MegaUpload has been shut down

Deleted member 77746 · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:43

Here it goes, next it will be rapidshare and then all the other sharing websites. Watch this space.

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:44

Surfer said:
? That can be termed illegal?

Otherwise every single site which has a similar facility e.g. facebook, youtube etc can be taken down without a thought by a US court order merely on the estimation that it has the potentiality to break copyright.

Of course it can be deemed illegal.

And no there's a massive difference between a site set up with its main purpose of facilitating the sharing of illegal content and things. Like Facebook, YouTube and search engines.

YouTube will also respond to requests to remove such material as I'm sure many others do. YouTube also has contracts with most of the big producers allowing them to use videos and music and for its members. To re-use such clips and make there own videos with such clips in them.

So how is this banning freedom of information? Have they shut down any forum that disagrees with the goverment, or things like Wikipedia. No, I didn't think so. Your argument isn't based on reality.

And no, currently us cant shut those sites down, like YouTube and the like as they aren't braking the law.
SOPA also isn't a bad idea, just purly implemented with not enough safeguards. Although with the amendmants it now has some of the safeguards, but still not far enough. But it's not likely to pass anyway. Even the original supporters are turning their back on it.

LordSplodge · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:49

FoxEye said:
If nothing else this thread proves how we are living in an "entitlement" society.
.

Maybe, but I'm guessing most people would use prefer a legal, easy to use and cheap streaming system over piracy.

However that's not the issue here. The shocking lack of due process is the problem and if you cannot see why a website being removed in this way with no due process is a serious issue then you must be truly ignorant.

Tephnos · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:49

Glaucus said:
Of course it can be deemed illegal.

And no there's a massive difference between a site set up with its main purpose of facilitating the sharing of illegal content and things. Like Facebook, YouTube and search engines.

YouTube will also respond to requests to remove such material as I'm sure many others do. YouTube also has contracts with most of the big producers allowing them to use videos and music and for its members. To re-use such clips and make there own videos with such clips in them.

So how is this banning freedom of information? Have they shut down any forum that disagrees with the goverment, or things like Wikipedia. No, I didn't think so. Your argument isn't based on reality.

And no, currently us cant shut those sites down, like YouTube and the like as they aren't braking the law.
SOPA also isn't a bad idea, just purly implemented with not enough safeguards. Although with the amendmants it now has some of the safeguards, but still not far enough. But it's not likely to pass anyway. Even the original supporters are turning their back on it.

From what I knew, Megaupload would remove reported files very quickly. Therefore, how is this their fault? They removed the files just as youtube does when reported.

But I'm not getting into a debate. This is wrong and I don't like it. As has been said, they got shut down without due process and are being arrested, and it isn't right.

Surfer · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:51

Of course it can be deemed illegal.

Ohh really? Why?

And no there's a massive difference between a site set up with its main purpose of facilitating the sharing of illegal content and things. Like Facebook, YouTube and search engines.

Its megaupload not piratebay.

But if you have information/evidence that supports that statement (ive underlined it to help) please share it with the rest of us and the US authorities

Have they shut down any forum that disagrees with the goverment, or things like Wikipedia. No, I didn't think so. Your argument isn't based on reality

What about wikileaks?

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:53

Celestial Nostos said:
From what I knew, Megaupload would remove reported files very quickly. Therefore, how is this their fault? They removed the files just as youtube does when reported.

But I'm not getting into a debate. This is wrong and I don't like it. As has been said, they got shut down without due process and are being arrested, and it isn't right.

Not really a facade to try and cover them.

This is part of the 72 page charge sheet.

…they are willfully infringing copyrights themselves on these systems; have actual knowledge that the materials on their systems are infringing (or alternatively know facts or circumstances that would make infringing material apparent); receive a financial benefit directly attributable to copyright-infringing activity where the provider can control that activity; and have not removed, or disabled access to, known copyright infringing material from servers they control.

Click to expand...

Let’s cover the last point first – the apparent non-removal of known copyright material from MegaUpload’s servers. First, a little background on how MegaUpload’s user uploading system worked because this is absolutely crucial to the case against the site.

Mega had developed a system whereby files set to be uploaded by users were hashed in order to discover if a copy of the file already exists on the Mega servers. If a file existed, the user did not have to upload his copy and was simply given a unique URL in order to access the content in future. What this meant in practice is that there could be countless URLs ‘owned’ by various users but which all pointed to the same file.

Megaupload’s “Abuse Tool” to which major copyright holders were given access, enabled the removal of links to infringing works hosted on MegaUpload’s servers. However, the indictment claims that it “did not actually function as a DMCA compliance tool as the copyright owners were led to believe.” And here’s why.

The indictment claims that when a copyright holder issued a takedown notice for content referenced by its URL, only the URL was taken down, not the content to which it pointed. So although the URL in question would report that it had been removed and would no longer resolve to infringing material, URLs issued to others would remain operational.

http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-what-made-it-a-rogue-site-worthy-of-destruction-120120/
And it goes on, they were issued a charge years ago and didn't remove content. They new content was uploaded and made money from it. They implemented a proper system to remove child porn, t did not implement it for copyright that would have actually removed. The file and not one of the hundreds of URL links.

On top of that, service providers are safeguarded under US law, as long as they meet certain criteria.

LordSplodge · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:54

Glaucus said:
So how is this banning freedom of information? Have they shut down any forum that disagrees with the goverment, or things like Wikipedia. No, I didn't think so. Your argument isn't based on reality.

SOPA also isn't a bad idea

The threat to freedom of information/speech is due to the sheer lack of due process. ICE is bad but SOPA/PIPA would have made it even worse. Yes MegaUpload was used by some to upload content that they didn't have the copyright for but then again so does YouTube and Google links to torrents and all sorts of ways of infringing copyright. These sites haven't been seized, have they?

SOPA in any form is a moronic idea that only even came into being because the lawmakers are in the pockets of the media industry. Our Government isn't any better, just look at the DEA.

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:55

But YouTube removes such content, megaupload didn't.

I've already covered SOPA. It's purly implemented with not enough safeguards. But this wasn't a SOPA take down, this is under existing laws. So how is it freedom of information.

vail3r · 20 Jan 2012 at 18:58

I was a little shocked to see this on the news, I think it will be interesting to see how this pans out.

LordSplodge · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:03

Glaucus said:
But YouTube removes such content, megaupload didn't.

I've already covered SOPA. It's purly implemented with not enough safeguards. But this wasn't a SOPA take down, this is under existing laws. So how is it freedom of information.

There is no version of SOPA that could be deemed tollerable. Same for PIPA. As for MegaUpload. I ask again, where is the due process? Essentially the US has determined a foreign corporation is committing copyright infringement and using ICE has seized the domain. SOPA would have made them able to stop the domain resolving even if it wasn't an American domain.

In reality MegaUpload should have had an opportunity in court to represent themselves. During this time the domain should remain active as until prevent guilty they are innocent.

Don't get me started on how countries like New Zeland are arresting people on behalf of the America government!

Aeleys · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:04

Glaucus said:
But YouTube removes such content, megaupload didn't.

I've already covered SOPA. It's purly implemented with not enough safeguards. But this wasn't a SOPA take down, this is under existing laws. So how is it freedom of information.

actually they did remove items, just not on the same scale Youtube does.

even though this was not a SOPA take down, it's pretty much how things will be if it does get the go ahead.

i wonder how hard ISP revenues will get hit if SOPA actually gets the green light...i don't think i'll bother just keeping it for internet shopping since that's about as much use ill get from the internet if it passes.

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:06

LordSplodge said:
In reality MegaUpload should have had an opportunity in court to represent themselves. During this time the domain should remain active as until prevent guilty they are innocent.

]

They can go to court and LoL.
Yeah becuase you allow other criminal activities to carry on, untill a court hearings been done. Which can be years. No, most criminal things are shut down at the point of arrest and then compensated if cleared.

Actually there can be a perfectly fine version of SOPA with enough safeguards. What's on the table isn't this, but it's perfectly possible and hopfullytaht is what we will get.

The halfway house we have ATM isn't good for anyone. No one is particular safe, no one knows the laws. What we actually needs is well thought out laws that clear this up. That will be the best situation for everyone.

Aeleys said:
actually they did remove items, just not on the same scale Youtube does.

Did you even bother reading the torrent freak article?
YouTube and other content providers are protected under law as long as they meet certain requirements.

LordSplodge · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:08

Glaucus said:
They can go to court and LoL.
Yeah becuase you allow other criminal activities to carry on, untill a court hearings been done. Which can be years. No, most criminal things are shut down at the point of arrest and then compensated if cleared.

Last time I checked copyright infringement was a civil matter. Also see YouTube: MegaUpload was used for plenty of legitimate uses yet is shut down. YouTube can be used for infringing copyright yet remains up.

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:09

LordSplodge said:
Last time I checked copyright infringement was a civil matter. Also see YouTube: MegaUpload was used for plenty of legitimate uses yet is shut down. YouTube can be used for infringing copyright yet remains up.

This isn't infringement and is very much criminal.

Do none of you bother reading.

UNDER US LAW, SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE PROTECTED AS LONG AS THEY MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. So no youtubeand others are not like megaupload.

Surfer · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:10

If the charge sheet is proven correct then of course Megaupload should be taken down.

The indictment claims that when a copyright holder issued a takedown notice for content referenced by its URL, only the URL was taken down, not the content to which it pointed. So although the URL in question would report that it had been removed and would no longer resolve to infringing material, URLs issued to others would remain operational

We will have to wait and see if the charges and claims are correct then. I would imagine they have evidence of the illegal files still being available even after Megaupload purports to remove it.

But this is not what i was talking about..... you said that a system that allows the sharing of information itself can be illegal. (so not the content but the mere facility...) Can you substantiate that claim please.

LordSplodge · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:11

Glaucus said:
Actually there can be a perfectly fine version of SOPA with enough safeguards. What's on the table isn't this, but it's perfectly possible and hopfullytaht is what we will get

Adequate laws exist. There is no need for any law that threatens the infrastructure of the Internet nor one that allows for censorship.

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:11

Surfer said:
But this is not what i was talking about..... you said that a system that allows the sharing of information itself can be illegal. (so not the content but the mere facility...) Can you substantiate that claim please.

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:12

LordSplodge said:
Adequate laws exist. There is no need for any law that threatens the infrastructure of the Internet nor one that allows for censorship.

There really isn't,especially in the UK.
And while that remains we are unlikely to see are rights as consumers increase either. Currently it's not really legal to do much fpwith the content we buy.

And even the American ones aren't well tested or established. Which means untill so meshing changes charges will be brought forward willy nilly and see what they can get away with and what they can't.

LordSplodge · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:15

Glaucus said:
This isn't infringement and is very much criminal.

Do none of you bother reading.

UNDER US LAW, SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE PROTECTED AS LONG AS THEY MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. So no youtube and others are not like megaupload.

MegaUpload isn't a US company. MegaUpload was used for legitimate purposes. America do not have control of all the Internet yet they feel entitled to do so.

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2012 at 19:17

LordSplodge said:
MegaUpload isn't a US company. MegaUpload was used for legitimate purposes. America do not have control of all the Internet yet they feel entitled to do so.

They feel they are entitled to protect their interests and again doesn't really matter where they are based. It depends on a number of things. From where they are hosted laws, extradition treaties. What if any thing is based in the US, like advertising and revenue streams.

Again the sooner adequate and well thought out laws are in place, the better for everyone.