech sector is still using up-to-the-second tech, and is familiar enough with the intricacies of it to offer intelligent opinions and insights on it, agree with them or not. I want to be Woz when I grow up.
posted by Slap*Happy at 8:20 AM on June 28, 2012 [6 favorites]


> Taunting the FBI never brings out their better side.

In that article I linked, it's mentioned that DotCom's lawyer joked about needed a drink when looking at Kim's Twitter feed.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:25 AM on June 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


But isn't his real worry about extradition, and a trial in a US court? This ruling would neither stop an extradition, nor stop the illegal-in-NZ evidence from being used in a US court, would it?
posted by tyllwin at 8:27 AM on June 28, 2012


Wishes are coming true today, yet no matter how hard I wish for Kim DotCom not to be such a giant asshole . . .
posted by TwelveTwo at 8:30 AM on June 28, 2012 [3 favorites]


Ok, the "money laundering", "racketeering" and "dvd burning" photos are fantastic enough for me to forget the whole "he's only free to do that because he's got enough money for a great defense team" thing.
posted by jason_steakums at 8:41 AM on June 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


I wasn't aware that the FBI had a better side.

As for extradition, I don't know NZ law well enough to say one way or the other. My suspicion is that, if the warrants were illegal, then the rule from R v Shaheed would be applied, and the court would do a balancing test to determine whether the extent of the violation is sufficiently severe to justify dismissal of any charges within the New Zealand courts. While the American courts might not care whether Mr. Dotcom's rights were violated in NZ by NZ authorities in executing the search, I imagine that a miscarriage of justice like this might convince a court in NZ that Mr. Dotcom's chances of securing a fair trial when the evidence to be used has been tainted in this manner might be sufficiently grave that it wouldn't allow him to be sent abroad for trial.
posted by 1adam12 at 8:44 AM on June 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


The FBI accidentally clicked the ILLEGAL option after typing in the CAPTCHA.
posted by srboisvert at 8:47 AM on June 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


This isn't, by the way, just some rogue judge. The authorities in this country overreached wildly in this case, and they absolutely deserve punitive measures. No matter what your opinion is of Dotcom (and lemme tell ya, mine has certainly gone down), the behavior of American law enforcement in this case has been Orwellian.

There should be jail time involved for some members of the prosecution team, though of course I don't expect any.
posted by Malor at 8:57 AM on June 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


that poor fucker is doomed

he's got the mark upon him
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 8:59 AM on June 28, 2012


Is there some technical justification for why DMCA'd files were only delinked and not removed from their servers? Like, did MegaUpload use some Twilight Zone file system that made it more computationally expensive to find-and-delete a file, rather than find-and-copy?
posted by LogicalDash at 9:00 AM on June 28, 2012


The Ars Technica coverage of Kim Dotcom and Megaupload has been really excellent. I'd start with this article.
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:21 AM on June 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


Is there some technical justification for why DMCA'd files were only delinked and not removed from their servers?

If the user comes back with a response that it is not, in fact, an infringement, it's much easier to restore a de-linked file
posted by tyllwin at 9:26 AM on June 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


LogicalDash: I don't know the specifics of MegaUpload's operations, so neither one of these may be correct, but there are at least a technical reason and a legal reason:

1. Apparently when a site uses a CDN to optimize delivery of its content, it can be very difficult to make sure that all copies of a file have been deleted. Facebook has been notoriously bad at this, leaving images that have been "deleted" on servers with the same fixed URL but de-linked from the user's profile for years after the user requested deletion.
2. Many sites are now starting to hide/disable/etc., rather than delete, pages that have been reported in DMCA takedown notices just due to the high false positive rate. Flickr recently changed its policy after a photographer had a very popular, years-old picture of his wrongly taken down and Flickr deleted all the favorites and comments associated with it. MegaUpload may have taken the same tack - if they received takedowns, remove public access to the media, but keep the copy in case the uploader challenges the takedown, so that the possibly large file doesn't have to be uploaded all over again.

Like I said, I don't know what was going on in MegaUpload and maybe it was just scumbag behavior, but these are two possible justifications.
posted by cobra_high_tigers at 9:28 AM on June 28, 2012 [3 favorites]


Is there some technical justification for why DMCA'd files were only delinked and not removed from their servers? Like, did MegaUpload use some Twilight Zone file system that made it more computationally expensive to find-and-delete a file, rather than find-and-copy?

They pointed all identical hashes to the same stored file. Just because one user didn't have a licence/fair use for the file doesn't mean all the other users that stored that hash don't either. It's not even hard to imagine a case where this would apply; one of the storage users might be the creator of the copied media in the first place. You can't just take down everyone for one user.

Hence you delink.
posted by jaduncan at 9:33 AM on June 28, 2012 [5 favorites]


In that article I linked, it's mentioned that DotCom's lawyer joked about needed a drink when looking at Kim's Twitter feed.

Haven't you heard? It's the Kim Dotcom lawyer's drinking game.
posted by Talez at 10:04 AM on June 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


Wait, he's not Korean?
posted by Redfield at 10:10 AM on June 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


Is NZ just another fiefdom of the US and its media interests, so that all it takes to make this mess go the way the US wants is some hand waving? Or will NZ end up kicking itself in the crotch? Interesting either way.

Also, if it turns out, that the exercise was so botched that the US has no case, does DotCom get to sue? And who and how would they sue? NZ? US? Or is it just tough shit, sure you just got run over by a steam roller - live with it...
posted by w.fugawe at 11:09 AM on June 28, 2012


These days, NZ seems to be kicking itself in the crotch a lot. John Key needs to leave the Beehive, and fast, or NZ will turn onto another US butt monkey.
posted by New England Cultist at 12:19 PM on June 28, 2012


Threat Level has the full text of the ruling: Judge Rules Police Anti-Piracy Raids Illegal
posted by homunculus at 12:22 PM on June 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


This Dotcom-Wozniak picture makes me nervous. They look happy together, but I swear that Kim Dotcom is thinking Hello... lunch.
posted by elgilito at 1:27 PM on June 28, 2012


So realistically, what does this mean? Will the FBI be forced to restore his websites?
posted by zarq at 8:35 PM on June 28, 2012 [1 favorite]



I have no love for Kim Dotcom, but as a New Zealand citizen, I am loving this ruling.

A police force who think they can justify armed raids and indiscriminate seizure with a flimsy non-specific warrant ('Catch is like, a bad person, go take, like, all her stuff'), and THEN hand that illegally obtained stuff over to the FBI like a slobbering golden retriever bringing the newspaper for Daddy ... well, it makes me mad enough to hope this blows up here in the media and politically, it would be good to see a few heads roll.
posted by Catch at 10:27 PM on June 28, 2012 [4 favorites]


There are problem with some of the indictments in the US as well. Apparently you can't indict a foreign company, or something like that.

Anyway, the government just wanted the site shut down, and obviously they got what they wanted.
posted by delmoi at 12:34 AM on June 29, 2012


Excellent ruling! Now let's hope the extradition get quashed with extremely prejudice. Ideally, penalizing the NZ police enough to make them think twice about blindly enforcing US foreign policy.
posted by jeffburdges at 1:24 AM on June 29, 2012


I'm feeling about like I did every time that pus-sac Larry Flynt spanked the US authorities...

YAY FOR THE CITIZENS!
posted by IAmBroom at 11:53 AM on June 29, 2012


Taunting the FBI never brings out their better side.
posted by Mad_Carew


The FBI’s like the Happy Fun Ball of federal agencies.
posted by blueberry at 11:49 PM on June 29, 2012


Kim Dotcom: Joe Biden Ordered the Megaupload Shutdown
posted by homunculus at 1:57 PM on July 4, 2012


Dotcom can see one file of 22 million, says FBI
posted by homunculus at 11:52 AM on July 6, 2012


US Gov't And Hollywood Have Turned Kim Dotcom Into A Beloved Cult Hero
posted by homunculus at 11:54 AM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]


Megaupload Judge Steps Down After Declaring U.S. ‘the Enemy’
posted by homunculus at 1:38 PM on July 18, 2012


« Older Points in Space is a lovely stop-motion timelapse ...  |  America's other Audubon.... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments