US Gov't Says They Can Still Freeze Megaupload Assets If the Case Is Dismissed 530
The Megaupload case continues, and on Friday attorneys for the U.S. government made some interesting claims. They were in court to argue against a request to dismiss the indictment against Megaupload that was raised on the grounds that Megaupload has no U.S. address. After a debate about jurisdiction and precedent, this happened:
"The government also argued that it could keep Megaupload in legal limbo indefinitely. 'None of the cases impose a time limit on service,' the government's attorney told the judge. Therefore, the government believes it can leave the indictment hanging over the company's head, and keep its assets frozen, indefinitely. Not only that, but the government believes it can continue to freeze Megaupload's assets and paralyze its operations even if the judge grants the motion to dismiss. That's because in the government's view, the assets are the proceeds of criminal activity and the prosecution against founder Kim Dotcom will still be pending. The fact that the assets are in the name of Megaupload rather than its founder is of no consequence, the government claimed."
Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Telling the court that you're going to circumvent the law in the case you lose probably isn't going to be so swell.
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Informative)
Telling the court that you're going to circumvent the law in the case you lose probably isn't going to be so swell.
Except when you are Uncle Sam
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Heh. This is nothing. If you find this is bad, never ever check what powers the IRS has if it "has reason to believe" you did something less than 100% kosher on your tax form.
Asset seizure without recourse - check
Person seizure without court case (eventually - yes) and zero recourse if they decide not to sue you - check
Seizure of "related" assets, not belonging to the offender - check
The list goes on
Re: (Score:3)
What makes you think those things AREN'T happen in the USA?
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:4, Insightful)
You guys really think this applies JUST to megaupload or corporations in general?
It also applies to use human beings thanks to NDAA2011 which allows the government to hold you indefinitely without trial. And now these recent statements make it appear they will hold you even after they lose the case because "this person was involved in criminal activities".
Isn't it wonderful the New Amerika that Obama and Bush have given us? The Constitution no longer has legal weight. It's rule of an oligarchy (the workers of the executive branch) to demolish or detain corporations & individuals at will. And trials be damned.
Re: (Score:3)
Barack 'The Betrayer' Obama, has now shown you the true overlords the RIAA/MPAA, if they command your assets be stolen and kept indefinitely, then they will be stolen and kept indefinitely, they don't need no stinkin' laws. Remeber what the Obama PR crew said when they were stacking the US department of justice with RIAA/MPAA lawyers, "it was all so they could keep a better eye on the RIAA/MPAA and the legal abuses". Well guess what, Barack 'The Betrayer' Obama, is a right wing tool and a puppet of corpora
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:4, Insightful)
Doesn't bother me any.
It's about time we had it out with the government over this "we decide it's involved in a criminal act, and therefore may keep it forever" bullshit.
It's one thing to find a bloody gun by a body or something. It's another to seize someone's money or property, declare it ill-gotten, then fail to bring it to court with the owner standing right there.
Bzzzt! Sorry. You either take it to court within a reasonable period of time (the Constitution defines this quite well, thank you) and prove it, or you have to give it back.
Sadly, we may need a constitutional amendment to force this.
Re: (Score:3)
Your argument makes no sense, because the money that the person gets for his work is still exchanged for his time and effort and investment, and it can be exchanged for other people's productive output. US dollars are worth 1% of what they were worth in 1913, but even at 1% things can be bought because of increase of productivity.
My argument makes no sense, because one of his main arguments makes no sense. That was the point. He argues that US money, not backed by gold, are not actually money and therefore being paid in dollars does not constitute the receipt of taxable income. My point was simply that if income in fiat currency has no value as he seems to believe, attempting to keep it rather than paying a portion as income tax is either pointless or hypocritical.
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah pretty interesting view there huh? Not only are they saying that they're above the law. But they're saying that the highest law in the land, is no longer the constitution and bill of rights. But the DOJ, and the whim of whoever is in charge. Yeah ... now that's going to go over very well, especially about the time it starts hitting appeal courts.
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Wasn't it Andrew Jackson who, when the supreme court ruled against him, made a comment along the lines of "and with what army are they going to enforce that ruling with?" and proceeded to ignore the courts ruling.
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Interesting)
He is supposed to have made this statement concerning the decision in Worcester V. Georgia (1832), "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" There is some dispute whether he actually said this or not but it sounds like something he would have said.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's why I always say, that the concept of "rights", "property" and "law" are illusions, only held up by the strongest one deciding to uphold them.
If the stronger ones are gone, or isn't on your side anymore, those concepts dissolve quicker than you can say OMFG, until all you are left with, is the law of the jungle.
And people *still* mod me down for it... Even when it practically jumps into their faces, like in this case...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No kidding rights, property, and rule of law can all go away quickly and things can dissolve into disorder. That's called a revolution, civil war, or state of anarchy.
You think you're some kind of genius for figuring that out? Everybody knows that without enforcement (and therefore, someone to enforce them) laws are nothing more then words.
People don't down-mod you for saying things like that, thes
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:4, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Not quite (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that most of said assets are outside the US, and the target of the investigation is also outside the US. The US Government had no jurisdiction to seize the assets in the first place. They also have no jurisdiction to hold onto the assets if the case is dismissed. In fact, they have no jurisdiction to prosecute either.
Re: (Score:3)
Remember, rights only apply to citizens of your country while prohibitions apply to everybody in the world.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to the world of "civil forfeiture". Property has no rights, so charge the property with the crime. The DEA's done it for about two decades now.
That said, the present case does seem to go a bit further than even that - At least in normal civil forfeiture, If by some miracle you can prove that the property had nothing to do with a crime, you can theoretically get it back; With Megaupload, the government hasn't even allowed for that nigh-impossible standard of winning.
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:4, Funny)
Umpteen years ago, I read that during the middle ages animals and even the weather were sometimes brought to court to answer for their crimes. I think, I understand now the motivation behind charging a pig with, say, heresy. In a word: Bacon.
Some things don't change.
Re: (Score:3)
I just would love to see Kim dot Com sue the US government for damages. In HIS country of choice, since the US government operate in all countries via Embassies, military bases or the like.
One thing that gets me (slightly off topic, put pertinent to the whole copyright and patent thing) is that apparently Texas has the most litigious friendly courts in the US. Why don't companies simply say that their product is not to be bought in Texas? Can't be much of a burden for major brands (I am thinking Minecraft h
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here are some of the benefits of all this control
Land is registered to stop it being stolen out from under you.
A car is registered so that police know who to call if you burnt body is pulled out of it.
A child is registered in order to make sure that you treat it properly, see that it gets taught to read and write real good and protect it from the possible harm of being brought up by a complete wing-nut.
You regis
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Long way of saying (Score:4, Insightful)
Like anarchy? Move to Somalia.
The western system will grind you to dust if it gets you into its gears but it is still a million times better even for the pile of dust then the pure anarchy of the libertarian.
Re:Long way of saying (Score:5, Insightful)
Libertarians are not anarchists although they are so far removed from the fascism of the Right and the communism of the Left that they must seem anarchists. Both the Republicans and the Democrats stand for Governmental control of the Citizens to the nth degree. The sheer volume of laws on the books in this country guarantees that every single citizen is a criminal.
Re: (Score:3)
Wait,... I thought the saying was:
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Re: (Score:3)
the time for voting (being effective) is over, friend.
we all know this.
why keep the lie going? are you a shill for the two failures know as D and R?
voting for devil1 or devil2 still gets you a devil.
voting, at least where it matters, is 100% useless at this point. admit it. the sooner we admit it the sooner we can move to the next step, whatever that might be.
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:4, Insightful)
You are one of the problems. There are more parties than just D&R.
In the last presidential election, more than 98% of the voters who bothered to vote, voted for D&R:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Result [wikipedia.org]
And here's something to think about:
Votes for Obama= 69,456,897
Votes for McCain= 59,934,814
The voters who didn't vote: approximately 77 million.
So if all those 77 million voters who didn't vote actually went and voted for someone else, that someone else would have won. Think about that.
And even if their votes were spread across different people who thus won't win, believe me the D&R would be a lot more nervous. Because in the next election, those voters might realize their power, get better coordinated and actually kick them out (of course if they still can't agree on who they want, then "the people have spoken", and you get D&R again).
Instead, the D&R can assume that the voters who don't vote, won't vote and literally do not count. Whereas more than 98% of the voters that do vote support D&R. So objectively the D&R are doing about as good a job as anyone can under the circumstances. How many more votes do you want them to get? 100%? They really are reflecting the people's will. Go talk to one of those "D" voters, they'll never vote for "R", and their "D" guy is the best. Same for the "R" voters.
So if you don't like the result, you should take it up with the voters who bothered to vote. The voters have clearly told their parties "keep doing what you're doing".
Talking about other ways of choosing the government means you're going against the 98% who bothered to vote. And that means you're the bad guy.
Sure those politicians might be bad. But they were elected. You weren't, so you ignoring the decision of the voters makes you as bad as a Dictator. Even if their decision is stupid, it does not make it any less democratic.
The only time I'd say other methods are justified is if there are no more elections or if the elections are very rigged (e.g. badly "Diebolded").
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Interesting)
It is actually just a tyrannical prosecutor, not the whole government.
It is a difficult issue, telling prosecutors what to do from on high, or giving them free reign to exercise their professional judgment.
Luckily, the courts aren't usually impressed by self-important prosecutors.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Do you know what scares me? It's that I can't tell if this prosecutor ever heard of Roland Freisler [wikipedia.org] or not, and if he realizes how uncannily close his argumentation is to Freislers famous outburst " Wir brauchen kein Gesetzbuch, Recht ist, was dem deutschen Volke nutzt", which translates as "We don't need any book of law, what's right is what gains the German people".
Obviously Freisler meant that he, and the Nazi regime in general, were the ones who were to decide what gained the German people, pretty much
Re: (Score:3)
I don't believe that. This kind of stuff is far, far too common on the part of U.S. prosecutors to wave it off as an anomaly. That's wishful thinking.
More generally, the fact that U.S. prosecutors are entirely immune from charges for malfeasance (not from any law, but by fiat from courts run by ex-prosecutors), means that prosecutors have nothing but incentive to accelerate their career by running roughshod over anyone's rights with impunity. Immunity for prosecutors is definitely a structural flaw of our g
Re: (Score:3)
Could you explain why simply expecting prosecutors to obey the law and not violate the Bill of Rights, like you and I are expected to, is such a "difficult issue"?
Re: (Score:3)
No, I'm sorry, it's not just a uncontrollable prosecutor.
"Oh, if Barrack knew, he would certainly fix this"
Yeah, right.
Obama is the one who appointed RIAA lawyers to head up the Justice Department copyright police ("Protection is Our Trademark")
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Since G.W. one law or incident after another is passed against the interest of the population...
Oh, this has been going on WAAAAAAY before ol' Dubya stepped foot into the White House...
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
no kidding
it IS time for a new revolution
this time the "well armed militia " will do what it was intended to do
remove a govt that is TOO corrupt and can NOT be fixed
some corruption one can NEVER get ride of fully
BUT
what we have now is not even in the shadows
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
remove a govt that is TOO corrupt and can NOT be fixed
How do you see this removal of government taking place? Sure, you could maybe round up enough of your militia to kill them all, but what then? Decades of education neglect has left you with a nation of morons and I guarantee that whatever you try and replace your government with, it will be worse. There are some drug lords in Mexico who might like to take a stab at leadership, if that helps.
I'm not disagreeing that there is a problem, and it needs to be fixed, and I don't know how you would fix it, but the moment you get out your guns and start shooting you'll have much bigger problems than you have now.
btw, kudo's on not posting anonymously when you are publicly inviting violent revolution. If you don't hear hammers batter down the door (you'd better run!) in the next few hours then you don't have it as bad as some countries.
Who needs hammers (Score:3)
It is simple (Score:3)
Get rid of the party system. Get rid of popularity contests and get rid of single sentence referendums.
The entire problem is that the running of a country, a society, a culture is FAR to complex to leave to religious lunatics and sound bite issue describers.
Religious lunatics? You don't have to believe in a talking bush to believe. Socialist, Capitalist, Communists and Libertarians and god knows what other feeble dregs exist, they ALL believe in the doctrine of their chosen fate.
An excellent example of this
Re: (Score:3)
Considering the number of times the US government has had a hand in (or is alleged to have a hand in) all kinds of covert ops to overthrow (or attempt to overthrow) various foreign governments it doesn't like (Iran in 1953, Pinochet in 1973, Guatemala in 1954, Bay of Pigs and others) I doubt the US would bat an eyelid at doing what it needed to do to stop an important state like California leaving the union if whichever lobby group or special interest group was lobbying the hardest wanted them to get involv
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Violent revolution is the only way to get rid of the corruption? I don't see how you can say that. We haven't really given voting a fair shot. Furthermore, if we're too lazy to bother voting, I don't really see us doing a revolu
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
At the risk of being waterboarded along with you in Gitmo, I will chime in on this one.
An overt revolution will fail badly. They have changed vital laws that protected us from the military crushing insurrection, so that they can now use it. It used to be a civil matter that the military had no business in. But we seen violation of that law back in the Clinton administration when they rolled tanks on Waco Texas. Since they seen we are too stupid or lazy to call them on it or hold their feet to the fire, they have grown great big balls and down right changed everything. Read about "Posse Comitatus Act" to get the gist of it and it's changes.
Not to mention, I think we signed the UN Small Arms Treaty Friday, and your arms will be registered, which the next step is to take them. It's how Hitler did it, I'm sure they are apt students. So any thoughts of an armed revolt are seriously fucked, even if you did succeed, the UN would step in as well, then you would have to kill all of them as well. As soon as you start that, we will be invaded big time and have to go to some kind of scorched Earth policy to get rid of them all.
Now where are you going to recruit for that kind of madness? Surely not from the fat, retarded, undereducated, lazy sons of bitches here. Do you think this waste of god damned space xbox generation is going to get off the couch to fight for something they have no clue about? Perhaps if football or pizza was threatened they might roll over and fart, but give it up concerning anything else.
Now I have studied this subject for a while and pondered it hard. There are ways to bring about vast changes but it's still fucked. Why? We already have an army here fucking with us from the Mexican Drug lords. Their god damn gangs would run amuck, they already have their hand deep in the asses of cities like LA. We've seen how they have threatened the medical weed shops with impunity, and some speculate that they influenced LA's city counsel to shut down those shops.
We've seen evidence of South of the border intent on retaking parts of America. Sure we all like to ignore this, and we can because we have a military that would kill every last fucking one of them and dance on their graves. But if we are fighting, they will stick a knife in our collective backs. Don't shit yourself for a second that they wouldn't. They already fuck up our border patrol and the people of that region and our pussy politicians are too afraid of the Mexican vote to do a damn thing about it.
Yes, we have a corrupt, fucked in the head government, but at least it's OUR corrupt, fucked in the head government. That means that we can fix the damn thing without genocide. This requires YOU and all of your little buddies to get off your asses and get politically active. This means that you need to be active during what they call "the grass roots" and you have to drag everyone you know and some you don't, kicking and screaming to the polls. You need to apply vast amounts of social pressure on "non-voters" to do their damn civic duty. We have amazing, unprecedented communications tools to get out the word, to organize and to act politically.
It takes brains, patience and hard work. There is no "fast food fix" for this. It didn't fall apart over night, nor will it be fixed overnight either. Until we have exhausted these tools and these means of peaceful and productive means of political change, don't be an asshole. Don't worry, if it's truly fucked, it can be dropped like a house of cards. But that is one hellish nightmare that we need to avoid at all costs. Humpty Dumpty doesn't go back together again, remember that.
So do us all a favor, and park the "armed revolt" thought in the garage. Save that "pissed off-ness" to drive your fat ass off the couch to get out and vote.
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not so optimistic anymore about our own soldiers firing on us. I followed OWS closely, mostly to see what kind of reaction our officials would take, and they didn't fail to disappoint me. When I see pictures of civilians peacefully protesting and getting manhandled, shot in the face with tear gas, etc by a heavy handed militant police force, my gut and heart just sinks. When NYPD and it's fucked in head mayor shoved journalists out of the way, contained them and arrested them, I knew we were and still are seriously fucked.
The whole "I don't agree with what you say, but defend to the death your right to say it." mantra has become a fucking joke after that. The media proved itself to be easily manipulated and a tool for propaganda against the movement. Now you don't have to agree with the OWS people, but if you take a look at how it was handled, it was all damn wrong. Imagine if it was your axe to grind and you and your ilk got treated that way.
I would have to wonder what would happen if an armed group such as the Tea Party staged protests like OWS, but armed like they have been in a lot of their meetings.
Re: (Score:2)
Demonstrations don't work when you have to hold them in free speech areas located far away from anyone that actually might pay attention. Got rid of those pesky protesters long ago, except of course in the case where the powerless are attacking other powerless people, e.g. funerals of peons and stuff like that. Strikes don't work because your job was sent overseas long ago, gotta be employed to strike. Voting doesn't seem to work since the government rigs elections by setting voting districts, only allo
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Yeah Okay (Score:4, Funny)
most of America is not like us complaining on Slashdot.
Thank god for that! Imgaine, 300 million people whining on some internet blog before returning to their basements to play war of worldcraft.
Re: (Score:3)
Now mod me to hell.
OK, it seems hell is "+5 insightful".
Re: (Score:3)
Biden is toast (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The goverment (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
[The government] should be brought to justice... This is insane and a clear message from the government to everyone: You have NO rights at all! Time to fight terrorism people and it starts at home.
Agreed.
But, don't be in any hurry to violence. Use the four boxes in defense of liberty in the order established. At this point, Ghandi achieves more than Patrick Henry. Don't provide a convenient excuse for the government to declare martial law and roll out the Nat. Guard.
But if we are finally forced to the last box, don't forget ol' Pat.
As for myself, I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees, but at the same time I'll not sacrifice myself prematurely in a stupid act of individual violence that achi
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The goverment (Score:4, Insightful)
I happen to own a surf-green strat, so I paid a lot of attention to your post and you are right. Don't bring out the guns. Yet. But something has to be done and the only force (and this is not the USA alone) are the people... It's revolution time as far as I'm concerned.
o/t - Nice. Actually, any strat I pick up becomes a "blue" strat ;) My strat is actually finished in a cherry/gold-burst. But it's a blue strat all the same. Same with the vacuum tube amp I built.
Back on-topic, you're point about it being all people, not just Americans, is spot-on. There is an international freedom movement growing. Did you know there are Italian "TEA Parties", as well as Serbian, Georgian, British, and about 15 other national TEA Party movements? There are reported to be 20 of them meeting this weekend in Dallas, TX.
People across the globe are hungry for freedom, and their governments have been starving them for too long. And once again, they look to Americans as examples of how to become free.
Failure is not an option. Fortunately, all we really have to do for victory is to remember, and never again forget, who we are as a people, why our Constitution was written the way it was, and what we stand for. Our failure to remember is what has brought us to this point. It is what must first change before anything else will.
An idea, a dream of freedom and liberty, is far more powerful than any weapons in any government armories or airbases ever could be.
Strat
Re:The goverment (Score:5, Interesting)
But, don't be in any hurry to violence. Use the four boxes in defense of liberty in the order established. At this point, Ghandi achieves more than Patrick Henry. Don't provide a convenient excuse for the government to declare martial law and roll out the Nat. Guard.
But if we are finally forced to the last box, don't forget ol' Pat.
"Ballot" was rendered inert as soon as we adopted the two-party, first-past-the-post system.
"Soap" stop being useful with the incestuous relationship between Corporates and Government.
So tell me how this story isn't pretty compelling evidence that "Jury" is FUBAR, too?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:The goverment (Score:5, Insightful)
I've spoken to a couple marine types after they've seen real action.. scary shit. They have little-to-no qualms attacking civilians if they are ordered to; for some the distinction between our civilians /or/ others' civilians doesn't even exist.
I grew up on military bases. I know a lot of military personnel, even up to a couple of full-bird colonels and two generals. We've actually had this discussion. I've yet to find any that would fire on US citizens, unless they were like radical Islamic types or similar.
If it came down to the government ordering the US military to "occupy" US cities and towns, round people up into camps, and basically carry out a "government takeover" and provide armed pacification and suppression against civilians, they would refuse, arrest the ones issuing the orders, and even launch an assault on government-loyalist positions if need be if things were that bad.
Google "Oath Keepers". There are many more that feel the same way but are reluctant to expose their beliefs, positions in the power structure, and/or telegraph any possible actions they might need to take in a desperate situation. Be assured a sizable chunk of the US NG and military will throw their lot (and their lives and military assets) in with the civilians in the event of such a takeover attempt.
What the real worry is for me are the treaties and agreements (both open and secret) with other countries that could provide for bringing in foreign troops for civilian pacification and rebellion suppression.
Still, the US government and any forces they employ will face the same threat that prevented both Germany and Japan from seriously considering invasion/occupation. A rifle behind every blade of grass, and knowing the kind of hardware hackers, etc, we have here in the US these days, new and ingenious IEDs lining every freeway, side-road, sidewalk, and footpath, and death waiting behind every window and door, plus our own home-brew drones. That's not even counting the military weapons and other assets that will surely be "liberated".
Unless they are willing to simply kill off ~70%-80% of the US population right from the start with WMDs, an occupation of the US would make Vietnam, Afghanistan, or any of the bloodiest campaigns of WW1 or WW2 look like a stroll in the park. Can you imagine? Former cops, gang-bangers, and mixed military all forming into ad-hoc combat units and working together against a common threat. Not the way I'd choose to unite the country, but revolution and upheaval does make for strange bedfellows when the feces strikes the rotary air circulation device.
I most fervently hope and pray that violence can be avoided. It would be such a waste of life and potential, and an unspeakable tragedy for so many. Sadly, sometimes those who lust for power and control make avoiding it impossible.
Strat
Re: (Score:3)
Sure. If the higher-ups were to tell them that's what they were doing. They wouldn't. They'd claim there were terrorist, drug
Re:The goverment (Score:5, Insightful)
It interests me that everyone here speaks of the US Military the same way they speak of corporations - as one giant hive mind with no dissent within the ranks. News flash: the military, like a corporation, is comprised of people who don't all think the same. In the event of the military being directed to take arms against civilians - of the same country no less - it is quite likely there will be increased instances of mutiny. The results would be ... cataclysmic.
Exactly. See my post above. A significant fraction of US NG/military will break ranks and join the civilians, bringing along their military weapons, training/experience, organizational structure, and other assets. A full-out conflict in such a scenario would be, as you say, cataclysmic. Likely cataclysmic for the entire world as well.
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much just exploding termites.
I think I saw that in a Loony Toons episode once.
Wait what? (Score:5, Interesting)
Guilty until proven innocent?
Re:Wait what? (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean Guilty even if proven innocent.
Who needs the law? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who needs the law? (Score:4, Interesting)
We have hope yet.
If NZ unfreezes DotCom's NZ assets he will have the resources to fight this case all the way to the supreme court. This is exactly the type of case we need to undo the illegal forfeiture laws in this country with a clear cut case of government abuse. Don't get me wrong, Dotcom's hands aren't clean, but I've never liked how the government proceeds with asset forfeitures to take away the defendants ability to defend themselves.
'Murica... (Score:2, Funny)
Fuck yeah.
Face it (Score:5, Insightful)
If you wanna bend over ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Get used to it.
If you wanna bend over and get it, that's your choice
But do not bet on it that many will follow you
Re: (Score:2)
Stop blaming the people when the corporations have gotten both political parties to corner the election market.
They own the media and aren't afraid to lie, cheat, and steal to get their way.
They are also not above rigging the votes to make sure they win no matter how much the voters hate them. See the ohio article for proof. If they can't smear and spin their way to winning the election they're more than happy to just steal it by force with a few well timed security glitches. There's a reason we slashdot
The Forefeiture Racket (Score:5, Informative)
This happens with citizens all the time.
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket/singlepage [reason.com] (Behind a paywall, bu the first paragraph will give you the gist.)
You get arrested for a crime. Your assets are seized. Charges are dropped or you are found not guilty. They don't give you your assets back.
Here's another article (Score:5, Insightful)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-government-is-the-looter/2012/05/18/gIQAUIKVZU_story.html [washingtonpost.com]
It's much worse than what I've said. Some people commit a crime on your property and they seize your property.
What about the 6th Amentment? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What about the 6th Amentment? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bart: The Constitution? I'm pretty sure the PATRIOT Act killed it to ensure our freedoms.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're close, but it has more to do with being present in the US. Immigrants generally have the same legal rights as citizens. Very few rights, such as voting, are spelled out for citizens, almost all other rights are for people. So in the case of gitmo the SCOTUS ruled not they mostly don't have standing in US court because they're actually in Cuba, and theoretically have access to Cuban courts instead.
I understand that that is ridiculous, but in a different way than what you claim.
Presumably if Kim Dotcom
Could always pull the BS they do in drug cases (Score:2)
Story tag (Score:2)
This story is tagged "piracy". One can only assume it's referring to the opinions of the US Attorney...
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's robbery not piracy. The assets weren't seized on the high seas.
That's Not a Good Message (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only that, but the government believes it can continue to freeze Megaupload's assets and paralyze its operations even if the judge grants the motion to dismiss.
The message they are sending seems to be: If you do something that might piss off a powerful enough lobby in the United States, even if the legal system sides with you, get your money out of the country.
That doesn't seem like a very smart message to send.
Big Kid... (Score:2)
Then i wake up, and realize that it is not just a feeling...
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Then in theory, if the government sues your property, you can intervene in the lawsuit.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Civil forfeiture is a key part of the war on drugs. If not for it, you could practically buy illegal drugs at will. I'm more than willing to give up some rights considering how much safer this makes us all.
- Lots of stupid Americans
Re: (Score:2)
The "war" on drugs makes you feel safer? In the 30 years or so that I remember of it I've felt less and less safe as drug dealers get more militant and violent The police have gotten far more violet to match but they inflict that on everyone while they retreat behind more layers of protection.
They're not the legal government, they're a gang. (Score:2, Informative)
If they don't follow the law then they're not the government they're just a gang.
Like the thugs in any 3rd world hole - they're already making threats of what they'll do regardless of what the court rules.
Pack them up and send them off to North Korea where they belong.
Expired (Score:5, Insightful)
Biden brought the Hollywood money back in the day, and that got him the VP slot and his **AA bosses some seats in the Justice Department, including Mr. MacBride who's working Kim Dotcom today. Despite the whole "supporting your vice president" thing, that's a liability moving into new elections. I don't want to think the O-man needs to or wants to make these sacrifices as an incumbent. He's a constitutional scholar and I think, a geek like us. At least I hope so.
BTW: I really hate the politicization of /. during crazy season. And yet here I am contributing to it.
Re: (Score:3)
Obama is no geek. He's no academic, or intellectual. He's a 'community activist' (read agitator) who has adopted the mannerisms of the intellectual.
If you doubt me, just try to find the scholarly work you would expect of someone with his academic credentials. I'll wait.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow, someone has not been paying attention. I mean: I donated and phone-banked for Obama in 2008. But his record on Constitutional issues is uniformly abysmal. I am now convinced that he has no moral principles at all.
Power and Arrogance -- a poisonous combo (Score:5, Insightful)
ALL the branches of the US government have become corrupt outlaws who have no clue as to what the Bill of Rights means. It's behavior for the last 8 years is a dictionary example of "power corrupts", made worse by the insufferable arrogance they display.
Who's racketeering here? (Score:2, Informative)
The US government accused Kim Dotcom of racketeering. And now they say they themselves are the real racketeers. Oh the irony.
Judge Dredd... (Score:2)
... I am the law...
Re: (Score:2)
Could anyone remind me... (Score:3)
...why I should care for American copyright laws? Ahh, forget it. I would ignore them anyways.
Re:Why?? (Score:5, Insightful)
What the US govt got from this?
The US government does not benefit anything from this, but on the other hand, those who are paying the politicians, ie, the king makers get to thumb their collective noses down to the rest of us
Re: (Score:2)
But I thought corporations were people....
Re: (Score:2)
No one.
Re: (Score:2)
With legal ideas such post or pre court semijudicial software and hardware disappearances - why risk your data in the USA?