New Zealand High Court wants to see evidence against Dotcom. US doesn't have any.
40 replies, posted
[quote]
[img]http://www.architecture-view.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/supreme-court-building-bulding-view.jpg[/img]
As the Justice Department continues to pretend there's nothing strange at all about its highly questionable tactics in shutting down Megaupload and having its executives arrested, the courts are still struggling with the details. A few weeks back, we noted that a judge in New Zealand [url=http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120529/18175419119/new-zealand-judge-wont-rubberstamp-kim-dotcom-extradition-orders-us-to-share-evidence.shtml]rejected[/url] the US's demand that New Zealand merely rubberstamp an extradition order to the US, despite there being numerous questions over the case itself and whether or not extradition is appropriate. As part of that, the judge also ordered the US Attorneys to hand over the evidence they're using to make the case against Dotcom and his colleagues, such that they can properly respond to the evidence. The US, as you might expect has gone absolutely ballistic about this, insisting that such an effort is impossible -- and that "it would take at least two months" to get the evidence together.
Of course, to some of us, that suggests that the DOJ hasn't yet looked at the evidence -- and thus it shut down the company and arrested its staff first, without even knowing if a crime had been committed.
Either way, that months-long delay presented a problem, since New Zealand had scheduled the extradition hearing for August 6th, and the Megaupload legal team deserved some time with the evidence to formulate its defense. The latest, however, is that New Zealand's High Court has [url=http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/kim-dotcom-s-plea-drop-charges-rejected-4930614]agreed to an "urgent review" of the original ruling[/url]. The court also told the US to start the process of putting together the evidence to hand over to Dotcom's lawyers, but that it can wait until the High Court has reviewed the case before actually handing them over.
No matter what, this is once again showing the US's hubris in this case -- assuming it could waltz into New Zealand, with highly questionable evidence, shut down a company, and extradite the executives to the US without anyone asking questions. With each move in this case, more questions are raised about the competence of the DOJ staff who worked on this case, led by Neil MacBride -- a former "anti-piracy VP" for the copyright industries, who may have let his biases and previous (and future?) employers' interests get the best of him.
[/quote]
[url]http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120615/17485919355/new-zealands-high-court-steps-into-extradition-fight-over-kim-dotcom.shtml[/url]
And the FBI/US Govt continues on their fun crusade...
It's bullshit they think they can have him extradited without providing evidence
US arresting/doing something without evidence?
damn that's a premiere right there chaps
called it
It's simply funny how New Zealand just seem to turn the US' plans against themselves.
I don't understand how New Zealand approved for extradition but should of inquired about evidence and why they should be exported to the U.S
Why is simply copyright infringement but where's the evidence?
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;36367456]I don't understand how New Zealand approved for extradition but should of inquired about evidence and why they should be exported to the U.S
Why is simply copyright infringement but where's the evidence?[/QUOTE]
They haven't "approved" anything, the [b]extradition hearing[/b] is scheduled.
The US on the other hand just wanted it to be stamped and to get Dotcom onto a plane asap.
Didn't they not even have a warrant for his arrest?
This whole mess is bullshit. And what about the "files aren't real things" bullshit? With that logic, whoever repairs the FBI's computers could legally copy all of the confidential files and get away with it scot-free.
[QUOTE=usa;36367486]They haven't "approved" anything, the [b]extradition hearing[/b] is scheduled.
The US on the other hand just wanted it to be stamped and to get Dotcom onto a plane asap.[/QUOTE]
Wait I thought they went? Or was that they weren't deemed a flight risk
Hi, we're the Federal government, we're above the law and we can do anything we want and if you say otherwise you will be punished severely. Fed in a nutshell.
This is all about control, they want to make it look like they need more control over the internet by painting this guy to be a bad guy.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;36367638]Hi, we're the Federal government, we're above the law and we can do anything we want and if you say otherwise you will be punished severely. Fed in a nutshell.
This is all about control, they want to make it look like they need more control over the internet by painting this guy to be a bad guy.[/QUOTE]
Is anyone surprised, they've been using terrorists scapegoat as a reason to get more control for a long time now.
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;36367456]I don't understand how New Zealand approved for extradition but should of inquired about evidence and why they should be exported to the U.S
Why is simply copyright infringement but where's the evidence?[/QUOTE]
What is this post? these words don't fit together
Have you really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like or something?
[QUOTE=smurfy;36367822]What is this post? these words don't fit together
Have you really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like or something?[/QUOTE]
I'm so tired, I meant why as the reason so copyright infringement but where's the evidence to back it up, so sorry
I don't really keep up on this case since it's a total mess, but I think (again, don't follow the case so I'm not really one to know) the US did have evidence against Dotcom and that he was actually doing a fair few illegal things, but then the US fucked up the case somehow and lost all the evidence. I remember it was a fairly big thing that Dotcom was actually doing illegal things in the original thread about his house being raided.
but the US really fucked up here either way
[editline]17th June 2012[/editline]
and the extradition and going in without a warrant was stupid and unlawful too
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;36367706]Is anyone surprised, they've been using terrorists scapegoat as a reason to get more control for a long time now.[/QUOTE]
Everything they do is about control, it's not about protecting anyone but themselves, what's more is they've managed to brainwash the country into believing that they are the good guys here to save the day.
They'd like nothing less that total control without restrictions, and notice the first things they go after are your ability to communicate freely over the internet and your right to bear arms against them.
[QUOTE=Cone;36367971]I don't really keep up on this case since it's a total mess, but I think (again, don't follow the case so I'm not really one to know) the US did have evidence against Dotcom and that he was actually doing a fair few illegal things, but then the US fucked up the case somehow and lost all the evidence. I remember it was a fairly big thing that Dotcom was actually doing illegal things in the original thread about his house being raided.
but the US really fucked up here either way
[editline]17th June 2012[/editline]
and the extradition and going in without a warrant was stupid and unlawful too[/QUOTE]
Did they have evidence or did they just fabricate a story against him because they didn't like him? If he was really such a bad guy with so much evidence against him then why didn't New Zealand allow the Fed to go through with it? This in the wake of so many failed internet control bills is just too fucking suspicious and I have zero trust that the Federal government is aiming to catch a real criminal here.
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;36367915]I'm so tired, I meant why as the reason so copyright infringement but where's the evidence to back it up, so sorry[/QUOTE]
This isn't helping case you are.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;36368106]Did they have evidence or did they just fabricate a story against him because they didn't like him? If he was really such a bad guy with so much evidence against him then why didn't New Zealand allow the Fed to go through with it? This in the wake of so many failed internet control bills is just too fucking suspicious and I have zero trust that the Federal government is aiming to catch a real criminal here.[/QUOTE]
that's true, but I think innocent until proven guilty should apply to both the government and Dotcom in this case, as in, I think we should wait for more objective information and go off of that. who knows, maybe it's all just an incredibly large misunderstanding.
[QUOTE=Cone;36368141]that's true, but I think innocent until proven guilty should apply to both the government and Dotcom in this case, as in, I think we should wait for more objective information and go off of that. who knows, maybe it's all just an incredibly large misunderstanding.[/QUOTE]
Innocent until proven guilty means that they have to prove him guilty. It doesn't matter if he can't prove them guilty of fabricating evidence. If they can't provide evidence of him being guilty then what is he guilty of?
[QUOTE=Cone;36368141]that's true, but I think innocent until proven guilty should apply to both the government and Dotcom in this case, as in, I think we should wait for more objective information and go off of that. who knows, maybe it's all just an incredibly large misunderstanding.[/QUOTE]
If they were a good organization with a history of protecting people and their rights then yeah, I'd definitely give them leeway, but they're not, they're corrupt to the core and have a history of doing these things and generally doing more harm than what little good they do.
facepunch internet certified lawyers 2012
Basically MegaUpload is hosting user uploaded content, some of which is pirated (like depositfiles, rs, mf etc), and when the links were reported he apparently just took them down, but didn't delete the files so the users could request a new link.
FBI just decides hes the first victim (also becase he was a con artist and playboy)
NEW ZEALAND, A LAND FILLED WITH TERRORISM, STRIPPED OF IT'S GOD GIVEN LIBERTIES
[QUOTE=Bobie;36368518]NEW ZEALAND, A LAND FILLED WITH TERRORISM, STRIPPED OF IT'S GOD GIVEN LIBERTIES[/QUOTE]
THEY HAVE NO JEWS! THEY MUST ALSO HATE ISRAEL!
[B]GOD FUCKING DAMMIT[/B] this fills me with rage!
The agencies that are supposed to be the highest law of the land in my country are being reduced to being fucking [B]LACKIES[/B] by the fucking [I]entertainment industry???[/I] This is ABSURD.
gib dotcom pls or nuke
[QUOTE=usa;36368489]facepunch internet certified lawyers 2012
Basically MegaUpload is hosting user uploaded content, some of which is pirated (like depositfiles, rs, mf etc), and when the links were reported he apparently just took them down, but didn't delete the files so the users could request a new link.
FBI just decides hes the first victim (also becase he was a con artist and playboy)[/QUOTE]
If it's so cut and dry the evidence should be overwhelming and easy to produce, no?
Why did they choose Megaupload out of all the thousands of file sharing websites?
[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;36370021]Why did they choose Megaupload out of all the thousands of file sharing websites?[/QUOTE]
...because it was the largest?
[QUOTE=ewitwins;36369815][B]GOD FUCKING DAMMIT[/B] this fills me with rage!
The agencies that are supposed to be the highest law of the land in my country are being reduced to being fucking [B]LACKIES[/B] by the fucking [I]entertainment industry???[/I] This is ABSURD.[/QUOTE]
Either we abolish copyright or we send the military into the offices of the record companies, film studios, etc.
Abolishing copyright would fix this shit fastest but the military method would be easier.
[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;36367506]Didn't they not even have a warrant for his arrest?
This whole mess is bullshit. And what about the "files aren't real things" bullshit? With that logic, whoever repairs the FBI's computers could legally copy all of the confidential files and get away with it scot-free.[/QUOTE]
They said that copying files is not theft. Copying FBI files falls under different crimes (depending on the files) - just like file sharing isn't theft but copyright infringement.
Granted, I'm just playing devil's advocate. The FBI/US/MPAA/RIAA needs to take their respective heads out of their asses and stop doing illegal shit.
[QUOTE=Sanius;36370050]...because it was the largest?[/QUOTE]
Mediafire and Filefront are also pretty huge. You can't call Coke the biggest soft drink company because it has large competitors such as Pepsi.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.