• Hollywood movie giants launch copyright lawsuit against Kim Dotcom
    20 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Six major Hollywood studios have issued a huge lawsuit against the internet mogul and alleged cyber-pirate Kim Dotcom, his colleagues and his famous now-defunct file-hosting service Megaupload.com. Among the film giants filing the lawsuit are 20th Century Fox, Disney, Paramount, Universal, Columbia Pictures and Warner Bros studios. Dotcom and his colleagues [I]“operated the notorious website Megaupload without authorization or license … and … intentionally infringed copyrighted motion picture and television programs on a massive scale and for a substantial profit,”[/I] said the complaint, which was filed to the US District Court in Alexandria, Virginia. According to the complaint, the Megaupload functioned [I]“not as a private online storage locker, but rather as a hub for uploading and downloading copies of movies and TV shows.”[/I] It says that only 1 percent of its customers, who were premium subscribers, were allowed to use the site for long-term file storage. The site’s illegal activity brought at least $150 million from subscriptions and about $25 million from advertisements to Kim Dotcom and his colleagues, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk, the plaintiffs contend. The lawsuit accuses Megaupload of illegally uploading such movies as Ghostbusters, Alice in Wonderland, Toy Story 3, Forrest Gump, Transformers, Avatar, X-Men: First Class and Back to the Future. The plaintiffs also argue that Megaupload’s [I]"Uploader Rewards"[/I] program [I]“openly paid its users money to upload popular unauthorized and unlicensed content, including plaintiffs' copyrighted television shows and movies, onto Megaupload's computer servers.”[/I] Steven Fabrizio, senior executive, vice president and global general counsel of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), said that Megupload [I]“paid users based on how many times the content was downloaded by others and didn't pay at all until that infringing content was downloaded 10,000 times.”[/I] Dotcom has said that he and the Megaupload site cannot be responsible for what customers do with the service, and called the accusations by the MPAA [I]“stupid.”[/I] [I]“Just like the DOJ criminal case against Megaupload, the MPAA case is a load of nonsense and won't succeed after scrutiny of the facts,”[/I] Dotcom wrote on his Twitter account. Dotcom's US attorney Ira Rothken said that the lawsuit was a way for the country's film industry to go after Megaupload if the US [I]“if the Department of Justice fails in the extradition and the criminal case"[/I] against Dotcom scheduled for July. [I]"The MPAA is suddenly realizing that we're a few months away from the extradition hearing, and once Kim Dotcom and the others prevail in the extradition hearing they'll have more resources and more assets,"[/I] Rothken told Reuters. Kim Dotcom, born in Germany as Kim Schmitz, is a resident of both Hong Kong and New Zealand, and a dual citizen of Finland and Germany. He made a fortune through his file-sharing website Megaupload, where [URL="http://rt.com/news/dotcom-steps-down-mega-434/"]until[/URL] August 2011 he was CEO. Dotcom’s legal troubles over Megaupload started in January 2012 after the US issued an indictment against Dotcom for charges of copyright and racketeering in connection with his [I]“notorious”[/I] site. After complaints from the FBI, the New Zealand government arrested Dotcom in 2012 at his mansion near Auckland. Dozens of officers stormed the home, seizing millions of dollars in cash and over 135 electronic items, including hard drives and laptops. The website was shut down, with millions of legal files made inaccessible along with any illegal content. The internet tycoon was freed on bail in New Zealand but his movements have been restricted. He is currently pending his extradition hearing which has been scheduled for July 2014. If convicted, Dotcom could face a jail sentence of up to 20 years. Dotcom along with his three colleagues have been battling US and New Zealand authorities ever since. US authorities allege that Megaupload cost film studios and record companies more than $500 million and generated more than $175 million by encouraging paying users to share and store copyrighted material like movies and TV shows. However, Dotcom claims Megaupload was merely an online warehouse and should not be accountable if the content was obtained illegally. He has won a series of legal cases against US, including a case in New Zealand's High Court, which ruled that the police raid on his house was illegal, as wells as the seizure of hard drives that were later copied and taken by the FBI. In March, Dotcom launched the Internet [URL="http://rt.com/news/kim-dotcom-launches-party-585/"]Party[/URL] to contest New Zealand’s general election in September. His party’s campaign platform promises include free high-speed Internet, a high-tech job boom, restricted government surveillance and a review of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://rt.com/news/kim-dotcom-hollywood-studios-041/[/URL]
Bit late now, is it not?
Really? 2 years after the initial takedown? You think they'd get on this a little earlier.
The fact that the new Mega is being used for similar activity might really hurt him, that could be why they waited.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;44486527]Really? 2 years after the initial takedown? You think they'd get on this a little earlier.[/QUOTE] The Feds failed to lock 'em up. This was probably the backup plan.
[QUOTE]cyber-pirate[/QUOTE] [img]http://d3sdoylwcs36el.cloudfront.net/online_content_distribution_strategies_pirate_computer_by_emilie_richards.jpg[/img] yarr
well, if you want to get technically YouTube is basically Napster.. sharing copyrighted content of coruse they don't want it to be that way but it was basically the same for napster and they got shutdown.
Hollywood has plenty of money, and if everyone in the country pirated for a whole year, they would still have plenty of money.
These movie studios have no case. Megaupload had terms of service that made it against the rules for users to upload pirated content. Kim Dotcom and Megaupload gave movie studios direct delete access to remove any content from the website that was their content. Kim Dotcom claims to have emails from some of these movie studios thanking him for such cooperation to help remove pirated and illegal content. He went so above and beyond what the law required of him. The DMCA should protect Megaupload on the basis that Megaupload is not responsible for its users' actions. It is the movie studios job to police the site, not Megaupload's. I'm not sure why people hate Kim Dotcom. We should be supporting him 100%. The US and the movie studios are basically trying to make an "example" out of him with this bullshit.
Ironically how Napster was made example of.. and then you've got youtube which does the same and no one acts, actually you've got a lot of sites but no one acts.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;44486527]Really? 2 years after the initial takedown? You think they'd get on this a little earlier.[/QUOTE] Damn, has it been 2 years already?
[QUOTE=Dark One;44486993]Ironically how Napster was made example of.. and then you've got youtube which does the same and no one acts, actually you've got a lot of sites but no one acts.[/QUOTE] Because the owner(s) of said sites actually have the financial means to fight back. That said YouTube has a really draconian and skewed DRM system that favors the big media companies and completely original content gets unrightfully taken down all the time.
[QUOTE=demoguy08;44487089]Because the owner(s) of said sites actually have the financial means to fight back. That said YouTube has a really draconian and skewed DRM system that favors the big media companies and completely original content gets unrightfully taken down all the time.[/QUOTE] yes, because your original content belongs to us now.. you sign the tos.
[QUOTE=UziXxX;44486979]I'm not sure why people hate Kim Dotcom. We should be supporting him 100%. The US and the movie studios are basically trying to make an "example" out of him with this bullshit.[/QUOTE] He's a very slimy and sketchy person. I trust him as far as I could throw him.
[QUOTE=Paulendy;44486650]The fact that the new Mega is being used for similar activity might really hurt him, that could be why they waited.[/QUOTE] Mega is set up in a way that they can't even know the file names and still takes DMCA notices. They can spin it in newspapers but it's completely irrelevant in court. New Zealand doesn't have a jury system (afaik), so the cases are actually decided strictly on the law text (or at least that should be the case. It would be very surprising if it wasn't). [editline]8th April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;44487541]He's a very slimy and sketchy person. I trust him as far as I could throw him.[/QUOTE] Doesn't mean he can't be useful or do the right thing though. Dealing with untrustworthy people to mutual benefit isn't very difficult after all, since we have modern legal systems with equal standing for (almost) all individuals and legal insurance readily available.
I'm sure there's an expiration date on the infringing acts and when they can sue. I know its 2 years for any citizen to sue from the harm/action that the person is suing for I wonder how many in this case.
They didn't get what they wanted out of the feds, so they're going to the courts. Surprise!
Prepare yourself for another song.
It probably took this long because the legal system is slow due to all the things it has to do.
[QUOTE=Karmah;44488845]It probably took this long because the legal system is slow due to all the things it has to do.[/QUOTE] like forge evidence, bride judges... find harden criminals to say that they were working for him, the usually.
[QUOTE=Paulendy;44486650]The fact that the new Mega is being used for similar activity might really hurt him, that could be why they waited.[/QUOTE] I thought Mega removed illegal shit now? A friend of mine said that a pirated movie he put on Mega had been removed. Probably just trying to scare me.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.