FBI shuts down Megaupload.com because of copyright infringement
The American Federal Bureau of Investigation has closed down video website Megaupload.com. Megaupload is accused of mass copyright infringement on a global scale. On Megaupload.com, users could download and upload movies, music and other digital content. Many of the files appeared to be illegal copies. The Department of Justice estimates there is a damage of 500 million dollars, due to the illegal offering of videos, television programs and other content on Megaupload. Seven employees have been individually charged, four of them have been arrested in New Zealand.
The FBI bases their actions on the DMCA act, which is designed to strictly enforce intellectual property breaches. Apparently, the FBI is led to believe that employees were fully aware of how the site was being used. American government agencies allegedly base their actions on internal e-mails, showing that employees were aware of illegal content distribution on Megaupload.com. Employees of the website may have earned as much as 175 million dollar through the transfer of illegal content.
The 37-year old founder of Megaupload, Kim Schmitz, is among the employees targeted by the U.S. authorities. The FBI thinks he earned more than 100 million dollars through illegal activities on the internet.
The shut down of Megaupload is a controversial development in the strict enforcement policy towards copyright infringement by the U.S. government. In protest against the shut down of Megaupload, hacker group Anonymous has organized attacks on the websites of the American Ministry of Justice and the website of record company Universal.
References: De Telegraaf , Ars technica, AD
By : Deniece Teterissa
Comments(8)
phulshof
The big question is how MegaUpload differs from e.g. RapidShare, which won its case in the US courts.
Lucas
Why close Megaupload.com?
We are not going to press charges on car companies because smugglers use them to transport drugs.
So let file hosters be free too!
Lucas
Why close Megaupload.com?
We are not going to press charges on car companies because smugglers use them to transport drugs.
So let file hosters be free too!
foliomob
@lucas to continue your metaphor, Megaupload.com weren't just providing the car, they were showing smugglers where to stash the dope. Shows they deliberately profited from smuggling specifically. That's the rub.
Dropbox also has tons of illegal content being shared on it (hell, so does hotmail.com), but unless you can show their intent to facilitate illegal content specifically, it's very very different.
phulshof
@foliomob,
I know the law works this way, but I still find it strange that intent should matter when it comes to the legality of an action. Two people can do the exact same thing, but one could be acting legally, and the other illegally, simply because of the intent behind it.
Bart Schermer
@phulshof. This is not strange at all. In criminal law, intent (in Dutch 'opzet') is a crucial element of most crimes (bestanddeel). In the MegaUpload case, the prosecution has to prove that Schmitz's intent was to facilitate wholesale copyright infringement. His intent must be gauged on the basis of his actions (for instance not providing a proper NTD system, providing incentives for uploading infringing content et cetera). If there is enough evidence to prove ('reconstruct so to speak) his intent, than his actions (and as a result of that, the service) are considered criminal. If this cannot be proven, than he might still be found negligent, but than he is not guilty of the indictment.
This also the key factor why a service like Google is not the same as the Pirate Bay or (possibly, nobody is guilty until proven guilty) MegaUpload. The intent of Google is not to facilitate wholesale copyright infringement.
phulshof
@Bart: I'm not disagreeing that the law works that way. I'm just surprised that it does. In the end, the only effect it will have is people hiding their intentions under these circumstances. Law should not be a popularity contest, IMHO.
Bart Schermer
Law isn't a popularity contest. It is about trying to establishing the 'truth' on the basis of available evidence.
Your comment