Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    20 Jan '12 06:47
    'Megaupload is based in Hong Kong, but some of the alleged pirated content was hosted on leased servers in Ashburn, Va., which gave federal authorities jurisdiction, the indictment said.

    The Justice Department said in a statement said that Kim Dotcom, 37, and three other employees were arrested Thursday in New Zealand at the request of U.S. officials. Three other defendants are at large.

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which defends free speech and digital rights online, said in a statement that, "This kind of application of international criminal procedures to Internet policy issues sets a terrifying precedent. If the United States can seize a Dutch citizen in New Zealand over a copyright claim, what is next?'"

    http://news.yahoo.com/popular-file-sharing-website-megaupload-shut-down-232101369.html

    Is this reasonable?
  2. 20 Jan '12 06:56
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    "If the United States can seize a Dutch citizen in New Zealand over a copyright claim, what is next?'"

    Is this reasonable?
    If both countries agree that copyright is a reasonable rule, then why not? If the person in question was a drug smuggler or murderer, would you feel differently about international cooperation?

    The real question here is not copyright, but to what extent one country can impose laws on citizens of other countries, living abroad who commit crimes within their boarders via the internet or other mechanisms. (Osama bin Laden similarly committed a crime remotely).

    If it is a copyright question, then would you have any objections if the guilty party was a US citizen living in the US, using US servers?
  3. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    20 Jan '12 07:06
    (Sorry, FMF. Didn't realize you had already posted this news in the Wikipedia Down Thread)
  4. 20 Jan '12 07:14
    I don't see much of a problem with this. The EFF's argument is basically trying to downplay the extent of IP violations by Megaupload. These aren't people that occasionally download a movie and some music, these are people that make a living doing this on a grand scale. If you make a living with criminal acts (even such relatively harmless crimes as IP violations), you should expect it to eventually catch up with you.
  5. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    20 Jan '12 07:20
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    If both countries agree that copyright is a reasonable rule, then why not? If the person in question was a drug smuggler or murderer, would you feel differently about international cooperation?

    The real question here is not copyright, but to what extent one country can impose laws on citizens of other countries, living abroad who commit crimes within t ...[text shortened]... you have any objections if the guilty party was a US citizen living in the US, using US servers?
    Well we don't arrest the owners of photocopier machines whenever we find that someone has used them to make an "illegal" copy.

    There is something arbitrary about IP law to begin with.

    If I found an abandoned statue by the side of the road, I can take it home, make a mold, cast an exact duplicate, and I have done nothing wrong (I don't think!) But if I found an abandoned CD or a book and did something similar, I could be charged.

    Along with other strange things:

    Item: Restaurant employees in the US cannot sing the traditional "Happy Birthday" tune.
    Item: Parents in the US cannot film their kid's high school production of "The Music Man".
    Item: Copyright lasts for the lifetime of an author or 99 years -- far longer than the patent on inventions (17 years).
    Item: Region protection. I buy a DVD in Europe to watch in the US – I can't. The DVD player won't play it because "by law" it cannot. But I could buy a US version of the same DVD and it would play.
  6. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    20 Jan '12 07:40
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    (Sorry, FMF. Didn't realize you had already posted this news in the Wikipedia Down Thread)
    It rightly deserves a thread of its own.
  7. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    20 Jan '12 07:54
    Megaupload does indeed host lots of copyrighted material but, like YouTube, it actually has a good response rate to complaints. (And, like YouTube, reactive policing is the only feasible model for policing its content.) If a copyright holder sees something there that should not be an notifies megaupload, the link is killed and the copyrighted material essentially removed from circulation.

    It's so directly comparable to YouTube in this regard, that surely we can expect to see YouTube shut down and its management arrested next. Uh-huh. I will eat my hat when that happens, and my winter hat is furry and will not taste nice at all.

    If not, why not?
  8. 20 Jan '12 07:58
    Originally posted by DrKF
    Megaupload does indeed host lots of copyrighted material but, like YouTube, it actually has a good response rate to complaints. (And, like YouTube, reactive policing is the only feasible model for policing its content.) If a copyright holder sees something there that should not be an notifies megaupload, the link is killed and the copyrighted material essential ...[text shortened]... happens, and my winter hat is furry and will not taste nice at all.

    [b]If not, why not?
    [/b]
    I'll have to retract my earlier post then, I didn't know Megaupload was as diligent in this regard.
  9. 20 Jan '12 08:32
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    Well we don't arrest the owners of photocopier machines whenever we find that someone has used them to make an "illegal" copy.

    There is something arbitrary about IP law to begin with.
    So it seems your complaint has to do with copyright law in general, not international law enforcement. The OP seemed to be suggesting you were against international law enforcement - or against it for certain categories of crime.

    I too think copyright law is a mess and needs fixing. Sadly, the law making process in the US (and other countries) is biased in favour of those with a financial interest.
  10. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    20 Jan '12 09:27
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    So it seems your complaint has to do with copyright law in general, not international law enforcement. The OP seemed to be suggesting you were against international law enforcement - or against it for certain categories of crime.

    I too think copyright law is a mess and needs fixing. Sadly, the law making process in the US (and other countries) is biased in favour of those with a financial interest.
    Is the law making process biased?

    I think as it is implemented today, the process shows a bias. As written, I don't think it is biased.

    I think a free internet is one of the best tools for reducing that bias that humanity has ever invented -- but it has to remain utterly free and open.
  11. 20 Jan '12 09:50
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    Is the law making process biased?
    It is evident to everyone that the SOPA law was motivated by those with a financial interest in a positive outcome. So yes, it is obviously biased.
  12. 20 Jan '12 10:51
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    Item: Region protection. I buy a DVD in Europe to watch in the US – I can't. The DVD player won't play it because "by law" it cannot. But I could buy a US version of the same DVD and it would play.
    I think you need to upgrade your DVD player. For years, I've been watching imported American and Hong Kong DVDs (which don't share British region coding) as easily as continental European and Japanese DVDs (which do).
  13. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    20 Jan '12 13:23
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    'Megaupload is based in Hong Kong, but some of the alleged pirated content was hosted on leased servers in Ashburn, Va., which gave federal authorities jurisdiction, the indictment said.

    The Justice Department said in a statement said that Kim Dotcom, 37, and three other employees were arrested Thursday in New Zealand at the request of U.S. officials ...[text shortened]... .com/popular-file-sharing-website-megaupload-shut-down-232101369.html

    Is this reasonable?
    I don't know specifically how much Megaupload was complicit in IP theft but the question "If the United States can seize a Dutch citizen in New Zealand over a copyright claim, what is next?" is a pretty stupid question.

    What's next is that the law will be enforced.

    What's the alternative? That anyone should be able to violate any copyright of anyone merely because he's based in a different country?

    If you don't want to get in trouble with US authorities, don't violate US law by stealing intellectual property held by US citizens and distributing it in the United States.
  14. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    20 Jan '12 13:24
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    It is evident to everyone that the SOPA law was motivated by those with a financial interest in a positive outcome. So yes, it is obviously biased.
    And murder statutes are motivated by people who don't want to die. Big deal.
  15. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    20 Jan '12 13:24 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by DrKF

    It's so directly comparable to YouTube in this regard, that surely we can expect to see YouTube shut down and its management arrested next. Uh-huh. I will eat my hat when that happens, and my winter hat is furry and will not taste nice at all.
    You are absolutely in no danger of getting fur stuck down your throat.

    The thing is Youtube proactively turned itself into a corporate hosting service such that all the stars these days showcase their newest and latest material inside of their Vevo players for which all you the viewer is asked to do is watch a 15 sec add. But generally you would put up with it because the quality is generally far superior to other posts of that same song by people who definitely are not authorised to have uploaded said material. The process started off quite slowly, but now it is a flood, where for some artists and or styles of music, the predominant form it takes on youtube is ad based. Score 1 for the carrot approach. Now apart from the artist Prince who once was known as TAFKAP, the are not many instances where the labels get clips shut down. They must work off the principle of any exposure is good for business.

    So to comment on your hypothetical expectation, I think it highly unlikely that youtube's management are even in the slightest bit of danger, given that they have orchestrated a content delivery system that increasingly sees every bit of premium, must see content being preceded by an advert. If anything youtube management are probably high on everyone's gift lists.The carrot approach works. Every song practically on youtube now has an itunes link, which after you've followed out of curiosity, brings you face to face with the sound and visual quality you miss when you look at the standard youtube board of fare. Once you are given a taste of the much higher itunes fidelity, you never quite can live with the typical crappy youtube version of the product.

    So what seemed at first to be an act of revolution for people all over the globe to freely share copyrighted material, the media companies with very few exceptions have indulged this criminal behaviour and turned youtube into a preview service for their higher quality versions of the same product. kerching kerching kerching.

    At the end of the day what self respecting middle class kid from middle America is going to let themselves be embarrassed by the fact that they played a whole bunch of standard rez clips on their new 52 inch 3D panel, that they obviously downloaded off youtube using Firefox. Seriously what kind of flake puts on such a low rent show for a 16th birthday party anyways?

    The scammer becomes the scammed!