Feeds

back to article Uh-oh! Kim Dotcom is back with a brand new Megaupload site

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom has announced that he will launch a new file-sharing website called Mega in January. Despite the fact that he's fending off the US authorities' allegations of industrial-scale copyright infringement, Dotcom has made it clear to the Feds that he couldn't give a toss. His previous file-sharing website …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Bronze badge

Life is increasingly like

a Neal Stephenson novel.

6
0
Terminator

Re: Life is increasingly like

Time to put a cloud host in earth orbit, aka, Straylight...

2
0
Thumb Up

Re: Life is increasingly like

Ha, yeah, the Crypt came to mind instantly. Actually, Kim probably read the book, too.

0
0
Thumb Up

Good luck

I wish him luck with that, although I don't expect a 'good result.' Giving the man the finger generally seems to annoy them no end and extra-legal means don't mean a thing to a US-based court judge so long as they are delivered in front of the bench.

7
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good luck

"Pulling the dragons tail" springs to mind.

Which reminds me, I should not post on the internet!

2
0
g e
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Splendid!

Always happy to see someone sticking to the USA Man.

May I be the first to wish him a fluffy cat, swivelly chair and an oak-panelled map of the world with flashing lights thereon!

16
0

Nice, but ...

"The new Mega encrypts and decrypts your data transparently in your browser, on the fly"

That should stop folks up/downloading full-length films then. The sequel will be out by the time it's finished.

1
0

Re: Nice, but ...

Not if the user system is doing the encryption/decryption. To have this done on the net provider side would be costly and cpu intensive.

Most of us no longer use 486's to do sthuff on the interwibbles.

3
0
Facepalm

Swiaa Banking

Sounds a bit like a swiss bank, and we all know how upstanding and reputable they are.

2
0
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: Swiaa Banking

But customers of those banks don't care about that. That's the whole point of using them....the same principle applies to Mega.

3
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

There is very good advice in this article.

"... will not use American hosting companies, domains, internet providers or anything else with Uncle Sam's stamp on it"

Nuff said.

13
0

Re: There is very good advice in this article.

Every peice of radio equipment these days seems to have the FCC stamp on it - no wifi for him then ;)

I do wonder what mobile he uses too....

0
5
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: There is very good advice in this article.

No it doesnt. I checked 5 laptops, 2 routers, 3 mobile phones and a WiFi card. No mention of the FCC.

2
0
Silver badge
WTF?

I wonder if UK Home Sec May has 'Future Proofed' this?

Poor old May, she claims the new spy and wire tap bling they are buying is 'Future Proofed'.

This venture, along with Silent Circle, is the new reality.

Let's see what GCHQ can do with this. All those little clouds filled with impenetrable secrets from the Middle East and 'terrorists'.

7
0
Bronze badge
Meh

Re: I wonder if UK Home Sec May has 'Future Proofed' this?

Oh, I'm sure they'll be able to crack it. But they won't be able to do it on mass, to millions of people, so an acceptable balance will be achieved,

0
2

Re: I wonder if UK Home Sec May has 'Future Proofed' this?

'En masse'. It's French, y'all.

6
1
Bronze badge

Re: I wonder if UK Home Sec May has 'Future Proofed' this?

Simple UK answer: RIPA

1
0
Thumb Up

I'll be buying

I'll be buying even though I have google drive for free! Why?

Because I support life, liberty and the a̶m̶e̶r̶i̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶w̶a̶y̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶l̶i̶f̶e̶

I want this to work out

3
0

That'll work.

Sorry, I think this bit is wrong:

"... cannot access the encrypted uploaded data, absolving themselves of any responsibility for contents of the files."

This should surely be:

"... cannot access the encrypted uploaded data, in a somewhat implausible attempt to absolve themselves ..."

1
1
(Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

Re: That'll work.

What was in our brains did not translate perfectly into the written word. The sentence has been tided up.

C.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: That'll work.

Will it automatically also change the filenames to something that doesn't give the game away.

Even if encrypted, a file called "IronMan_4_ripped.mp4" looks awfully suspicious.

0
0
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: That'll work.

No, it does work - until the they are notified of infringing content - which they can remove just like they used to.

What it protects them from is any requirement to police or inspect the content.

1
0
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: That'll work.

How will they read an encrypted filename?

0
0

Re: That'll work.

Decryption glasses?

1
0
Terminator

Re: That'll work.

Awesome reference to a fine fine film...ah, Rowdy Roddy Piper...a fine Canadian. Time to get *your* glasses.

0
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

"It is understood Mega's staff and owners cannot access the encrypted uploaded data, absolving themselves of any responsibility for contents of the files"

Is this the opinion of the journalist or of me.ga??? It hasn't absolved any other service provider, so what makes anyone think its going to absolve me.ga of responsibility now.

1
1
Silver badge

seems reasonable

If I rent out a lockup garage or warehouse to someone and they store naughty things there, am I legally responsible?

If I rent a house to someone and they indulge in naughty activities there, am I legally responsible?

If I deliver a letter containing naughty plans for someone am I legally responsible?

If I run a massive public broadcasting organisation and someone has rumpy-pumpy in a dressing room, am I legally responsible?

If I store encrypted files for someone am I legally responsible?

The person doing the naughty thing is the one responsible.

14
1
Silver badge

Re: seems reasonable

yes, you are. At least so far the US government is concerned.

And yes you are to all of them, if it can be proven that you were aware of said illegal activity.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: seems reasonable

Todays answers

No to all questions

Answers after Mrs May gets her bill through.

You are a terrorist. Go to jail. Do not pass the court.

7
0

Re: seems reasonable @Pen-y-gors

You can be. It's Aiding and Abetting under certain circumstances such as if you knew what was going on.

2
0

Re: seems reasonable

If only things worked like that.

Don't forget 'strict liability'

0
0
Silver badge
Pint

Re: seems reasonable

"If I rent out a lockup garage or warehouse to someone and they store naughty things there, am I legally responsible?" - Yes, if you are aware of it and choose to ignore it.

"If I rent a house to someone and they indulge in naughty activities there, am I legally responsible?" - If you are running a brothel essentially, then yes.

"If I deliver a letter containing naughty plans for someone am I legally responsible?" - Ask the Al-Qaeda couriers sat in GITMO.

"The person doing the naughty thing is the one responsible." - They are, but by acting as a wilful and willing enabler who deliberately turns a blind eye and fails to report the crime, you share responsibility in the eyes of the law.

Like it or not, that's the way the cookie crumbles. Standing by and helping people break the law is generally considered illegal, in most cases.

5
1
Flame

Re: seems reasonable

Remember that, even if we had legal systems not violently corrupted by big business and money, legally responsible is not a lot to do with morally responsible.

It has even less to do with factually responsible.

You are responsible for whatever a big company says you are responsible for. In the same way, they are not responsible for whatever they have decided they are not responsible for.

3
0
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: seems reasonable

But if the data is encrypted, you are not likely to have been aware of it's content.....

2
1
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: seems reasonable

"If I rent out a lockup garage or warehouse to someone and they store naughty things there, am I legally responsible?" - Yes, if you are aware of it and choose to ignore it

Not so simple.

1) Mega is specifically refusing to even know what's in there, so by definition they are not aware of any naughty things stored in there.

2) "Legally Responsible" in what jurisdiction??

4
0
Silver badge
Big Brother

"Legally Responsible"

Which is where Cyberspace is going to get interesting, and there is no law that currently answers the problem.

Is it where the data is hosted?

Is it where the data owner is located?

Is it where the processing server is located (which may not be in the same jurisdiction as the storage)?

Is it where the company owner is located (which may be a registered company and subject to different laws for directors than from individuals)?

Is it where the domain name is registered?

Is it where the copyright content owner is located?

Is it at the choice of anyone who wants to raise the legal action in cases where there may be a choice (think patent law in the US where the case is filed in certain states which are more sympathetic than others - what would happen if the EU had a similar "federal" circuit of courts)?

Many of you will have opinions on these - please don't post replies, there is NO right answer at the moment.

1
1

Re: seems reasonable

"Standing by and helping people break the law is generally considered illegal, in most cases." ***

*** unless you work in politics or banking.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: seems reasonable

"1) Mega is specifically refusing to even know what's in there, so by definition they are not aware of any naughty things stored in there."

Nice idea, but to put it into perspective, that's like a drug mule or afore-mentioned Al-Qaeda courier trying to avoid prosecution by not knowing what was in the briefcase. If you have reasonable suspicion to think that the bloke you are selling a firearm to is going to cap someone with it and they do, you bear a share of the blame in the eyes of the law. Which is kinda fair enough, when you think about it: Wilful ignorance shouldn't be a carte blanche to engage in smuggling, or to aid and abet criminals.

Kim is basically going to be handing people the tools to commit an offence with and then sticking his fingers in his ears and saying "LALALALA I don't know that you're breaking the law". Except it won't even be that opaque to him: For the site to be used for its (less face it:) intended purpose of sharing movies and music, the Keys will have to be easily accessible to anyone. Hell: They'll probably be listed in the file description on the site, which makes the encryption and 'invisibility' to the site admins a moot point.

I don't see it really working out to well: He doesn't have a shred of plausible deniability and his entire defence is based on technicalities and lying under oath if it goes to court ("I honestly didn't know anything illegal was happening on my website, judge!")

2) "Legally Responsible" in what jurisdiction??

New Zealand? If that's where he is and his business is.

He's clearly trying to ensure that the US can't touch him. That might work. It depends on who has the best lawyers, I guess.

1
1
Silver badge
Stop

Re: "Legally Responsible"

"Many of you will have opinions on these - please don't post replies, there is NO right answer at the moment."

Please don't try to censure debate on it, though.

And there *are* laws that answer part(s) of the problem.

0
0
Silver badge
Holmes

Re: seems reasonable

"unless you work in politics or banking."

Not true: Look at the kind of shit financial institutions get into via the actions of a few rogue traders fixing rates, for example... and they didn't even *know* about it. Likewise, the current hoo-ha as regards NoTW pivots around whether senior figures *knew* if the law was being broken.

If you can establish plausible deniability (which Kim is trying to do via the "It's encrypted, so I don't know it's illegal" thing), then you might be able to avoid culpability. If that plausible deniability isn't plausible enough ("I didn't know the dodgy guy who gave me a grand to carry a bag through customs had put drugs in it!"), then you're in trouble.

0
0

Re: seems reasonable

"Nice idea, but to put it into perspective, that's like a drug mule or afore-mentioned Al-Qaeda courier trying to avoid prosecution by not knowing what was in the briefcase. If you have reasonable suspicion to think that the bloke you are selling a firearm to is going to cap someone with it and they do, you bear a share of the blame in the eyes of the law. Which is kinda fair enough, when you think about it: Willful ignorance shouldn't be a carte blanche to engage in smuggling, or to aid and abet criminals."

Couriers... not a drug mule. A courier may carry certain items that are illegal but under their terms and conditions you are not allowed to do that. Similarly i would presume you are not allowed to host content on me.ga that is unlawful/copyrighted etc. However, just cos they provide a hosting service doesn't make the company unlawful or guilty of a crime. They provide a service just like a courier does. However, if you are willingly providing a service to known terrorists or drug barons then of course ignorance isn't going to save you.

0
0
Windows

Re: seems reasonable

In London it would certainly not be reasonable to assume that. In Operation Rize the Met opened almost 7,000 safety deposit boxes and sent the directors to prison because some of the boxes contained contraband.

0
0
Alert

Re: seems reasonable

If I rent a house to someone and they indulge in naughty activities there, am I legally responsible?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/03/09/calgary-landlord-growop-woes.html

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: seems reasonable

Not actually 'No' to all questions.

If you rent a house to someone who runs a meth lab or similar out of it. You, the home owner, will be fiscally responsible for some very expensive clean-up, government inspections, and regulatory paperwork. Not to mention the tremendous loss of equity IF you can even sell the house again.

With luck you won't go to jail or at least spend a lot of time in jail ... but it will definitely be financially devastating.

0
0
Holmes

@!Psyx Re: seems reasonable

Kim is basically going to be handing people the tools to commit an offence with and then sticking his fingers in his ears and saying "LALALALA I don't know that you're breaking the law".

Quite. So when is Google cloud service (and other cloud services) being charged then?

0
0
Bronze badge

Far enough the USA were Tards

As usual,

But the guy was still allowing people access to ripped off goods (aka stolen) He was also moving money about in an attempt to not pay taxes.

You can't, on the one hand claim to want to do wtf you want and not pay for it, then with the next ask for the protection of the people you have been ripping off.

Yeah the USA are idiots, and their legal system and the way its foreign policy works explains how people can hate them enough to kill themselves in order to hurt them, but this Kim guy is not a nice robin hood persona deserving of any compliments.

He hunts baby dolphins as well apparently

2
4
Silver badge

Re: Far enough the USA were Tards

I don't want to weigh in and defend the guy here - I know nothing abut whether he is a nice chap or not, but I jave to clear you up on one point - copied is not stolen. Stealing something deprives the owner of it, copying it does not, although it may prevent them from profiting by metering access to it.

Copying != theft != piracy.

Whether copying is morally right is another question, but by sttempting to conflate it with other 'serious illegal' activities, copyright owners are doing themselves no favours when it comes to credibility.

9
1
Silver badge

aka stolen

You have bought into the propaganda.

To steal something requires that you deprive someone of that item. He might be guilty of copyright infringement. But that should be a civil not a criminal offence.

5
0
Silver badge

Re: Far enough the USA were Tards

"He was also moving money about in an attempt to not pay taxes."

Google, Vodaphone, Starbucks, .......etc. It's what legitimate organisations do :)

8
1
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Far enough the USA were Tards

"But the guy was still allowing people access to ripped off goods (aka stolen) He was also moving money about in an attempt to not pay taxes."

Yeah: People aren't allowed to do that.

Only companies and corporations.

6
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.