MPAA & Megaupload Want In On Hearing Over Whether Former User Can Get His Data Back

from the jockeying dept

In the ongoing saga of all of the Megaupload servers that the federal government seized and then handed back to hosting company Carpathia, telling them to effectively destroy them (and with it all sorts of important evidence in the Megaupload case), the judge is considering holding a hearing to dig into some of the questions raised by the case -- leading a few motions to be filed. The first, of course is by Kyle Goodwin, represented by the EFF, over his desire to get his data back. The filing also raises significant questions about the entire situation:
... the available record already shows that the government acted (and continues to act) with a callous disregard for third-party property rights in data stored on Megaupload. For example, the government knew Megaupload operated a data storage business, and thus held the property of third parties lawfully using Megaupload’s storage services. The government knew its search and seizure of Megaupload’s assets would deprive such third parties of the ability to access and retrieve their property. In seizing domain names and executing the search warrant at Carpathia, the government took constructive possession of all the third-party owned data it had seized and to which it had prevented (and continues to prevent) access by their owners. The government then “released” the third-party owned data in a manner that deliberately made the data both inaccessible to property owners and subject to government-sanctioned destruction, while at the same time blocking all reasonable efforts to allow access.

These failings are striking given that the government is well familiar with the need to accommodate third-party Fourth Amendment rights through minimization when it executes searches and seizures, especially of electronic material.
Of course, Goodwin isn't the only one asking the court to pay attention. Megaupload itself pointed out that it should be included in any such hearing, even though it's technically outside of this part of the dispute. It notes that if the courts order the data retrieval, someone who understands what's on the servers and how to find the relevant material would be helpful. Furthermore, the company is concerned about how the servers will be handled, since it still believes there's useful evidence there that the DOJ appears to want to destroy.

Of course, if Megaupload is filing for something, you shouldn't be surprised to find out that the MPAA is right behind with its own filing, warning that it wants to be sure that the court magically make sure that no infringement occurs if anyone can access their backup data. We've heard this story before, but here it goes again.
... any remedy granted should not compound the massive infringing conduct already at issue in this criminal litigation.... Additionally, if it would be helpful to the Court to consider evidence from the MPAA or its members on such issues as the lack of authorization for the reproduction and/or distribution of their works via Megaupload, or the overwhelming amount of infringement of the MPAA members’ copyrighted work on Megaupload, they will of course cooperate.
Of course, the issue right here has nothing to do with the MPAA's fears about infringement. It's about getting someone back the legitimate data they have on the servers. Why would the MPAA fight so hard against that?

I would imagine this is going to drag on for a while.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 1:59pm

    The MPAA wants to kill competition in distributing media. Also i doubt if they want an accurate audit of infringing to non infringing files on the Megaupload servers.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:02pm

    Its more like the MPAA is freaked out that Megaupload could have some good evidence for non-infringing uses so they are desperately trying to block it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:03pm

    Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

    And for that we're supposed to ignore -- especially here at TechPirate -- the millions gotten from infringing material.

    Anyway, just baloney. But cue whiny pirate excuses in 3..2..1...ARRR!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:07pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      Successful troll is successful!

      Achievement unlocked: Green Badge of Foolish!
      Yep, it's absolutely certain the users who cannot access their data made millions off of Megaupload...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:12pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      This is about user data and you are inconveniencing those who don't have pirated material. I'm guessing the MPAA isn't going to reimburse those people for holding this up over piracy.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:16pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      Out of the blue
      has no clue
      He's just a troll
      who should shut his pie hole
      He can't even read what's written
      By a black widow I wish he'd get bitten


      And that's all I got so far. If anyone would like to add more to that, feel free.

      Basically, stfu troll. You didn't even state a single fact and you have none to back up your completely fabricated assertions about users and a site you know nothing of.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Milton Freewater, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:22pm

        Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

        "You didn't even state a single fact and you have none to back up your completely fabricated assertions about users and a site you know nothing of."

        His posts have become pure nonsense and he knows it. But how could he resist, given how many responses he gets? He's like Marilyn Manson putting on eyeliner to shock the squares.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          :Lobo Santo (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:23pm

          Re: Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

          I see what you mean, we should go to round profile pictures...

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gothenem (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:27pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      Allowing someone to get back his legally created material which was siezed by the government is not baloney (or bologna).

      Many people used Megaupload for perfectly legitimate reasons. As a storage place for their own records, and to distribute their own legally created software. These are all people who were hurt when Megaupload was raided.

      Yes, infringing content was placed there. I am not saying that it wasn't used for infringement, but the innocent should not have to pay for the crimes of the guilty. After all, how would you feel if your car was taken by the police because a similar car three states over was used as a getaway vehicle in a crime. After all, all makes and models of that vehicle are obviously used for criminal enterprise right?

      This is the same argument, and then there are shills and trolls like you, who say that it's ok. No it isn't.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      James Burkhardt (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:28pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      Actually, the arguments here have NOTHING to do with the income megaupload is accused to have gained via allowing piracy. It has everything to do with my backup and distribution copies of various legal programming projects that I had been using Megaupload to store (along with other services, which has minimized my exposure in this case). That is to say legal, non-infringing data which, in possible violation of LE and governmental responsibility to minimize impact to innocent bystanders, has been sized and was designated to be destroyed.

      MPAA's filing asks the court to not 'Compound the massive infringing conduct..." of Megaupload. I would posit that giving users the ability to request specific files, perhaps after being given access to a directory listing of their stored content, could provide a clear suggestion of who is looking for legitimate, legal data, and who is looking for infringing content. That would really take the wind out of the sails of us pirate apologists, leaving only the sizable infringing content to remain right?

      Then again, given the volume of data and files the government probably acted the way it did because there is no quick, efficent way to dump all the non-infringing content. And no way to determine how much of it is infringeing. As indicated by the MPAA itself, who has argued that there is too much content for them to introduce human examination of all potentially infringing content. Then again, supposedly Google has a way to figure it out, right? they should be able to whip up a filter in minutes, and run it for a week and you get the new non-infringing data.

      So why can't I get my old code back?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Atkray (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:42pm

        Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

        I think that anyone who requests their data should be entitled to it. Although MPAA hates the the concept, there is still a presumption of innocent until proven guilty in the US.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          silverscarcat (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:51pm

          Re: Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

          "there is still a presumption of innocent until proven guilty in the US."

          Wait, what?

          I thought it was "guilty until DNA evidence proves otherwise"?

          At least according to Law and Order.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      jupiterkansas (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:28pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      I Megaupload can make millions from this, why can't the MPAA? Sounds like a great business model for getting your content distributed and making tons of cash.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:47pm

        Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

        The reason MPAA doesn't have distribution where you can download is simply because they want full control over what a user can and cannot do. If it were possible I'm sure they'd try to limit physical copies to only the person who bought it. Its always come down to how they can control you the best. If the MPAA could I'm sure they'd want movie theaters to be the only possible way to view movies. What its all about on copyright is trying to make things scarce. The other thing is as the world gets more and more connected users like the produce and share making the scarcity even worse for media companies. The silly thing is as the world becomes more and more connected there's more money to be made so technology advances are in the media industry's best interest.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Lord Binky, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:36pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      Being that fundamentally wrong brings up a good point.

      Money Saved Does Not Equal Money Spent.

      If I refrain from buying a $30 steak at a 5 star restuarant and instead cook an $8 steak myself, I did not earn $22 dollars. Where would that money even come from? If it worked like that I would be cooking lots of $8 steaks every hour making thousands of dollars a day.

      So why would someone who did not spend money on an item, magically create millions of dollars for someone else?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chargone (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:13pm

        Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

        not that advertisers want you to understand that: "this X was 18.99, now only 7.99, save 11 dollars!" uh... no. not save 11, spend 8. i would Save that money by NOT spending it... as in, not buying your product. (though one could argue it's 'save 11 dollars more than you would have had you bought this previously. hah! take that earlier customers!' so... yeah.)

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          John Fenderson (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 4:29pm

          Re: Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

          I remember having a serious argument with someone about this. In the end, I pointed out that they were too distracted by our discussion to purchase literally billions of dollars of stuff. Since I saved them so much money, they should pay me a small commission. 1% sounds reasonable.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 6:00am

          Re: Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

          I have this kind of discussion with the wife in the supermarket.

          'Oh looks its on offer, 2 for only 20!'
          'Yes dear but it is 0 if we don't buy, and who the fuck needs 2 ironing boards?"

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 4:43pm

        Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

        And by extension, money saved does not equal money stolen, either. But of course the RIAA fanboys are too stupid to see this.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        anon, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 7:46am

        Re: Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

        I believe that sharing of data should be made legal, if anything a "pirate" is not going to go out an buy thousands of movies he has downloaded, although it has been proven he will still buy. Now look at a pirate that has downloaded lets say 500 movies that would cost between 6 to 10 thousand pounds or around 15 000 dollars. Taking into account the fact that this amount is roughly more than half of the standard wage in America, the entertainment industry is trying to say they deserve half of all money ever made in the world.

        Way to go looking greedy, but in reality people spend as much as they can when they can , now if you took the full population and the amount they spent on entertainment every year throught the world it would be less than $1 per person. So to compensate them for there work i believe that a legal service that charges a maximum of $5 a year for access should more than compensate the studios for there work, in fact that would not only compensate them it would be giving them,after the profits by he website probably double the money they had made under the old system.

        Now i agree that not everyone will want to pay $5 for access to everything ever created, but over time it will become the norm, where more and more people will join and profits will sore. Yes at first it will not make enough as initially you will not have many member's but over time business will improve, and that is what happens when there is a disruption to a system, as in the case of scribes and printing press.Forget creating a tax as that would funnel the money to those who do not deserve it, and would not give Hollywood any incentive to create new movies.

        It might take the likes of Hollywood and there ilk a few years to generate the income they are used to but it will stop the bleeding and start the healing.

        Let them survive on the trillions they earn from cinemas and other methods of ripping the customers off, but sharing is something that is not going away and the sooner they start accepting this the sooner they can start improving the future outlook on there content...

        Just as a endnote, If they do not stop what they are doing now they could be the threat to Hollywood in the near future to losing total control over any form of media. Where the MPAA will be looked at as a joke when another organisation takes over from them, and where more movies are made outside the system than in it.

        Maybe this is where we need to start actually , with creating a new organisation that takes over from the MPAA, an organisation that looks at all movie created and rates it for whatever audience it deserves.

        That I think would be a massive step in replacing the MPAA and the real start of removing power from those that are destroying the industry by holding on to the power they have for dear life.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:43pm

      Re: Sigh. Technical complaint by some idiot alleging "lost his" data".

      I'm just responding to the troll too because he'll go away if enough of us respond. Keep it up everyone!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Zos (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:21pm

    "Of course, the issue right here has nothing to do with the MPAA's fears about infringement. It's about getting someone back the legitimate data they have on the servers. Why would the MPAA fight so hard against that? "

    because they will do anything rather than admit that there's legitimate data on those servers...because then shit starts unravelling, the servers have to be brought back up, and the whole narrative starts to unravel into class action liability suits and countersuits.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:25pm

      Re:

      Yep it undermines their argument that megaupload is designed to be a piracy tool. And yeah if there's legit data it means users should be able to get it as well as its bascially the MPAA's fault so they are to blame for potential losses which results in lawsuits to the MPAA.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Lord Binky, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:27pm

    Yeah, it totally makes sense for any user to go through a long, painful, draw out process to get your pirated data back which could then be turned around and used again you, instead of just pirating it all again painlessly in a night.

    So obviously the MPAA thinks that's what the user is after, because the user wants to be caught.

    This is like bearded lady at a side show screaming about everyone looking at her is a danger to her safety because there is no way they could resist her feminine wiles.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Chargone (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:15pm

      Re:

      this post is entertaining, but i'm having serious trouble figuring out which direction you're coming at this from and what conclusion you're reaching.

      Some of this has to be sarcastic... but i can't tell which bit.

      pretty sure that's an achievement...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Colin, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 6:40pm

        Re: Re:

        I think his point is: assume this guy has illegally downloaded movies or whatever that he's trying to get back. Why go through all of this shit rather than just illegally download it again? If he's going through all of this trouble, I think it points to this more likely than not being legitimate data that he wants to retrieve. If this whole thing goes through and it turns out to be some illegal MP3s, why would he do it?

        Unless this is a remarkable plant by the MPAA and they've loaded this guy's account with illegal stuff to prove a "Look! Pirate!" point, it doesn't seem like it's worth his time unless it's legit.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Zos (profile), Nov 1st, 2012 @ 6:20pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          it's a good point, except for the details of the items.... soundtracks used as back ground music for sports streams.

          legitimate content, part of his business, but by a strict reading (through the eyes of the lawyers) it means he's a dirty fucking pirate and all the value is in those songs, which he had no right to use.

          Whereas any reasonable person would say " oh, he put music on as background for the streams, well of course he did, that's what people do, you idiot"

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Milton Freewater, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:44pm

    More on the case

    http://torrentfreak.com/u-s-accuses-megaupload-user-of-storing-pirated-music-121031/

    According to the TorrentFreak report, Goodwin is alleged to have partially unauthorized music files as part of his data. Whoops, if true.

    What's more troubling is that he's also getting some pushback from the US on videos he created that contain music, because they aren't sure if all of the music on them is properly licensed.

    The US team has combed through his data to find any evidence of POTENTIAL infringement - not actual, POTENTIAL - as an excuse to not return it. Their proposal is that he be punished because they don't know.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      TheLoot (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:55pm

      Re: More on the case

      Well, as we all know, if it's media on the internet, it's obviously infringing. /s

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Alana (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:46pm

      Re: More on the case

      The US team has combed through his data to find any evidence of POTENTIAL infringement

      Through the illegal copies of the data they made? Oh wait, I'm not even sure if they have ACCESS to the full servers. I'm inclined to believe they're just pulling things out of their ass.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    GMacGuffin (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:51pm

    Dear MPAA:

    Infringing content -- by definition -- was made by someone other than the Megaupload user. It's already out there somewhere else, so infringers don't need to obtain access to their lockers. And wouldn't be asking to get at their infringing content in a Federal Criminal case anyway. Friggin Duh! (Oh, but you know that anyway.)

    Cue disingenuousity music...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      G Thompson (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 7:52pm

      Re: Dear MPAA:

      What?

      You mean MegaUpload was not the universal and sole repository of all things evil, infringing, and just plain wrong to the business plans of self serving corporate dinosaurs?

      Surely thou jest! ;)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    gorehound (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 2:53pm

    Our Government blatantly disregards our own Laws to shut down MU and still they persist.
    Of course they won't stop ! And of course the Damn Fucking MAFIAA stands right behind them cracking a whip.

    MAFIAA wants to shut down whatever they can because they ultimately want to control all content and they have no souls when it comes to fairness.

    What do you think will happen if SCOTUS Rules in favor of big ripoff book publisher in the big case that can determine if you even own something you buy and you want to sell it used.

    FUCK YOU MAFIAA..............You will never see a dime out of my wallet assholes.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Forest_GS (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:06pm

    Here's the situation;

    The government hold a box, it holds a legal object and an illegal object. If it lets one out it has to let the other out as well.

    The legal object is one-of-a-kind. The illegal object is one copy of millions.

    What's more important, opening that box, or destroying it?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Alana (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:47pm

      Re:

      Schrodinger's Legality.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      jupiterkansas (profile), Nov 1st, 2012 @ 8:09am

      Re:

      The government could open the box for one month. Let people get their legal stuff. Then close the box again.

      All the illegal stuff in that box was out in the open for years before the box is close, and is still out there despite the box being closed, so opening the box for a month will have absolutely no effect on anything except to shame the government.

      There was never a justification for closing the box in the first place without adequate warning to the people keeping stuff in the box.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:10pm

    In the ongoing saga of all of the Megaupload servers that the federal government seized and then handed back to hosting company Carpathia, telling them to effectively destroy them (and with it all sorts of important evidence in the Megaupload case), the judge is considering holding a hearing to dig into some of the questions raised by the case -- leading a few motions to be filed.

    Pirate apologist much? Exactly what "important evidence" is the government hiding from Megaupload? NONE. Absolutely, positively NONE. Not even Megaupload's own lawyer can identify any relevant evidence that's being withheld. What a fucking joke. If the evidence is so "important," it would be easily identified.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Chargone (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:18pm

      Re:

      *facepalms*

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:38pm

      Re:

      Kind of hard to identify evidence being withheld when the evidence is being withheld.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      silverscarcat (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:56pm

      Re:

      "Exactly what "important evidence" is the government hiding from Megaupload? NONE. Absolutely, positively NONE."

      Prove it.

      Prove that there's no important evidence being withheld.

      You have to prove it without looking at any files on Megaupload.

      "If the evidence is so "important," it would be easily identified."

      Of course. I'll just call Charles Xavier to find the answers.

      After all, every lawyer team has a psychic on hand to read people's minds, right?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 4:10pm

      Re:

      Of course Mega's lawyers can't identify anything - the data has been stolen from them. They're not allowed to see it to mount a defence...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 4:20pm

      Re:

      So since no evidence is being withheld you should be able to tell us what the evidence is, right?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 9:33pm

      Re:

      WIth access to the files, or even to an accurate listing of the contents of the files, they could potentially demonstrate that a substantial proportion of the files are not straight-out rips, which should put them in the clear.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), Oct 31st, 2012 @ 11:51pm

      Re:

      Exactly what "important evidence" is the government hiding from Megaupload? NONE. Absolutely, positively NONE.

      Why are you so sure of that? It would seem that the contents of what was actually stored on the servers is pretty important in showing substantial legitimate uses of the service.

      Not even Megaupload's own lawyer can identify any relevant evidence that's being withheld.

      Hard to "identify evidence" when the details are all being withheld.

      Funny, though, that you're so sure you know what's on the servers. Hilarious.

      If the evidence is so "important," it would be easily identified.

      Considering they can't see it, how the hell can they "identify" it?

      Also, drop the ad hominems please. It's really unbecoming.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 8:52am

        Re: Re:

        Why are you so sure of that? It would seem that the contents of what was actually stored on the servers is pretty important in showing substantial legitimate uses of the service.

        LMAO! You are only confirming what I said: You can't identify any relevant evidence that is being withheld. You said there was "all sorts of important evidence" on the servers. You still have not, and cannot, identify what that evidence is

        Dotcom himself can't identify any evidence that he doesn't have access to. Of course the service can be used for non-infringing purposes. The government has not argued otherwise, nor would they because it's obviously true.

        This is just desperate pirate-apologism.

        Hard to "identify evidence" when the details are all being withheld.

        Funny, though, that you're so sure you know what's on the servers. Hilarious.


        What's on the servers are the files store by the users of the service, some of which are infringing and some of which aren't. If there was something on there that would help his case, such as an email or a document, then he would say, "I need that evidence!" Not even Dotcom can identify any such evidence.

        So, please, Pirate Mike, explain to me EXACTLY what evidence is being withheld. You can't. Not even Dotcom can. Why? Because there is none.

        Considering they can't see it, how the hell can they "identify" it?

        Also, drop the ad hominems please. It's really unbecoming.


        If there was any evidence that could help him, such as emails or documents, he would know about there existence already. Looking at MILLIONS of gigabytes of data stored by the users of the service will not prove anything relevant to the case.

        I'll drop the ad homs the day you man up and actually have a conversation with me where you don't run away like a little child who knows he got caught.

        The fact remains, you said, definitely, that there is in fact "all sorts of important evidence." I called you out on it. Rather than just admit that you can't identify even one single piece of important evidence, you keep digging the whole and defending your pirate buddy.

        Want me to respect you? Admit that you can't identify even one piece of important evidence and that your claim to the contrary that such evidence exists and is being withheld was baseless. I know you are incapable of such honesty.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 11:48am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Hi there below_average_joe, how's your wife?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 12:13pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            She's great. I just surprised her with a trip to the Bahamas next month. Gotta keep the ladies happy. How's yours doing? She must be really stressed out with all that's happening.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Ninja (profile), Nov 1st, 2012 @ 4:02am

      Re:

      I get you support the early decision of the Supreme Court that there's no proof that the Govt is doing illegal surveillance so nobody can sue despite the fact that everything (the interpretations, the procedures, the surveillance itself if any) being secret.

      Rather telling. I think I'm going to sue you based on some secret evidence I got here that nobody can check. Sounds very fair.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 3:13pm

    i seriously doubt that Goodwin would take a chance of losing his business because of having copyrighted files and i seriously doubt if he would risk going to court to get his data back if he had infringing files either. this is another smoke screen put up by MacBride to try to keep all the balls ups he and the DoJ have made from being exposed.

    'It's about getting someone back the legitimate data they have on the servers. Why would the MPAA fight so hard against that?'

    obviously, because they are shit scared of Mega's lawyers finding information that is trying to be kept from them, like who ordered the whole fiasco in the first place.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gwiz (profile), Nov 1st, 2012 @ 8:28am

      Re:

      i seriously doubt that Goodwin would take a chance of losing his business because of having copyrighted files and i seriously doubt if he would risk going to court to get his data back if he had infringing files either.

      I also seriously doubt the EFF would have taken Goodwin on as their Litmus test case if there were any signs or indications of impropriety on Goodwin's part.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Pixelation, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 4:42pm

    Just curious if a class action lawsuit could be filed against the government on this one.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Ian, Oct 31st, 2012 @ 7:40pm

    The real story

    The MPAA isn't really against people getting their data back, so much as that they want to inflict the maximum amount of damage on every Megaupload user in order to create a chilling effect against relying on online storage lockers. They want to destroy the business model of the industry writ large.

    They also don't want to admit that even one byte of data on Megaupload is non-infringing content.

    Expect them to fight like a wounded, cornered animal, because that's what they are.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 7:52am

      Re: The real story

      This. Exactly the conclusion I came to. They want to burn the legitimate users as badly as possible to make storage lockers completely toxic to anyone even considering using them for legitimate purposes. They want to use the fear of suddenly losing your data to drive away any non-infringing users, thus guaranteeing that when examined, such services will have little if any non-infringing content.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    anon, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 7:15am

    Crazy

    I wonder how the court is going to look at this, lol not really. The DOJ seems to have a lot of power to influence the courts decision which is sad as it is just creating more of a mess letting this case drag on and on.

    The first thing I want to see the court do is rightfully declare that a persons access to his legally owned material is more important than fishing expeditions.

    Secondly
    The right to have access to your own material superceeds the right of the DOJ to seize anything in the forfeiture laws in America. If i am visiting a criminal at his home and my car is parked in the driveway it cannot be seized as it is not and never was used for any criminal intent and is not and never has been the property of the accused.

    Thirdly

    The material that is illegal has to be pointed out to the court and that can be destroyed, it is up to the MPAA to provide proof that any data is illegal and not up to the user to prove that his content is legal or illegal.

    And finally, the period that material has been kept from the user that stored legal content should be taken into consideration when giving each and every user compensation for the loss to there data, which was don under the assumption that they had committed a crime.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 1st, 2012 @ 12:22pm

    Ask Carpathia

    Has anyone thought to ask the company that owns the servers to release the data as a good will gesture?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This