Comments on: MegaUpload case proves we don’t need SOPA or PIPA

By: Eric

Eric — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:40:13 +0000

Content owners and carriers have been making this calculation for years, and only the media believe the numbers.
The first big case of this was when the Secret Service raided Steve Jackson Games back in 1990. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jackson_Games,_Inc._v._United_States_Secret_Service

By: Darken Aoc Rahl

Darken Aoc Rahl — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 03:25:49 +0000

People equate MU with piracy? Really? Given the option between MU and Kazaa and which to compare to piracy I would say that Kazaa was a tool used for piracy. Yet Viacom leading the charge for SOPA developed Kazaa and spread it to millions of users via CNET and made millions off of illegitimate filesharing only to turn around and sue the people for using the tools they made then whining about how widespread piracy was that they encouraged in the first place.

This is corporate censorship for the sole purpose of creating legal monopolies by shoving the little guy in the corner away from the public eye. The entertainment industry has been trying to control the internet for ages to turn it into a glorified PPV service like the cable TV. Mindless sheep like you let them do so.

SOPA doesn’t give a damn what you think the focus of a website is. All they care about is completely shutting down sites which have the ability to in the future cause possible copyrighting. That means goodbye Youtube, Facebook, Wikipedia, Photobucket and yes Dropbox. Some freedom we have in this country. Wake up to a little reality.

By: anto33

anto33 — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 02:52:53 +0000

It seems feds don’t need more laws to take down any site.We are doomed.

By: Austin Hoffman

Austin Hoffman — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:23:54 +0000

That’s sad…since it’s all BS…SOPA/PIPA were junk + MU arrest was unfair + I don’t think swizz he has any legal connections to MU…imo it was all fabbed up to get other celebrity endorsements.

p.s. looks like someone is pissed – FBI vs ANONYMOUS video:
http://www.peeje.com/anonymous-hackers-we-legion-211/

By: Deboprio Ghosh

Deboprio Ghosh — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:29:50 +0000

what makes youtube/dropbox holy ?

By: Arvin Alba

Arvin Alba — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 14:22:24 +0000

Oh c’mon, let’s face it, almost everyone you know will equate Megaupload with piracy. People using MU for legitimate purposes are rather rare. MU’s business model depends on display ads and a subscription service. The display ads require tremendous amounts of page views, which MU gets through piracy. The subscription service allows for less hassle when downloading; they entice with pirated content, make you so annoyed at waiting you pay them for the less hassle. They make millions on illegitimate file sharing.

The dropbox analogy is not dead on. Dropbox doesn’t focus on sharing – they focus on data synchronization and collaboration. Most users of Dropbox are legit, and they actively discourage illegitimate content. I sure as hell won’t look for illegitimate content on Dropbox.

People seem to compare the MU situation as arresting Ford for making cars that the bank robbers will use. Using that analogy, I would say that MU is a Ford who designs cars with the bank robbers in mind – faster, armoured, with weapons, hiding places for the loot and all.

MU was taken down, and rightly so. There was enough of a due process. I would rather have MU taken down than have users fined thousands of dollars they have no hope of paying. After all, it’s MU who’s profiting from the piracy.

By: don

don — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:56:57 +0000

Your headline “MegaUpload case proves we don’t need SOPA or PIPA” and your ending paragraph “This is just one of the many reasons why the MegaUpload case is troubling … ” are at odds.

It MAY demonstrate that SOPA/PIPA are not needed, but the FBI et al didn’t act over a 24-hour period before they raided the sites.

File-sharing will happen, one way or another. The problems come from companies making billions from those shares. GREED does weird things to people.

By: John E. Bredehoft

John E. Bredehoft — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:34:22 +0000

Ah, but all sites are rogue sites. RIAA/MPAA members frequently blast Google-owned YouTube (while at the same time making deals with YouTube to get their content featured).

By: CfC

CfC — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:50:30 +0000

I can’t wait till the file sharers and file thieves all get hauled away like Kim Dotcom….. what a lardasz-geek. Then Psudo journalists, like many who write about tech (even on this website) will stop teasing with lame articles that tell people how to get free (stolen) stuff, or look how your freedoms will be taken away, etc…

The tech press only like to write about things with certain buzz words, even though soooo much of it is total BS non-information.

So when the free stolen stuff dissapears from the web, many of these psudo-journalists will have to go pan-handling for their next day rate. What a great day that will be.

By: Travis

Travis — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 05:07:24 +0000

I find the statement that the site caused “more then half a billion dollars in harm” absurd. That assumes every piece of copyrighted material passed on the server would otherwise have been purchased….an unlikely even. The figuring of damages in copyright cases is completely ridiculousness.