Kim Dotcom Wins Case Against NZ Police To Get Seized Material Back 111
New submitter Mistakill writes "It seems the case against Kim Dotcom for the NZ Police isn't going well, with Kim Dotcom scoring another victory in his legal battles. Police have been told they must search everything they seized from Dotcom and hand back what is not relevant to the U.S. extradition claims. Justice Helen Winkelmann told police their complaints about the cost and time of the exercise were effectively their own fault for indiscriminately seizing material in the first place. She wrote, 'The warrants could not authorize the permanent seizure of hard drives and digital materials against the possibility that they might contain relevant material, with no obligation to check them for relevance. They could not authorize the shipping offshore of those hard drives with no check to see if they contained relevant material. Nor could they authorize keeping the plaintiffs out of their own information, including information irrelevant to the offenses.'"
A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:5, Insightful)
Kim Dotcom really comes across as an amazing douche.
The thing is that in this everyone else in this whole saga is SO douchey that he actually manages to come across as a sympathetic character.
It's really quite incredible if you think about it.
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that this is getting sorted out is really unfortunate.
Really? I would say that the rule of law shouldn't be suspended simply because the accused is a massive (to quote an AC from a previous thread) chucklefuck.
Really, it's best for everyone if he wins this, because despite being a prat he was subject to a massive abuse of the law from several governments simultaneously. It's far more important that the rule of law is maintained than one dickhead gets away with being a dickhead.
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah sure. From the boring point of view justice and so on.
From the entertainment side though, not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
Rule of Law based purely on entertainment value is an interesting idea. I may want to subscribe to your newsletter.
Re: (Score:3)
I'll be the judge of that. Seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that's what "trial by combat" was.
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:5, Interesting)
One douche is a threat to no one. Another douche is a threat to you, me, and pretty much anyone in the world. (Wow, how often do you get to say something that grandiose and sweeping without it being an exaggeration?!)
Root for the first douche, this time. It's ok for him to lose, but it really is important that the second douche lose much worse, publicly and with the most exposure and embarrassment possible. The second douche needs to know that all societies and laws hold them in utter and complete contempt. (The first douche, otoh, already knows that.) And any politician who ever hopes to be elected in the US, needs to know that "fire those guys" absolutely must become a part of his platform. If someone can run for next President or next term of Congress without publicly stating they intend to clean house at the DoJ, then we aren't making enough noise.
Re: (Score:2)
While most of your list was spot on, I must take exception to this. If the questions are solely for the purpose of incriminating you, (and I'm sure they are), why would you answer any of them at all? What benefit is that to you?
Or to put it another way, Don't talk to police [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:5, Insightful)
Amateur douchebags. (Score:5, Insightful)
You want to see how it is really done check out washington d.c.
Douchery with the almost complete complicity and full support of the press.
You want to do this kind of stuff, you need the press.
Re: (Score:2)
Silly rabbit. Rules are for people, not governments.
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:4, Insightful)
Correction, rules are for poor people...
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:4, Interesting)
. . .because rich people own governments anyway.
For example, the current administration is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Goldman-Sachs. The previous administration appeared to by owned by a combine of Halliburton and the major Defense contractors.
The question is, which of our Corporate Masters will own the NEXT administration . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Correction, rules are for poor people...
Don't say that too loudly. A certain degree of illusion is necessary to maintain order.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't say that too loudly. A certain degree of illusion is necessary to maintain complacency.
TFTFY. Though I will (sadly) grant you that the two terms are, effectively, the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh no. That can not stand! Remember my friend, Corporations are people too.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, we can't put corporations in jail, which makes them pretty much a class of 'person' which is very different from actual people.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Douchiness is irrelevant.
To what?
I was merely observing that this involves such unpleasant characters that a normally rather unsympathetic character actually comes off looking better than the rest.
Douchiness is everything to do with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree.
I think it's the US government that did what they did, not NZ law enforcement. This was proven by the case itself and the push to extradite. I however, do have a problem with serviscope's comment about being a douche, because last I checked how people consider someone "being a douche" is not even consistent between individuals and is not illegal or even relevant, as stated.
Re: (Score:3)
I disagree.
I think it's the US government that did what they did, not NZ law enforcement. This was proven by the case itself and the push to extradite. I however, do have a problem with serviscope's comment about being a douche, because last I checked how people consider someone "being a douche" is not even consistent between individuals and is not illegal or even relevant, as stated.
Just because someone else told them to do it shouldn't get them out from it. Technically everything that happened on NZ soil is the fault of the NZ law enforcement. They did the simple mistake of trusting the US governmental agencies and acting like they were told.
That is not a minor mistake and makes the NZ prosecution and coppers on the case big douches. Marionette douches are still douches.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with NZ still being responsible, and I think that's why the judge is pushing back so much on the NZ prosecution: they basically followed the US's statements without even reviewing them, and already apologized many times. It's not enough, but it's a start.
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't direct RIAA, it was law enforcement on behalf of the RIAA. So I don't think it's unreasonable to blame the US if they're allowing themselves to be proxies.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that, if the first and popular comments address that as a relevant issue, people might get the idea that the personality of the affected characters actually matter.
That's why it's so easy to effectively use ad hominen against public characters sometimes, discrediting them completely in the eyes of many.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, you might defend scoundrels. But you're defending them from even greater scoundrels. We have more to fear from our leaders than from our criminals.
Re: (Score:1)
When defending the lesser scoundrel, you still end up with nothing but scoundrels
Re: (Score:2)
When defending anyone who is on the opposing end of an abuse of power, you're also defending your future self.
Re: (Score:2)
First, they came for the douchebags, and I said nothing, because I was not a douchebag.
Then, they came for the assholes, and I said nothing, because I was not an asshole.
Then, they came for the jerks, and I said nothing, because I was not a jerk
Then, they came for the loudmouths, and there was nobody left to save me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A confederacy of douchebags. (Score:5, Insightful)
it's not as incredible as a complete shitpost for a first post that has no relation to the situation and instead is an ad hominem comment about Kim Doctom. Whether he has an ego or not, whether he's douchey or not, who *cares*?
the problem is the US government is breaking the law just to try to prosecute file sharers, and no government in the world (including the US's own caselaw) really support this concept.
Re: (Score:3)
the problem is the US government is breaking the law just to try to prosecute file sharers, and no government in the world (including the US's own caselaw) really support this concept.
My whole *point* was that this higlights the incredibly bad behaviour of the law enforcement so very well. Despite Kim Dotcom being a crook (that's not ad-hom: he has been convicted) he still looks all shiny and clean compared to the law enforcement agencies involved.
You actually managed to be in very violent agreement with me
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not in agreement with you at all. I'm highlighting that you shitposted on your first post and made no statement other than "Dotcom is a douche".
"Doctom is a crook" is just as homimen (you stating otherwise just means you're intellectual dishonest) in relation to your ad-hom in your original post. "Doctom was convicted of things in the past" would not be an ad hominem statement. I know that in your world you believe I agree with you, but I assure you as "violently" as possible, that I think you have si
Re: (Score:1)
It's really quite incredible if you think about it.
Not really, the entire Middle East thing is the same deal.
Precedent (Score:1)
Well, that's basically how the big boys start a precedent. Before they go and bust your teenage son or grandma, they'll use expanded powers to nail a few low-lifes such as drug-dealers, terrorists, pedos, etc.
Then, they come and say "see, we're doing this for the good of society"
Once it's engrained in society, then they move to something more accepted but disliked by many. For example, porn. Then "copyright infringement" etc etc.
Re: (Score:2)
So? (Score:2)
Does it matter? What matters is the law. If we change our attitude towards the validity of the law because we like or dislike someone we're going down the wrong path.
Goodness me, apparently NZ justice is real (Score:5, Funny)
An overzealous police force being made to face the consequences of its own misconduct?
What a country!
Re:Goodness me, apparently NZ justice is real (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize, that they already sent copies of the hard drives across the ocean to the States. And no matter what that NZ judge says... Kim is already guilty according to our most important citizens - business. This is data they had no right (literally) to take. He's a dick - but they're worse.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Goodness me, apparently NZ justice is real (Score:5, Interesting)
Failure to abide by the decision may influence the court's decision to extradite him.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Just a wild guess: part of a defense against extradition will be that the suspect's local rights will not be respected by the requesting country.
Now in this case, that argument sure gains a lot of ground against a country that fails to uphold NZ law...
Re:Goodness me, apparently NZ justice is real (Score:4, Funny)
To paraphrase a golden oldie. . .
Kim Dotcom is a dick! He's a reckless, arrogant, stupid dick. And the US DOJ are pussies. And the RIAA is an asshole. Pussies don't like dicks, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes: assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is: they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate - and it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes, pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves... because pussies are an inch and half away from ass holes. I don't know much about this crazy, crazy world, but I do know this: If you don't let us fuck this asshole, we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit!
You know, it's a sad world, when "Team America" dialogue fits a real-world situation. . . .
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If they do that, the judge will *know* they are lying, and will hit them even harder. There were *plenty* of perfectly legitimate files on those servers. People have tried suing to get access to their files. All of that is on the record.
Re:Escape clause included for police (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, there seems to be two facets to the ruling:
1) That they hand back anything irrelevant to the case and do not keep a copy themselves.
2) That they hand a copy of everything that is deemed relevant.
So Kim will get access to all the data once more and the police will lose access to all data and hardware that isn't directly relevant to the case itself.
Would never happen in the U.S. (Score:3)
In the U.S., when the Feds take your stuff, they won't give you squat, even if they have nothing on you. They'll keep your computers for years, then finally return your stuff if they don't have a case. They won't let you get copies of your data, either.
With your computer gone for so long, you will have had to bought new ones, and the old one will be obsolete by the time you get them back.
The rule really ought to be that they take your computer, mirror the hard drives, then give it back unless they have im
Re:kim dotcom (Score:5, Insightful)
Its the rights of assholes and attention whores you have to stand up for. Once those are violated, you get a precedent. Don't let it happen.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Can we have a month hiatus on Kim Dotcom stories? Please??
Never mind, make it a permanent hiatus. He's now just a grandstanding figure and I think he is beyond the "news for nerds" scope that /. was supposed to have.
Seconded. Then we can focus more on John McAfee.
Re:kim dotcom (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:kim dotcom (Score:5, Funny)
Kim Dotcom sold me a 3D printed Raspberry Pi for 20 Bitcoins you insensitive clod!
I used it to program an Arduino based robot that will deliver GMO wheat to Julian Assange.
Re:kim dotcom (Score:5, Insightful)
Do we really need any more info about this attention whore?
Is he the attention whore, or are the authorities? It seems to me he's just defending himself, while the Keystone Cops are going out of their way to maximize any and all bad press that can possibly be brought against them. Whether we know all the intricasies in the law is one thing, but shouldn't the cops have at least some competence in wielding it? They've apparently forgotten entire swaths of related concepts such as warrant procedure, jurisdictions, evidence handling, ... How do they retain their jobs with this level of performance?
Re:kim dotcom (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh do fuck off.
This is an important case for the boundaries of where the line between legitimate hosting and illegal file sharing is drawn.
It's about as important and relevant as any news you can get on Slashdot because the result of it has real repercussions - either the internet is safe from the authorities arbitrarily shutting down hosting companies because they feel like it, or the authorities win another battle to the point where state/law enforcement based censorship slips even further towards companies like Google also being guilty of supporting infringement to a legally culpable degree.
Can we have a permanent hiatus on you commenting instead?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
we were having pretty much zero stories on megaupload or dotcom before his arrest... which made him news for nerds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It would be a perfect trifecta, not only was he violated, his rights, his private property, not only was he threatened with deadly force for ... nothing at all, they should add this one more thing: suing him for wasting THEIR time and resources.
And ten years later, Buttle is erroneously arrested for being a terrorist heating engineer...
Damn, now I have the "Brazil" theme song stuck in my head...
Re:Cost (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think that would fly since, as you quoted, the judge pointed out that the expenses were their own damn fault.
Now, if the citizens of NZ decided to sue their government for wasting so many resources on a personal vendetta against a single individual... THAT I can see making it to court.
Re: (Score:2)
Now, if the citizens of NZ decided to sue their government for wasting so many resources on a personal vendetta against a single individual... THAT I can see making it to court.
Kim seems to be (or have been) quite cozy with a few of NZ' officials.
So it's not so much a case of personal vendetta but one of those 'le'ts roll over for the US government' cases.
Re: (Score:2)
Now, if the citizens of NZ decided to sue their government for wasting so many resources on a personal vendetta against a single individual... THAT I can see making it to court.
Kim seems to be (or have been) quite cozy with a few of NZ' officials.
So it's not so much a case of personal vendetta but one of those 'le'ts roll over for the US government' cases.
it seems like a case of damage control after they had a case of stupid by assuming that the US government wouldn't ask them to do anything stupid and illegal.
Re: (Score:3)
Kim seems to be (or have been) quite cozy with a few of NZ' officials.
I admit to not knowing much about NZ politics, but if it's anything like what we have here in the States, friend of politician A == enemy of politician B.
Re: (Score:3)
Now, if the citizens of NZ decided to sue their government for wasting so many resources on a personal vendetta against a single individual... THAT I can see making it to court.
Never going to happen.
NZers have a "she'll be right" attitude to everything.
No matter how shocking or horrifying the actions of their government, Kiwis just sit back and say "oh well, never mind" and then ask "what's for dinner, where's my beer?"
The government(s) of this country have forgotten that that their job is to *represent* the citizens, not rule over them like some despot dictator.
In just the past year or three we've had a raft of instances where the courts have ruled that the government or its agen
A fair conclusion (Score:3, Insightful)
Granted, considering the volume of information would be problematic to sift through, but is it fair to say
"since there's so much, let's just seize the lot, including every person's legitimate files stored there and keep them to ourselves"?
Like that wouldn't backfire..
Re:A fair conclusion (Score:5, Informative)
Granted, considering the volume of information would be problematic to sift through, but is it fair to say
"since there's so much, let's just seize the lot, including every person's legitimate files stored there and keep them to ourselves"?
Like that wouldn't backfire..
That's what they get for using American-style strongarm tactics, without an American-style kangaroo court system to back them up.
Meanwhile, in America (Score:4, Informative)
Innocent motorists are routinely relieved of their cash and belongings by police, without ever being charged with a crime, and with no recourse to recover their stolen property.
They should just extradite him to the US along with all of his seized property, and then the US government can just keep it forever under its insane civil forfeiture laws.
Re:Meanwhile, in America (Score:4, Informative)
If the FBI could get him to the US, they'd put him in a room with a single agent with no camera or recording device. He'd decide to sign a confession, but just before he did he'd try to attack the agent and he'd have to be shot dead with an entire magazine's worth of bullets.
Re: (Score:2)
They should just extradite him to the US along with all of his seized property, and then the US government can just keep it forever under its insane civil forfeiture laws.
That's what they're trying to do. Unfortunately, NZ judges want this other stuff dealt with before the extradition trial.
Re: (Score:1)
I know. Certain information being copied without permission... it makes my skin crawl just thinking about it! I can feel myself melting away... my artificial scarcity is vanishing!
This Day in Slashdot box (Score:2)
2006 ThePirateBay.org Raided and Shut Down [slashdot.org]
Biggest Surprise (Score:2)
It still feels like living in a bizzaro simulacrum when confronted with the fact that the fucking entertainment industry can and does send out deadly paramilitary units across the face of the planet to defend their f
Re: (Score:2)
This is not U.S. law enforcement we are talking about.
If this happens in the U.S., both side will be engaging in military warfare, and when Kim gets overwhelmed the entire complex will turn into something similar to the Mount Carmel Center.
The USA was never a Christian nation, no matter what other people have said. The commandment "Thou shall not murder" does not apply to the government.
Re: (Score:2)
He couldn't make his mind between the British 's' and American 'z' spellings, and in the end he traded the 'e' to make room for both letters. (:
Re: (Score:2)
He was being multicultural. The one with the sz was the Czech version!