Feds Shut Down Megaupload.com

[obfuscator]

Actually, I'm a software developer for a company with 1500 employees. And in my experience, there are a comparable number of poorly designed and poorly supported commercial applications and free/open source ones.

So you should understand the difference between a poorly designed product and a poorly supported product. Poor design goes the way of the dodo unless the product is adapted quickly and with organisational objectives and user interface in mind. There's no money to be made if your product's crap. Organisations tend not to touch much in the way open source/free because of lack of support, it's usually buggier and it's slower to evolve, even if it's very good. They're not comparible because commerical ones wouldn't make the money to keep them commercial and they can be adapted to suit the organisations wants/needs in a timely fashion.

 

These are basic fundamentals *you* should know as a developer.

I do know those fundamentals, and in my experience the scenarios you mention are often not true. I've seen plenty of commercial applications that are both poorly designed and poorly supported, terribly buggy, and extremely slow to evolve.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that crappy software comes in both varieties; commercial and open source.

[Guest jrhairychest]

So.....there's a lot of software dev companies out there spewing out crappy products and surviving then......yep right! Let's be realistic, it's not a 50/50 ratio on these things. Any organisation producing commercial software has to keep ahead of the game and if a client isn't happy they normally fix those issues in good time. Free/open source gives no guarantees on anything. Tha's why few companies will use them. The main 'client' of these are the home user.

[Alg]

So.....there's a lot of software dev companies out there spewing out crappy products and surviving then......yep right!

It works for McDonalds :twss:

 

In all seriousness, crap is in the eye of the beholder. You could have a crappy program, but people will still use it if it's useful or has some other advantage. It might have some feature that a portion of users can't stand, for example. Or it's just more accessible: Everyone knows what Photoshop is, while Paint.net is a bit more obscure. Information about the former would be much easier to find. Or the commercial product is all that people need: As bad as they might be, the virus scanner programs that Best Buy includes with a new computer are enough for the guy that's just going to be checking his email and maybe Wikipedia.

 

That, or being the only one in this discussion without some kind of computer science background means that I'm talking out of my ass :-P

[the-whisky-bar]

There's a wondrous way to force sub-par software on people, and it's called compatibility requirement.

 

^ pretty much this.

[mitcheltr]

I wonder if Dotcom will be convicted, I doubt he will have to go behind bars for 20 years.... Also the claim of 500 Million USD in damages seems to be made up out of thin air, there is no way to measure this really.

[Howlin0001]

http://torrentfreak.com/elite-anti-terror-police-went-after-megauploads-kim-dotcom-120207/ that is an interesting read.

While last months shutdown of Megaupload has been well documented, the finer details of the raid on Kim Dotcoms mansion have only just been revealed. A new and astonishing report features a house tour and in-depth discussion with Dotcoms bodyguard. He was confronted by dozens of armed police, some from New Zealands elite anti-terrorist force, who also demanded of a nanny: Do you have any bombs?!

 

Even after taking in the details of todays 3Newz report several times, it is harder than ever to comprehend what happened at the Dotcom mansion last month.

 

We knew that dozens of police swooped on the location in helicopters and we knew they were armed. But what is even more unbelievable is that some of them were from the Special Tactics Group, New Zealands elite counter-terrorist force.

 

STG, nicknamed Super Tough Guys, train with the countrys Special Air Force and are sent in to deal with the most violent of offenders. Yet no one in the Dotcom household had any record of violence. Indeed, their main target was a man suspected of online copyright infringement a computer related offense.

 

Wayne Tempero, Dotcoms bodyguard, told 3Newz that the police were armed with assault rifles and sidearms STG are known to use M4A3 carbines and Glock pistols. Tempero explained that two firearms were held in Dotcom mansion two shotguns, both his, legal, fully licensed and locked away in safes.

 

At 06:45 Tempero was woken by a horrendous noise and after dressing and running outside he was confronted by a huge cloud of dust being kicked up a helicopter hovering just above the ground.

 

Tempero, wearing just a t-shirt and track pants with his hands held up, and was ordered by a flak jacket wearing armed officer to lie on the floor. Tempero said that the noise of the helicopter and doors being smashed elsewhere on the property was so loud that if the police did identify themselves, he didnt hear them.

 

The armed police went into the indoor play area which had 3 kids inside one aged 3, one 4 and another 15 months, together with their Filipino nannies. From there they proceeded to one of the nannies rooms, kicked the door down and demanded to know if she had any firearms or bombs.

 

Tempero said he asked the nanny twice if she was sure they asked if she had bombs she said she was. Maybe thats the kind of thing that Filipino nannies do, Tempero said.

 

Outside people were being handcuffed and put on the floor. Two security guards, Tempero himself and the Filipino staff, were placed next to a van containing barking dogs.

 

Meanwhile the police had gone upstairs and were trying to smash down the door to Kim Dotcoms quarters. Tempero said Dotcoms wife tried to give them the security code but they werent interested and told her to go downstairs.

 

Police smashed down three doors to get to Kim and when Tempero was allowed back upstairs, six officers with sledgehammers and a circular saw were trying to smash into what they thought was Dotcoms hiding place. It was in fact a broken service elevator/dumb waiter (below).

 

 

Dotcom had actually followed a prearranged plan formulated by his bodyguard which involved him hiding in the Red Room to ensure his safety. Tempero was asked what would have happened if a couple of police had simply turned up and asked for Dotcom to come down.

 

He would have complied with everything, we would have sat at the large table, he wouldve probably offered them breakfast and he would have complied with everything, Tempero said.

 

Would he have done anything to destroy the hard drive, to take down Megaupload? 3Newz asked. Certainly not, why would he? He would be destroying his defense, Tempero responded.

 

 

Despite the massive police and apparent counter-terrorist operation against him, Dotcom was in the Red Room alone for more than half an hour.

 

If Kim had a Doomsday setup where he could delete his harddrive or takedown Megaupload, would there have been sufficient time for him to do that had that been his intention? questioned 3Newz.

 

He couldve done that within seconds, said Tempero.

 

There can be little doubt that Kim Dotcom and the other operators of Megaupload are accused of serious crimes and ultimately a court will decide if they are innocent or guilty. But whatever the scale of the alleged offenses, these are white collar issues computer matters and whatever he may or may not have done, Kim Dotcom is not a terrorist and has never been accused of being one.

 

Heres the excellent 3Newz video report. Its over 10 minutes long but worth the time.

 

Judging by the 3Newz reporters tone, hes struggling to see the connection between the alleged offenses and the response by the authorities. And he isnt the only one.

[Racheya]

That's ridiculous and to me just goes to show how trumped up this whole affair is.

[Danqazmlp]

Before we can say it's ridiculous, does anybody have a copy of NZ procedures?

 

When a man is wanted for 500m USD worth of charges, the police will take no prisoners. With how much money he had, he would easily have the ability to escape and leave the country swiftly, which is more than likely why the police went in fast and hard. Hindsight is a great thing, but when dealing with large scale criminal operations, the police cannot take any risks. It's better to be safe than sorry, and nobody was hurt.

[nine naked men]

I didn't think New Zealand had a police force. Learn something new everyday. Good for them.

[Furah]

I didn't think New Zealand had a police force. Learn something new everyday. Good for them.

 

Same here. I just thought that on the rare occasion a NZ farmer got drunk and hit his sheep we sent some of our police officers over there.

[Guest jrhairychest]

That's ridiculous and to me just goes to show how trumped up this whole affair is.

 

Depends on your point of view. If you support piracy then you'll pretty much go along with the article and its point of view because that's what you want to believe. Sometimes you've got to look at things from a different point of view. This article contradicts some of the things said.

[Nomrombom]

"Internet's Dr. Evil"

 

"Bond villain lair"

 

>broken intercom

>smashing doors, multiple SWAT type teams

 

The police response was ridiculous and unnecessary.

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

That's ridiculous and to me just goes to show how trumped up this whole affair is.

 

Depends on your point of view. If you support piracy then you'll pretty much go along with the article and its point of view because that's what you want to believe. Sometimes you've got to look at things from a different point of view. This article contradicts some of the things said.

 

 

You know, looking at the Daily Mail main site really calls into question what their intentions are - are they really trying to present an unbiased story, or do they want to make Kim Dotcom look like the worst scum that ever spawned? Admittedly, as you so put it, if you support the international pressure and subsequent raid, then you'll go along with it because that's what you want to believe.

 

You'll just have to forgive me if I want to look around and listen to what everyone's saying about this whole matter before I go with the crowd.

 

I won't say that Kim Dotcom was a saint, nor will I say that Megaupload was only ever used for legitimate purposes. What I will say is this: The measures that they took to get this person locked up way exceeded anything that would be necessary. Not to mention, it totally screws over his entire family and staff over an [alleged] $500 million loss in revenue claimed by the RIAA.

[Guest jrhairychest]

You know, looking at the Daily Mail main site really calls into question what their intentions are - are they really trying to present an unbiased story, or do they want to make Kim Dotcom look like the worst scum that ever spawned? Admittedly, as you so put it, if you support the international pressure and subsequent raid, then you'll go along with it because that's what you want to believe.

 

You'll just have to forgive me if I want to look around and listen to what everyone's saying about this whole matter before I go with the crowd.

 

I won't say that Kim Dotcom was a saint, nor will I say that Megaupload was only ever used for legitimate purposes. What I will say is this: The measures that they took to get this person locked up way exceeded anything that would be necessary. Not to mention, it totally screws over his entire family and staff over an [alleged] $500 million loss in revenue claimed by the RIAA.

Precisley why I said that there can be more than one perspective. It just depends who you go with on the context and what your own point of view is. It's not rocket science to note that those who support the Torrentfreak article are those who aren't in favour of Megaupload being shut down at the time....oh, it wasn't for the free stuff honest guv :rolleyes:.

 

I'm suprised you need to read a number of articles to reach your own point of view on the subject. Do you need to be told which point of view to have?

 

It's up to the authorities in question how they deal with something like this. If there's no evidence to support the claim then he'll be released. By your own admittance you know yourself this organisation and Kim weren't exactly cosher. As far as his family or his staff are concerned I couldn't give a toss if they get screwed over. If he's obtained money by illegal means that means his staff and his family have benefitted from it.

[Erewhon2]

I haven't read this whole thread, but I have been dipping in and out of it since it started.

 

Essentially what I don't understand is why there is any 'sitting on the fence' or advocating for piracy? Copyright piracy is illegal, plain and simple. If sites like Megaupload only had home made videos available for download, or others with no copyright issues...then fine, knock yourself out and download/upload what you want. But that isn't the case, they conduct activities that are illegal in most if not all of the world. And don't start giving righteous justifications, this is hardly a life and death choice here. I do not want to have a criminal record or be prosecuted in civil or criminal court, so I don't break the law, end of story :shame:

[Racheya]

Yeah you say that, but ask me how such a large site is able to control what users upload before it's uploaded, not after as they were previously? Given this line of thinking, YouTube, Facebook, Google... everything should be shut down since it's copyright piracy, plain and simple.

 

Copyright infringement is illegal, in some places, but short of shutting down the internet you can't expect sites to be able to stop ALL infringements from happening.

[Nomrombom]

Well the problem is just that - it's on almost every site on the internet, yet only some of them are being attacked. What gives?

[Alg]

Well the problem is just that - it's on almost every site on the internet, yet only some of them are being attacked. What gives?

Probably because MU was apparently not operating within the laws as it claimed. One of the early pages on this thread had a thing about how they didn't actually delete copyrighted content as they should have/claimed to have. Yeah, the rest of the internet pirates, but it doesn't claim to do otherwise (And, in fact, revels in it :razz: ). Plus, sites like Youtube do get hit by that kind of thing regularly; If you use it to listen to music, you're bound to have noticed that a lot of videos get taken down due to copyright claims. Similarly, Youtube/Google and Facebook aren't file hosting/sharing/whatevering sites. Megaupload was.

[Nomrombom]

For all the stuff they have on them they might as well be. And if you have a youtube downloader, Youtube is a filesharing site.

[Sbrideau]

Yet they won't touch youtube, seeing how there are Vevo channels and such.. And youtube is basically the same thing...

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

Yet they won't touch youtube, seeing how there are Vevo channels and such.. And youtube is basically the same thing...

 

They've gone after Youtube before, it just didn't pan out in the courts.

[Furah]

Well the problem is just that - it's on almost every site on the internet, yet only some of them are being attacked. What gives?

Probably because MU was apparently not operating within the laws as it claimed. One of the early pages on this thread had a thing about how they didn't actually delete copyrighted content as they should have/claimed to have. Yeah, the rest of the internet pirates, but it doesn't claim to do otherwise (And, in fact, revels in it :razz: ). Plus, sites like Youtube do get hit by that kind of thing regularly; If you use it to listen to music, you're bound to have noticed that a lot of videos get taken down due to copyright claims. Similarly, Youtube/Google and Facebook aren't file hosting/sharing/whatevering sites. Megaupload was.

 

I've spoken someone who has a job for one of those companies that basically sue people on the behalf of the copyright holders and said that MU was one of the better file hosting sites in that they tended to respond to requests in a timely manner and actually do take things down.

[Jonanananas]

Well the problem is just that - it's on almost every site on the internet, yet only some of them are being attacked. What gives?

Probably because MU was apparently not operating within the laws as it claimed. One of the early pages on this thread had a thing about how they didn't actually delete copyrighted content as they should have/claimed to have. Yeah, the rest of the internet pirates, but it doesn't claim to do otherwise (And, in fact, revels in it :razz: ). Plus, sites like Youtube do get hit by that kind of thing regularly; If you use it to listen to music, you're bound to have noticed that a lot of videos get taken down due to copyright claims. Similarly, Youtube/Google and Facebook aren't file hosting/sharing/whatevering sites. Megaupload was.

 

I've spoken someone who has a job for one of those companies that basically sue people on the behalf of the copyright holders and said that MU was one of the better file hosting sites in that they tended to respond to requests in a timely manner and actually do take things down.

 

It was explained earlier in this thread that MU did not take down content, they merely disabled one link to the content. Now, if multiple users wanted to upload the same content to MU, the site would only save it once and simply give out different links that point to the same content. When asked to take the content down due to copyright, they only removed the single link they were asked about - if other people had another link,they could still access the content.

 

As for why MU was attacked and not other sites - most likely because a lot of these other sites have servers in other countries where hosting stuff like this is not illegal or something like that. If there is the legal oppurtunity to go after these sites, the entertainment industry WILL.

[Guest jrhairychest]

Yet they won't touch youtube, seeing how there are Vevo channels and such.. And youtube is basically the same thing...

 

They've gone after Youtube before, it just didn't pan out in the courts.

 

Seems so. From reading the New York Times article Youtube now has "revenue-sharing" agreements with a lot of media organisations and it complied with a take down notice of 100,000 vids by the next day. Megaupload are you listening?

 

There's also an embarrassing number of points where both Google and Viacom did certain things.....quite underhandedly :-?

[Erewhon2]

Yeah you say that, but ask me how such a large site is able to control what users upload before it's uploaded, not after as they were previously? Given this line of thinking, YouTube, Facebook, Google... everything should be shut down since it's copyright piracy, plain and simple.

 

Copyright infringement is illegal, in some places, but short of shutting down the internet you can't expect sites to be able to stop ALL infringements from happening.

 

That wasn't really my point. My emphasis was on our actions as members of the public, I stated that I choose not to break the law, others choose to download pirate copies therefore break the law consciously and with intention. That is what I don't condone...there is no justification for those actions than self-gratification. Your point suggests it's all the fault of the sites that offer these downloads. Yes they are at fault but are impossible to police properly, therefore we have to be accountable for our own actions.