Dotcom raid illegal

[Sydney's Mom]

There is no 5th amendment right vis-a-vis activities that took place in New Zealand. That is why we build prisons on foreign soil.

[StoryEnthusiast]

It will be a big waste of taxpayers' money in NZ. It's just a show staged by the local police.

[MikeOxlittle]

So a German-Finnish national, with New Zealand and Hong Kong residencies, operating a business completely out of U.S jurisdiction .... is getting harrassed by the U.S government?

That makes total sense.

Originally Posted by MikeOxlittle

So a German-Finnish national, with New Zealand and Hong Kong residencies, operating a business completely out of U.S jurisdiction .... is getting harrassed by the U.S government?

That makes total sense.

Yeap, because they may have been facilitating U.S. citizens in breaking U.S. law on U.S. soil. Copyrights are also governed by international agreements, so there is a huge incentive for foreign governments to cooperate.

Now I don't agree with a government taking illegal actions on either home or foreign soils, and believe that they should be held accountable. However illegal activities have been conducted online for far too long simply because there is minimal accountability. (Law breakers can go to foreign soil to delay arrest and prosecution, or even seek nations that will protect them from arrest and prosecution.) So something needs to be done.

[MikeOxlittle]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Yeap, because they may have been facilitating U.S. citizens in breaking U.S. law on U.S. soil. Copyrights are also governed by international agreements, so there is a huge incentive for foreign governments to cooperate.

Now I don't agree with a government taking illegal actions on either home or foreign soils, and believe that they should be held accountable. However illegal activities have been conducted online for far too long simply because there is minimal accountability. (Law breakers can go to foreign soil to delay arrest and prosecution, or even seek nations that will protect them from arrest and prosecution.) So something needs to be done.

"They may have been...." does not equal they did.

MegaUpload TOS laid out all the policies of the site and if the users who were sharing copyrighted material didn't pay attention to them, shouldn't the U.S Gov't go after them?

Instead of a guy who was simply providing a helpful service to millions of people.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Yeap, because they may have been facilitating U.S. citizens in breaking U.S. law on U.S. soil.

No, as I understand it, because some of their servers were hosted in the US. That is what lets them get a foot in the jurisdictional door.

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Yeap, because they may have been facilitating U.S. citizens in breaking U.S. law on U.S. soil. Copyrights are also governed by international agreements, so there is a huge incentive for foreign governments to cooperate.

Now I don't agree with a government taking illegal actions on either home or foreign soils, and believe that they should be held accountable. However illegal activities have been conducted online for far too long simply because there is minimal accountability. (Law breakers can go to foreign soil to delay arrest and prosecution, or even seek nations that will protect them from arrest and prosecution.) So something needs to be done.

What the US Gov't has done in Australia to get us to 'conform' with their country's idealogies is to use the Balance of Trade to bully the Gov't to agreeing in writing with them.

And they've done it again and again in various and quite different industries, eg copyright, pharmacology etc

That sucks .....

The US Gov't has no doubt bullied New Zealand into performing it's wishes in this matter as well using the Balance of Trade Agreement.

A bully is a bully - whether it be a country or a person or an organisation.

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm afraid I can't agree with you. A procedural screw-up is bad, but it's probably just human error. It's not in the same league as a professional criminal like Mr Dotcom who's made millions from his crimes over many years.

If you disagree, then let's agree to differ; I doubt we're going to change each other's mind on the matter.

We're not talking about minor procedural errors, there have been major mistakes in this case. The legal theories the U.S. has relied on are questionable, the fact that the U.S. couldn't properly serve Megaupload the corporation (as distinct from the individuals running it) was a big screw up and the fact that the search warrants relied on to seize Dotcom's property were illegal is a major screwup.

Just saying "oops, human error" when there are major procedural [language edit] is just gross; those procedures are there to provide important checks on police powers that are more important than the result in any particular case.

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Yeap, because they may have been facilitating U.S. citizens in breaking U.S. law on U.S. soil. Copyrights are also governed by international agreements, so there is a huge incentive for foreign governments to cooperate.

Now I don't agree with a government taking illegal actions on either home or foreign soils, and believe that they should be held accountable. However illegal activities have been conducted online for far too long simply because there is minimal accountability. (Law breakers can go to foreign soil to delay arrest and prosecution, or even seek nations that will protect them from arrest and prosecution.) So something needs to be done.

That doesn't make sense, either common or legal ..... the individual in the US has every opportunity to make their own decision prior to acting on any statement, matter or thing that is said or done over the internet.

Following on from your thinking then it seems to me that the US Gov't sees itself, and acts, as the over arching Police Force of the whole world if it believes that one or more of its citizens are acting as a result of a conversation or literature that 'ended up' in the US, and others acted on it in such a way that crime/s were committed. The notion of self determination is missing.

See - doesn't make sense.

If the US didn't like what Megaupload was doing then simply stop it from being available in US internet space.

That's what China apparently does with various programs and/or features.

The US had/has options regarding the activities of Megaupload, it just didn't want to look like it was as controlling as China.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Fluribus

I've never been to England and I've never done business in England. If the that country's police knocked on my door, I'd tell them to stuff themselves. I don't see why that same attitude shouldn't apply for citizens of other countries as well.

Eventually we won't have things like geographic boundaries anymore, or an end to jurisdiction. Occasionally people bring up the idea of a torrent server located on an oil rig in international waters, I wonder who would be able to prosecute the admin??

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Yeap, because they may have been facilitating U.S. citizens in breaking U.S. law on U.S. soil. Copyrights are also governed by international agreements, so there is a huge incentive for foreign governments to cooperate.

Now I don't agree with a government taking illegal actions on either home or foreign soils, and believe that they should be held accountable. However illegal activities have been conducted online for far too long simply because there is minimal accountability. (Law breakers can go to foreign soil to delay arrest and prosecution, or even seek nations that will protect them from arrest and prosecution.) So something needs to be done.

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Eventually we won't have things like geographic boundaries anymore, or an end to jurisdiction. Occasionally people bring up the idea of a torrent server located on an oil rig in international waters, I wonder who would be able to prosecute the admin??

The oil rig would no doubt be registered under a specific country's laws, and no doubt it is a company that owns it or leases it, not an individual.

Therefore if it's a company then it would be registered on a country's stock exchange and that means that the company would be subject to a companies act and therefore legal action able to be taken on it.

So, for your idea to have legs one would probably need to develop their own floating platform on the high seas, not touch land or go into the waters of any country likely to legislate against their activities, or extradite them for their activities, and employ staff (if any) outside of all industrial agreements.

Of course, access and egress to this floating platform would be interesting, and would need to include work to be done on it to keep it afloat.

The effects of international maritime laws are another issue.

But heh .... maybe outer space has more opportunities!!!

(Of course if the prime reason for this venture is to pursue criminal activities then it wouldn't elicit much sympathy and may be subjected to 'pirate' action of the cloak and dagger and big gun type - think mercenaries)

Basically Giggleton I think your idea is silly, but a bit of light relief!!

[Belfaborac]

Giggles is in it for the long haul though; the very, very long haul. No borders (I think we'll probably have geographical boundaries...like...forever), no legal jurisdictions? Well, maybe in a few hundred years. Maybe. But probably not.

Human beings simply aren't anywhere near civilised enough for that kind of scenario. Some serious evolution is needed first.

Originally Posted by MikeOxlittle

"They may have been...." does not equal they did.

I used the word may because a warrant is used to obtain evidence, evidence that is usually used in a court of law, that determines the guilt of a party.

That being said, I take serious issue with TOS being used to shelter one's self from liability. If they are hosting confidential materials (e.g. email) then yes they should be buffered from liability. Once you start publishing materials, those materials are no longer private and there should be much higher standards relating to accountability. But the way things are today, businesses are using automation and TOS to try and hide from the consequences of their actions.

[Dulin's Books]

well some kind of oil platform in international waters that is a target of a government with anavy will just cease to exist. there would be no need to take "legal" measures to enforce anything

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Belfaborac

no legal jurisdictions? Well, maybe in a few hundred years.

And then 20, or 50, years after that, world government collapses.

History never ends, at least not until we all kill each other. And that's not happening, because after we're down to the last couple thousand, we'll probably come roaring back.