Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Piracy Crime Government The Courts

FBI Asked Megaupload To Preserve Pirated Files, Then Used Them Against Dotcom 241

avxo writes "According to an article on the New Zealand Herald, Kim Dotcom says his team has evidence showing that the Department of Homeland Security served a search warrant on Megaupload in 2010, forcing it to preserve pirated movies. According to Mr. Dotcom, those preserved movies are the center of the latest legal battle. 'When the FBI applied to seize the Megaupload site in 2012, it said the company had failed to delete pirated content and cited the earlier search warrant against the continued existence of 36 of the same 39 files.' He added: '[t]he FBI used the fact the files were still in the account of the ... user to get the warrant to seize our own domains. This is outrageous.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FBI Asked Megaupload To Preserve Pirated Files, Then Used Them Against Dotcom

Comments Filter:
  • by arbiter1 ( 1204146 ) on Saturday November 24, 2012 @10:08PM (#42084647)
    But there is something in the law that protects megaupload from this kinda BS. They complied with a search warrant and held the files on their system like FBI asked, now they are being shut down cause they kept them.
  • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 24, 2012 @11:46PM (#42084989)

    No, over 2000 users uploaded these files. Mega is trying to use the structure of their site where they hashed an upload and only kept one copy of the file to say that because there was only copy and because NinjaVideo had uploaded 36 of these files at some point (because NinjaVideo uploaded thousands if not hundreds of thousands of files), they couldn't delete those files because the order from the DHS instructed them not to. But that's a ridiculous assertion— even if they were told not to delete the files (really they were just told not to delete the NinjaVideo account, so they're using a liberal interpretation to include these files) they had an obligation to prevent the files from being used for further illegal purposes.

    Phrased another way, a court order requiring preservation does not mean Mega is allowed to continue to allow others access to those files and continue to break the law. Those 36 files were accessed, downloaded, and shared illegally after the point at which they were required to be preserved, and access removed under the DMCA.

    Mega cannot use a design component of the site which was done for cost purposes, as a defense against criminal liability.

  • Re:Nowhere fast (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Runaway1956 ( 1322357 ) on Sunday November 25, 2012 @01:15AM (#42085265) Homepage Journal

    I'm not so sure that statement is true. Bearing in mind, there are three kinds of people in the world. Those who make things happen, those who watch things happen, and the biggest group, those who wonder what the hell happened.

    I'm in and out of the first two groups, on this and other issues. That other group? They are the enablers, who permit big media to do what they do. They aren't big media, they aren't the Axis, they are just there, giving tacit support to whatever government and big media might do in their names. The so-called sheeple. Hollywood, or any other member of the **AA tells them to go watch a movie for twenty bucks, the sheeple just say "Bahhh", and they run with the herd down to the cinema.

    Ehhh - someone will come along directly to tell me that I've lost all credibility with the word sheeple. Whatever . . .

  • Re:Wow. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 25, 2012 @07:43AM (#42086185)

    It isn't. MegaUpload DID make infringing links nonfunctional promptly upon report.

    The indictment (have you read it?) is that they didn't take down the underlying files which were still accessible via other links which had NOT yet been reported as infringing.

    I'm not sure how this gels with the language of DMCA 512(c) which states "remove OR DISABLE ACCESS TO" [emphasis mine], but that demonstrates bad faith on the part of the FBI.

  • Re:Nowhere fast (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MartinG ( 52587 ) on Sunday November 25, 2012 @09:28AM (#42086431) Homepage Journal

    Having kids is no excuse. I do have kids and admittedly its more tempting to "give in" but I still manage not to support the MPAA or RIAA at all.

1 Angstrom: measure of computer anxiety = 1000 nail-bytes