Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Piracy The Almighty Buck The Courts

Kim Dotcom Says Legal Fight Has Left Him Broke 117

Posted by timothy from the broke-the-bench dept.
mrspoonsi writes Kim Dotcom, the founder of the seized file-sharing site Megaupload, has declared himself "broke". The entrepreneur said he had spent $10m (£6.4m) on legal costs since being arrested in New Zealand in 2012 and accused of internet piracy. Mr Dotcom had employed a local law firm to fight the US's attempt to extradite him, but his defence team stepped down a fortnight ago without explaining why. Mr Dotcom said he would now represent himself at a bail hearing on Thursday. He denies charges of racketeering, conspiring to commit copyright infringement and money laundering. He told a conference in London, via a video link, that his lawyers had resigned because he had run out of money. "The [US authorities] have certainly managed to drain my resources and dehydrate me, and without lawyers I am defenceless," he said. "They used that opportunity to try and get my bail revoked and that's what I'm facing."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kim Dotcom Says Legal Fight Has Left Him Broke More

Kim Dotcom Says Legal Fight Has Left Him Broke

Comments Filter:
  • i don't believe him.

  • Justice is served! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zentigger ( 203922 ) on Thursday November 27, 2014 @06:12PM (#48476059) Homepage

    If you can't actually beat 'em, just bankrupt 'em or drive 'em to suicide!

    I love the modern concept of "justice"

    • Not quite sure that this is 'justice', though definitions have gotten rather shifty of late.

    • Re:Justice is served! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bloodhawk ( 813939 ) on Thursday November 27, 2014 @06:59PM (#48476237)

      considering the money he spent on extravagance, political campaigning and other crap I would hardly say he was bankrupted by the system. System may not have helped but his own spending is more of an issue here.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by murdocj ( 543661 )

        When you look up "entitlement" there's a picture Kim Dotcom.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hodet ( 620484 )

        Yam enough of the poor Kim articles. I only have so much self-righteous rage to go around. Sounds like he made his bed, now he can sleep in it.

      • Re:Justice is served! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) * on Friday November 28, 2014 @11:03AM (#48479265) Homepage Journal

        The thing is, no matter how much of a douchbag you think he is the fact that he is fighting illegal actions by the US government against a citizen of another country is enough lend your support. Sometimes you have to support scoundrels if you want to support freedom.

        • The thing is, no matter how much of a douchbag you think he is the fact that he is fighting illegal actions by the US government against a citizen of another country is enough lend your support. Sometimes you have to support scoundrels if you want to support freedom.

          NO I really don't. There are so many genuine cases happening all the time where people are being treated like shit by the government that there is no needed to support a scumbag, especially a rich piece of shit scumbag that has no one to blame but himself for his situation.

    • If you can't actually beat 'em, just bankrupt 'em or drive 'em to suicide!

      I love the modern concept of "justice"

      They didn't bankrupt him; he did that. He could probably have hired less experienced lawyers to represent him. My guess is his lawyers were up-front about the rates and he decided to keep using them anyway.

      It's a bad system, and his choices sucked at the point where he had already committed what is technically a pretty major crime, but he still had choices.

      Pretty much everyone I've ever met--with a very few exceptions--believe that copyright violation should get noncommercial violaters no more than a smal

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        But this is commercial infringement. It's a big deal.

        "It's commercial, so it's a big deal." doesn't follow. I certainly don't agree that it's a "big deal."

        The system still sucks, but is anyone claiming he's actually an innocent guy getting railroaded?

        I claim that the government have violated all sorts of standard procedures and therefore deserves to suffer for it. It doesn't matter how 'bad' Kimmy is.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Is it serious, though? I get that he is likely to have violated the letter of the statutes, but it's my understanding that he was basically running an offsite storage service with de-duplication, so technically he would have been in volition, but in practice each of his customers would have had licenses, and if he hadn't been using de-duplication to save storage space, he may have been in the clear.

        So, if his external facing service was functionally identical to a non-infringing service, is it really a ser

        • Re: Justice is served! (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Is copyright infringement ever a serious crime to begin with? Is there a victim somewhere? It's been shown time and again that the bulk of infringements are not lost sales, so it's really just rich corporations crying "no fair!" because someone got to see/hear their stupid crap for free. Which boils down to "we're a bunch of babies who get butthurt when everyone doesn't play by our rules because we're obsessed with the illusion of power and control". I don't take their stupid monkey games seriously, and ne

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        He could probably have hired less experienced lawyers to represent him. My guess is his lawyers were up-front about the rates and he decided to keep using them anyway.

        Eh, this is why we should just move to a Judge Dredd style of justice. People don't need legal counsel. The fuck is their problem with having their assets seized and being imprisoned effectively by a foreign power? They only have themselves to blame, amirite?

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        'Erm' yeah, like cos you know, innocent until proven guilty because we don't believe you, when the you is the government and they have to prove their claims in a public court. This of course because without public courts governments have proven to be totally 100% corrupt when it comes to accusing people of crimes and basically chopping off their heads for all and sundry reasons. So yeah innocent and the government most definitely does not have the legal right to use the prosecutorial system as a penalty in

      • Re:Justice is served! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by aaaaaaargh! ( 1150173 ) on Friday November 28, 2014 @04:32AM (#48477841)

        They didn't bankrupt him; he did that.

        That's splitting hairs. Without his legal team, he had been extradited by now.

        But this is commercial infringement.

        Highly doubtful. He offered free access to delete content, a system similar to the one that Youtube has implemented, and had an additional team of employees to deal with copyright complaints. Three different legal teams checked the business model and gave him the thumbs up.

        is anyone claiming he's actually an innocent guy getting railroaded?

        I find it very unlikely that he's actually guilty of criminal copyright infringement. You would think that this law is designed for people who actually infringe copyright, but apparently not in the US. If he's guilty, then thousands of file hosting companies that are still in business would be guilty as well, and the executive boards of the biggest copyright infringers on earth Google and Youtube would all have to be in maximum security prison by now.

        The problem is, however, that by "guilty" you might mean "guilty according to the faulty undue process of corrupt US justice, acting on illegaly obtained evidence and on the basis of breaking the laws of other souvereign nations". Well, in that case, he might indeed be guilty, although he still will still be able to make a pretty good case. The US does in fact not even have jurisdiction over his company, they had to resort to mind-boggling legal tricks to still be able to reach him -- tricks that no souvereign nation should allow to be pulled, but apparently some of them like New Zealand and UK are nothing more than additional states of the US.

        • So... Where are those three legal teams now that gave him the incorrect information that has led him to this situation?

          They should be defending him if he followed their paid advice and ended up in hot water as a result.

          All three teams would agree that this is a cut and dry case and step in to defend him.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Tom ( 822 )

          and had an additional team of employees to deal with copyright complaints.

          By encouraging it and actively looking to get high-profile illegal content uploaded, yes. Did you miss all the news about what the prosecution discovered in their internal e-mails and stuff?

          I find it very unlikely that he's actually guilty of criminal copyright infringement.

          Given his history, even without knowing anything about this case at all, my bet would've been on his guilt. He's a career criminal, he's been convicted before, changed countries at least twice to avoid the legal consequences of his actions - yeah, I would be more surprised if he were innocent.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Ichijo ( 607641 )

      Justice has always been about revenge above anything else. Otherwise there wouldn't be a death penalty because it isn't much of a deterrence, it provides no possibility of rehabilitation or repayment, it's just as effective as life in prison for societal protection, and denunciation is kind of a silly reason to punish someone.

      • And being convicted as a felon isn't a guarantee of repayment either or rehabilitation. Prison isn't about rehabilitation its about punishment always has been. I hear its really hard getting a job after having served there time.

    • It's just an eye for an eye.

      Just think of all those musicians he has driven into bankruptcy by his unfettered permission of copyright infringements, like ehm... well... I'm sure we can come up with at least someone... anyone? Please?

  • It was his album.

  • try selling your mansion.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MrL0G1C ( 867445 )

      It's not his, he's renting it. But of course you'd know that if you'd read this story when it was posted on Tuesday. [slashdot.org]

    • I agree with your sentiment, but he doesn't even own that
  • He needs money, maybe he can do something to make money, like, you know, start up a web site to share stuff? In North Korea? He's a match for their glorious leader's ideology.

  • Legal costs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by precisenz ( 922730 ) on Thursday November 27, 2014 @06:22PM (#48476105)
    Sure, the legal costs to defend himself are totally what did it... Not the $4million failed political campaign he ran this year, or the failed music album, or the extravagant lifestyle he lives...

    • Re:Legal costs (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Dahamma ( 304068 ) on Thursday November 27, 2014 @08:04PM (#48476505)

      Apparently he once spent over $1M to charter a yacht and throw nonstop parties during the Monaco Grand Prix. Hard to feel sorry for someone who pisses away $1M in 3 days on parties. As if the multiple convictions for fraud, espionage, and embezzlement weren't enough...

    • Well, of course! After all that, how could he pay for those legal costs? Not to mention the fact that they cut off his main source of income - megaupload.com.

      Without having to defend himself from all that legislation I'm sure he wouldn't have been bankrupt now. Or at least, not yet.

  • Here's a plan (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Thursday November 27, 2014 @06:25PM (#48476127)

    Change you name to Kim Putin, and no one will mess with you.

  • Billionaires wanted (Score:3, Insightful)

    by n3r0.m4dski11z ( 447312 ) on Thursday November 27, 2014 @06:34PM (#48476155) Homepage Journal

    If I was a billionaire, I would kick him a few mil. Its fun to have someone stand up to these turkeys. He did appear to be winning and putting egg on the face of the americans for a while there.

    We must remember that the USA tried to pluck a citizen from another country by strong arming their justice department. As a non US citizen, fuck all that shit. US law isnt world law and god forbid that ever becomes so. It is so enough already as it is!

    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by T-Bone_142 ( 917711 )

      If I was a billionaire, I would kick him a few mil. Its fun to have someone stand up to these turkeys. He did appear to be winning and putting egg on the face of the americans for a while there.

      We must remember that the USA tried to pluck a citizen from another country by strong arming their justice department. As a non US citizen, fuck all that shit. US law isnt world law and god forbid that ever becomes so. It is so enough already as it is!

      If you were a billionaire you would probability be in the same country club as those turkeys and have a vested interest in the mater.

  • ...is he able to get a public defender?

  • The Kim Dotcom Bubble .. has popped ?

  • Fucking Hypocrites! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by danthemanvsqz ( 3856229 ) on Friday November 28, 2014 @01:42AM (#48477469)
    Wouldn't be nice if the US Government went after the assets of the bankers on Wall Street who commit fraud and launder money in the same way they've gone after Kim.com.
    • US Government take care of there own and yes you are right but as usual the rich get away and the middleclass and poor are the one who always pay. Its less costly to put away drug dealers and put up cameras to catch red light runners mostly people stuck in the middle of the intersection because of poor light design and placement.

  • A parasite (he didn't get a fleet of flashy cars by donating disk space to anyone) gets sucked dry by a bigger, nastier parasite.

    Sorry, but if you live by a dog-eat-dog creed, don't expect tears when your pet poodle is a predator's desert.

    I'm sympathetic with ISOhunt, who got crippled by the UK government, as I'm willing to bet that people after illegal ISOs searched elsewhere. They're a major source of information on ISOs for F/L/OS software, though, which is entirely legal. They got a raw deal on that, because of the bad name the *AA have given torrents. Blocking the others won't do the UK any good, but that's not the point. Nor is it the point that these services index, not host. The point is that it doesn't matter whether the links point to legitimate or illegitimate content, they're tarnished not by what they index but by the mode of transport used.

    Kim DotCom is another matter. He raked in an awful lot of money by doing very very little. He'd make a great bank CEO or politician, such is his level of verminicity. Had he done essentially the same, with far less profit (it's ok for him to live, just not ok for him to own half the cars in New Zealand), far less arrogance (like I said, a bank CEO or politician), and far less swagger (maybe, just maybe a touch of humility), I might pity him more. The humble earn at least some respect for being humble. It's rare enough.

    If he'd presented his service as "common carrier", then that too would be worth respect. That's legal, that's all about NOT looking at what's there and NOT being shot in the process. DotCom's approach was to be a braggart. Sorry, but that kills any respect.

    As judges are renown for disliking the arrogant, swaggering braggart type, that might well have cost him every court case contested. Even on the rare occasion that justice is blind, it still has a sense of smell and arrogant, swaggering braggarts stink.

  • Perhaps he shouldn't have spent $3M trying to corrupt the government with his failed political party.
    It all worked out in the end, the incumbent party he was trying to take down gathered even more votes that the previous election.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by LesFerg ( 452838 )

      Perhaps he shouldn't have spent $3M trying to corrupt the government with his failed political party.
      It all worked out in the end, the incumbent party he was trying to take down gathered even more votes that the previous election.

      We don't all carry a NZ flag to wave around in a patriotic frenzy, and most of us can't remember more than the first 6 words of the national anthem, but dammit he shouldn't have attacked our Prime Minister, thats our job.

      If the paperwork had been properly prepared and everybody had sought the appropriate legal advice in the first place, he woulda been pushed into a plane when they first stormed his rent-a-manor instead of being left to waste taxpayers money here in Auckland, not to mention the man hours was

  • about time (Score:2)

    by Tom ( 822 )

    Sure, there were blunders and probably a few laws were broken during his prosecution, but to all the fools rooting for Kimble here I say: About time justice finally caught up with this guy who's been a career criminal for most of his life, sold out his friends to the law before to get a better deal for himself, and has dodged prison by changing country too often already.

    I hope they put him away for good.

    And I hope his fanclub here will learn the difference between downloading movies for free and rooting for

Slashdot Top Deals

Avoid strange women and temporary variables.

Close