DOCSLIB.ORG

In Retrospect 2012

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In Retrospect 2012 A GLOBAL MULTI-STAKEHOLDER DIALOGUE PROCESS 20122012 IN RETROSPECT INTERNET & JURISDICTION PROJECT CASE COLLECTION VOLUME 1 I N T E R N E T & MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE JURISDICTION INTERNET & JURISDICTIONMore information PROJECT AT about OBSERVATORY the Internet & Jurisdiction Project at: www.internetjurisdiction.net 1 k eepin g trac k O f trends twitter:www.internetjurisdiction.net @IJurisdiction TO S TAY UP-TO-DATE ON THE INTERNET & JURISDICTION PROJECT AND THE LATEST TRENDS W I T H R E g A R D TO T H E TENSION BETWEEN THE CROSS-BORDER INTERNET AND NATIONAL JURISDICTIONS, SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER AT WWW.INTERNETJURISDICTION.NET A N D f OLLOW @IJURISDICTION ON TWITTER. 2012 IN RETROSPECT The Internet & Jurisdiction Project is an evidence- based global multi-stakeholder dialogue process. To inform its participants about emerging trends and high-level patterns, the Internet & Jurisdiction Project detected, curated and categorized over 420 cases around the world in a dedicated data- base between February and December 2012. They crowd-curation show the tension between the cross-border nature of the Internet with its transnational online spaces and the patchwork of geographically defined national jurisdictions. spotlIghT I & J DATABASE WITH The Internet & Jurisdiction Observatory supports CATEgORIZED CASES the Internet & Jurisdiction Project team in keeping track of the latest trends around the globe. This interdisciplinary network of selected international experts crowd-ranks every month all collected crowd-ranking cases in the Internet & Jurisdiction database via a progressive filtering process. The 20 most impor- tant cases are showcased in the monthly Internet & Jurisdiction Project newsletter Retrospect with retrospect concise summaries and links to relevant back- MONTHLY NEWSLETTER WITH TOP 20 CASES ground information. The case collection ”2012 in Retrospect“ is a com- pilation of 220 selected cases. It provides a review dialogue + analysis of crucial dynamics to stimulate discussions and trigger research. Synthesis REgULAR REPORTS ON LATEST TRENDS AND INSIgHTS FACILITATION TEAM ABOUT The Internet & Jurisdiction Project facili- tates a global multi-stakeholder dialogue process to address the tension between the cross-border nature of the Internet and Bertrand de geographically defined national jurisdic- LA CHAPELLE tions. It provides a neutral platform for Director international organizations, states, business [email protected] and civil society to discuss the elaboration of a transnational due process framework to handle the digital coexistence of diverse national laws in shared cross-border online spaces. Since its launch in January 2012, the Paul Internet & Jurisdiction Project has involved FEHLINGER more than 80 entities in its dialogue process. Manager [email protected] INTERNET & JURISDICTION OBSERVATORY 32 selected international Experts from 26 different institutions in 13 countries are part Of the internet & jurisdiction observatory. the interdisciplinary network is composed Of respected senior Experts while leaving room for emerging talents. Séverine Robert J. Michael ARSÈNE CURRIE GEIST French Center for Research on Dalhousie University, Law & University of Ottawa, Canada Contemporary China, Hong Kong Technology Institute, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law, Canada @severinearsene @CdnTechLaw @mgeist Chinmayi William H. ARUN DUTTON Nicolas JONDET National Law University New University of Oxford, Delhi, Centre for Communication Oxford Internet Institute, UK University of Edinburgh, Governance, India Edinburgh Law School, UK @BiIIDutton @chinmayiarun @NicolasJondet Lilian Francis Augusto EDWARDS Matthias C. MEDEIROS KETTEMANN University of Strathclyde, Centre University of Oslo, Norwegian for Internet Law and Policy, UK University of Frankfurt/Main, Research Center for Computers Cluster of Excellence “The @lilianedwards and Law, Norway Formation of Normative Orders”, Germany @francisaugusto Giancarlo @MCKettemann FROSIO Ian Stanford University, Center BROWN Kathryn for Internet and Society, USA KLEIMAN Oxford University, @GCFrosio Oxford Internet Institute & Internet Counsel, Fletcher, Cyber Security Center, UK Heald & Hildreth PLC, USA @IanBrownOII Urs @KleimK GASSER Harvard University, Berkman Lee Wolfgang Center for Internet and Society & BYGRAVE KLEINWÄCHTER Harvard Law School, USA University of Oslo, Norwegian Department for Media and @ugasser Research Center for Computers Information Sciences, Unversity and Law, Norway of Aarhus, Denmark 4 OBSERVATORY Konstantinos Carlos Affonso Lachlan KOMAITIS PEREIRA DE SOUZA URQUHART Internet Society, Switzerland Rio de Janeiro Institute for University of Nottingham, Technology and Society & Rio de Mixed Reality Lab, UK @kkomaitis Janeiro State University, Brazil @mooseabyte @caffsouza Joanna KULESZA Joana Theresa VARON FERRAZ University of Lodz, Department SCASSA for International Law and Interna- Fundação Getúlio Vargas, Center tional Relations, Poland University of Ottawa, Canada for Technology and Society, Research Chair in Information Brazil @KuleszaJ Law, Canada @joana_varon @TeresaScassa Sarah LOGAN Rolf H. Thomas WEBER Australian National University, SCHULTZ School of International and Po- University of Zurich, Center for litical Studies, Australia Graduate Institute of Interna- Information and Communication tional and Development Studies, Law, Switzerland @circt International Law Department, Switzerland Tobias Bendert MAHLER ZEVENBERGEN Wolfgang Oxford University, Oxford University of Oslo, Norwegian SCHULZ Internet Institute, UK Research Center for Computers Humboldt Institute for and Law, Norway @benzevenbergen Internet and Society, Germany @tomahler @WWSchulz Nicolo Francesca ZINGALES Dan MUSIANI University of Tilburg, Department SVANTESSON of European and International Mines ParisTech, Center for the Bond University, Centre for Public Law, Netherlands Sociology of Innovation, France Commercial Law, Australia @TechJust @franmusiani Tatiana Nicolas TROPINA VON ZUR MÜHLEN Max Planck Institute for Foreign Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, and International Criminal Law, Germany Germany @gap_the_mind 5 CONTENT FEBRUARY 8 MARCH 12 APRIL 17 MAY 22 JUNE 27 JULY 32 AUGUST 37 SEPTEMBER 42 OCTOBER 47 NOVEMBER 52 DECEMBER 57 7 FEBRUARY 1. ACTA faces controversy 3. US Administration publishes in Europe over anti-piracy Privacy Bill of Rights white provisions paper The yet not ratified Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement1 In an effort to strengthen consumer protection in the (ACTA) between 31 states encountered significant public Internet economy, the White House published a blueprint protest2 in Europe. As a reaction, the European Parlia- for a Privacy Bill of Rights16 on February 23, 2012. The ment rapporteur3 stepped down from office and several white paper suggests seven core principles17 and foresees European countries4 suspended their ratification process. to draft industry standards in a dialogue with stakehold- The European Commission asked the European Court of ers, which are likely to effect global privacy standards of Justice5 to rule on the legality of ACTA in the EU’s jurisdic- US based Internet platforms. These would be enforceable tion. Another international trade agreement, the Trans-Pa- by the Federal Trade Commission. In order to guarantee cific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), currently negotiated6 the “international interoperability” of privacy laws across between nine countries, will equally include provisions7 different jurisdictions, the proposed framework empha- against online piracy. sizes mutual recognition, multi-stakeholder dialogue and regulation through codes of conduct, as well as cross-bor- Read further: der enforcement cooperation. Parallel to the publication European Parliament: Public ACTA Discussion8 of the blueprint, two coalitions of Internet companies an- European Commission: 10 Myths about ACTA9 nounced the introduction of a “No Track” browser button Radio Netherlands Worldwide: Loosen up copyright law, and standard privacy policies for mobile apps19. says Dutch government10 Read further: 2. Defamation trial to decide The White House: Obama Administration Unveils Blueprint whether Twitter is A publisher for a “Privacy Bill of Rights” to Protect Consumers Online20 in Australia’S jurisdiction The Washington Post: “Privacy bill of rights”: Advocacy groups, industry weigh in21 Twitter, incorporated in the US, is sued for the first The Economist: Online Privacy in America – Rights and time under Australian law for defamation11. The plaintiff Wrongs22 argues that Twitter is a publisher and therefore liable for retweets of an original tweet. The case recalls the Gutnick 4. US authorities seize foreign v. Dow Jones12 ruling of 2002, in which US based publisher .com gambling site registered Dow Jones was held liable for defamation of the Austra- lian businessman Joseph Gutnick under Australian law. in Canada via VeriSign Under US jurisdiction, Section 230 of the US Communica- After an indictment23 by prosecutors of the US state tions Decency Act guarantees online publishers immunity Maryland, the Department of Homeland Security shut of defamation charges for user-generated content. down the gambling website bodog.com, which was regis- tered with the Canadian registrar DomainClip and oper- Read further: ated by non-US citizens. The District Court of Maryland CNET: Is Twitter liable for defamation13 ordered VeriSign24, subject to US jurisdiction, to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Uila Supported Apps
    Uila Supported Applications and Protocols updated Oct 2020 Application/Protocol Name Full Description 01net.com 01net website, a French high-tech news site. 050 plus is a Japanese embedded smartphone application dedicated to 050 plus audio-conferencing. 0zz0.com 0zz0 is an online solution to store, send and share files 10050.net China Railcom group web portal. This protocol plug-in classifies the http traffic to the host 10086.cn. It also 10086.cn classifies the ssl traffic to the Common Name 10086.cn. 104.com Web site dedicated to job research. 1111.com.tw Website dedicated to job research in Taiwan. 114la.com Chinese web portal operated by YLMF Computer Technology Co. Chinese cloud storing system of the 115 website. It is operated by YLMF 115.com Computer Technology Co. 118114.cn Chinese booking and reservation portal. 11st.co.kr Korean shopping website 11st. It is operated by SK Planet Co. 1337x.org Bittorrent tracker search engine 139mail 139mail is a chinese webmail powered by China Mobile. 15min.lt Lithuanian news portal Chinese web portal 163. It is operated by NetEase, a company which 163.com pioneered the development of Internet in China. 17173.com Website distributing Chinese games. 17u.com Chinese online travel booking website. 20 minutes is a free, daily newspaper available in France, Spain and 20minutes Switzerland. This plugin classifies websites. 24h.com.vn Vietnamese news portal 24ora.com Aruban news portal 24sata.hr Croatian news portal 24SevenOffice 24SevenOffice is a web-based Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. 24ur.com Slovenian news portal 2ch.net Japanese adult videos web site 2Shared 2shared is an online space for sharing and storage.
    [Show full text]
  • The Disquieting Dotcom Case 5:30 AM Sunday Jan 29, 2012
    The disquieting Dotcom case 5:30 AM Sunday Jan 29, 2012 The arrest of the alleged internet pirate Kim Dotcom and three of his associates last week is questionable both for the manner in which it was conducted and for the official actions that preceded it. The early-morning raid on his mansion north of Auckland bore an unintentionally comic resemblance to a movie from Hollywood - one of the pillars of the American corporate establishment that has a keen interest in seeing Dotcom in a US court. Some 76 officers, six times as many as took out Osama bin Laden, swooped - a lot more than are deployed against allegedly desperate homegrown criminals, except perhaps for terrorists in Te Urewera. The police also used two black helicopters, so operation commander Detective Inspector Grant Wormald's assertion that "it was definitely not as simple as knocking at the front door" is hard to argue with. Wormald's dry remark referred to Dotcom's alleged retreat into the house: he is said to have activated electronic locks, which police had to "neutralise", and to have "barricaded" himself in a safe room. The images evoked are straight from a spy movie and irresistibly characterise Dotcom as a desperate fleeing criminal. But people can react strangely when helicopters land on their front lawn at dawn, particularly if they once put a US$10m bounty on the head of Osama bin Laden, as Dotcom did. The police's colourful version of events was helpfully presented to the news media in a detailed press release - in stark contrast to the neither-confirm-nor-deny response they take to media questions when, say, a civilian is shot by an officer.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
    Case 1:12-cr-00003-LO Document 134 Filed 10/30/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID# 1657 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) vs. ) ) KIM DOTCOM et al., ) ) The Honorable Liam O’Grady Defendants. ) Criminal No. 1:12CR3 ) MPAA MEMBERS’ RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER CONCERNING HEARING ON CRIMINAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(G) As a non-party participant in proceedings in this Court about the question of preservation and disposition of the servers leased by Carpathia to defendant Megaupload, the MPAA Members1 respectfully submit this brief response to the Court’s October 2 Order for briefing about the suggested format and breadth of a hearing relating to non-party Kyle Goodwin’s motion seeking access to those servers. As we have indicated in our previous filings, the MPAA Members’ interest in this hearing, and in any resolution of Mr. Goodwin’s motion, is simply to ensure that if the Court decides to craft a remedy for third-party Megaupload users, any such remedy include safeguards to prevent retrieval of infringing materials. Again, the MPAA Members are sympathetic to any users who may have lost their only copy of material that they had lawfully copied onto Megaupload for legitimate purposes. And the MPAA Members continue to take no position on whether the Court should or should not exercise its equitable jurisdiction to respond to Mr. Goodwin’s request. But any remedy granted 1 The MPAA Members are the six members of the Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.: Paramount Pictures Corporation, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Universal City Studios LLC, Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc., and Warner Bros.
    [Show full text]
  • An Empirical Analysis of Errors with Automated Dmca Takedown Notices
    Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal Volume 37 Issue 2 Article 1 4-1-2021 COPYRIGHTING COPYWRONGS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF ERRORS WITH AUTOMATED DMCA TAKEDOWN NOTICES Seng, Daniel Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Seng, Daniel, COPYRIGHTING COPYWRONGS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF ERRORS WITH AUTOMATED DMCA TAKEDOWN NOTICES, 37 SANTA CLARA HIGH TECH. L.J. 119 (2021). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol37/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal by an authorized editor of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COPYRIGHTING COPYWRONGS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF ERRORS WITH AUTOMATED DMCA TAKEDOWN NOTICES By Daniel Seng1 Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), reporters issuing takedown notices are required to identify the infringed work and the infringing material and provide their contact information (functional formalities), attest to the accuracy of such information and their authority to act on behalf of the copyright owner, and sign the notices (non-functional formalities). Online service providers will evaluate such notices for compliance with these DMCA formalities before acting on them. This paper seeks to answer questions about the quality of takedown notices, especially those generated by automated systems, which are increasingly being used by copyright owners to detect instances of online infringement and issue takedown notices on their behalf.
    [Show full text]
  • He's No Robin Hood
    The intangible investor Written by Bruce Berman He’s no Robin Hood File sharing promotes a culture of piracy infringe inventions unwittingly, but others government for having, through its that makes it more acceptable to steal do so systematically because, like file sharers, shutdown of the site, deprived innocent third branded goods and inventions, as well they know that the chances of getting caught parties of access to their files. It as content. Big daddy Kim Dotcom is are slim, the punishment is relatively light also suggests that the seizure violated the sticking it to all IP holders and, perhaps most importantly of late, the First Amendment.” public frequently does not care. In the 1970s and 1980s many people who The piracy economy exists in no small went into the field of copyright saw In the court of public opinion, copyrights part because a wide range of people believe it themselves as fighting to help authors, and brands have fared poorly. Thefts of is acceptable - even fashionable - to use musicians and artists - and therefore as digital content and counterfeits are easily other people’s creative output. Many being on the side of the angels. By the 1990s, achieved and difficult to stop. Patents have otherwise honest violators believe they are however, many who entered the field came not done much better. A cultural disdain for not stealing, but are merely doing what most from tech backgrounds and saw copyright as IP rights has emerged, facilitated in part by PC or smartphone users are meant to do – a constraint to progress.
    [Show full text]
  • Privacy in the US in a Post-Snowden World Debora Halbert & Stefan
    By Policy or Design? Privacy in the US in a Post-Snowden World Volume 1 (2) 2015 By Policy or Design? Privacy in the US in a Post-Snowden World Debora Halbert & Stefan Larsson. Abstract By drawing from a number of studies in the field as well as the Snowden revelations and the case of MegaUpload/MEGA, the article makes an analysis of relevant legislation on privacy in the digital context. The purpose of the analysis is to understand to what extent and how the current paradigm of privacy protection is, or is not, sufficient for contemporary needs. In particular, we ask how privacy is protected by policy in an American context and to what extent this is or is not insufficient in relation to an approach of “privacy by design”. In short, we conclude that privacy by policy is necessary but not sufficient and that efforts should be made to further implement policy by design. 1. Introduction In his recent book, The Circle, David Eggars writes about a fictional social media company that, through its ubiquitous presence and constant technological innovation, was changing the way its employees and people throughout the world perceived their on-line lives.1 Through friendly interventions and constant digital interactions, the characters in The Circle come to realize the benefits of a fully transparent and digitally downloaded life. The goal for the circle, as envisioned by its corporate leaders, was full transparency because only then do we come to a point of true authenticity and public honesty. The circle, as envisioned by Eggars, and perhaps being pursued by not-so-fictional social media companies, could also be understood as a form of friendly fascism, a term coined by Bertram Gross in the 1980s.2 Gross argued that fascism would not come to the United States in the form of militarism and violence but rather, it would come in the form of government and corporate convergence.
    [Show full text]
  • Megaupload Indictment.Pdf
    GENERAL ALLEGATIONS At all times relevant to this Indictment: 1. KIM DOTCOM, MEGAUPLOAD LIMITED, VESTOR LIMITED, FINN BATATO, JULIUS BENCKO, SVEN ECHTERNACH, MATHIAS ORTMANN, ANDRUS NOMM, and BRAM VAN DER KOLK, the defendants, and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, were members of the “Mega Conspiracy,” a worldwide criminal organization whose members engaged in criminal copyright infringement and money laundering on a massive scale with estimated harm to copyright holders well in excess of $500,000,000 and reported income in excess of $175,000,000. 2. Megaupload.com is a commercial website and service operated by the Mega Conspiracy that reproduces and distributes copies of popular copyrighted content over the Internet without authorization. Since at least September 2005, Megaupload.com has been used by the defendants and other members and associates of the Mega Conspiracy to willfully reproduce and distribute many millions of infringing copies of copyrighted works, including motion pictures, television programs, musical recordings, electronic books, images, video games, and other computer software. Over the more than five years of its existence, the Mega Conspiracy has aggressively expanded its operations into a large number of related Internet businesses, which are connected directly to, or at least financially dependent upon, the criminal conduct associated with Megaupload.com. 3. Megaupload.com was at one point in its history estimated to be the 13th most frequently visited website on the entire Internet. The site claims to have had more than one billion visitors in its history, more than 180,000,000 registered users to date, an average of 2 50 million daily visits, and to account for approximately four percent of the total traffic on the Internet.
    [Show full text]
  • Piracy, Privacy and Internet Openness: The
    I N S I D E T H E M I N D S Understanding Developments in Cyberspace Law Leading Lawyers on Analyzing Recent Trends, Case Laws, and Legal Strategies Affecting the Internet Landscape 2012 EDITION 2012 Thomson Reuters/Aspatore All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, except as permitted under Sections 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act, without prior written permission of the publisher. This book is printed on acid free paper. Material in this book is for educational purposes only. This book is sold with the understanding that neither any of the authors nor the publisher is engaged in rendering legal, accounting, investment, or any other professional service. Neither the publisher nor the authors assume any liability for any errors or omissions or for how this book or its contents are used or interpreted or for any consequences resulting directly or indirectly from the use of this book. For legal advice or any other, please consult your personal lawyer or the appropriate professional. The views expressed by the individuals in this book (or the individuals on the cover) do not necessarily reflect the views shared by the companies they are employed by (or the companies mentioned in this book). The employment status and affiliations of authors with the companies referenced are subject to change. For customer service inquiries, please e-mail [email protected]. If you are interested in purchasing the book this chapter was originally included in, please visit www.west.thomson.com.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cooperation Provisions of the UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime: a ‘Toolbox’ Rarely Used?
    The Cooperation Provisions of the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime: A ‘Toolbox’ rarely used? Abstract This article examines the provisions for international cooperation in the UN Convention and Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) and their effectiveness in achieving the UNTOC’s goal of promoting effective cooperation in the prevention and combating of transnational organised crime. It is a response to the growing sense that the UNTOC is not as effective a tool as promised, which sense is exacerbated by the absence of a functional review mechanism for the UNTOC. The article notes the delimitation of the scope of the UNTOC based on organised crime groups that participate in serious transnational crime. It then goes on to describe the UNTOC’s provisions for informal law enforcement cooperation, mutual legal assistance, international cooperation in asset recovery and extradition, and examines what little evidence there is of the implementation of these provisions. It concludes that the UNTOC appears to be have been more successful as a tool for promoting informal rather than formal cooperation, and speculates as to why this may be so. by Neil Boister 1. Introduction The UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime1 (Palermo Convention, UNTOC or UNCTOC) adopted in Palermo in 2000, enjoys almost universal subscription by States. As at May Professor, Te Piringa Faculty of Law, University of Waikato, New Zealand. Research was completed while the author was a visiting scholar at the University of Hamburg, funded by the receipt of a Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel Prize from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. My thanks to Professor Florian Jessberger (University of Hamburg), and to the Humboldt Foundation, for their generosity.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is the True Legacy of Kim Dotcom?
    What is the true legacy of Kim Dotcom? No legacy is more controversial than that of Kim Dotcom. Has he an infamous legacy or a revolutionary one? A legacy of a cybercriminal or a digital entrepreneur? Was he a fugitive or political victim? Through his academic and professional lifetime Dotcom transformed from an “alienated young genius” 1 to the CEO of a site with “150 million users2”, Megaupload. Through this journey he has left his mark in the digital landscape, transforming the availability and commercialisation of online services. Yet his academic legacy also has a darker and more sinister twist: the power of the authorities and the wide scale economic impact of technology are prominent themes. There is also another side to Dotcom, often hidden in his portrayal by the media, a loving father and a husband which adds a more humanistic side to Dotcom’s legacy. It reminds us that at the end of the day despite his influential personality, Dotcom is human, like you and me. During his youth, Dotcom became renowned in Germany for being a well-known hacker. Whilst most kids got their enjoyment from sports, Dotcom attained his from breaking into international cyber services. He claimed to hack into the Pentagon, one of the most secure buildings in the whole of the USA. Whilst it has never been proven if he did commit this crime, there is no doubt he had the potential. Later, he went to claim that "every PBX is an open door to me"3 and sold the access codes at $200 each.
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand Police Ordered to Return Dotcom Material 31 May 2013
    New Zealand police ordered to return Dotcom material 31 May 2013 return it to Dotcom. She rejected the argument that the police had committed only a technical breach of the law and should not have to sift the material for irrelevant data, which they said would be a lengthy and expensive exercise. "The deficiencies in the warrants and, as a consequence, the searches, were more than merely technical," she said. "The defects in the warrants were such that the warrants were nullities. The plaintiffs are entitled to relief." The Auckland mansion of Megaupload founder Kim She also said the police must provide Dotcom with Dotcom on January 20, 2013. A New Zealand judge on clones of material that had already been sent to the Friday ordered police to return any digital material seized FBI. in an armed raid on Internet mogul Kim Dotcom's mansion last year not directly related to the prosecution against him. Dotcom's US-based lawyer Ira Rothkin tweeted that his legal team was analysing the decision. US authorities allege Megaupload and related file- A New Zealand judge on Friday ordered police to sharing sites netted more than $175 million and return any digital material seized in an armed raid cost copyright owners more than $500 million by on Internet mogul Kim Dotcom's mansion last year offering pirated copies of movies, TV shows and not directly related to the prosecution against him. other content. The decision by High Court chief judge Helen The US Justice Department and FBI want Dotcom Winkelmann follows a ruling last year that the to face charges of racketeering, fraud, money- January 2012 raid on Dotcom's Auckland mansion laundering and copyright theft in a US court, which was illegal because the search warrants used were could see him jailed for up to 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Megaupload Boss Aims to Lie Low 6 November 2012
    Megaupload boss aims to lie low 6 November 2012 popularity in New Zealand pitching his US extradition case as a David-and-Goliath struggle, said he sensed a backlash looming. In the past, he has said he ignored calls from his lawyers to limit his Twitter musings—which cover topics ranging from the extradition case to the US election—but indicated he was finally willing to heed their advice. "As much as I enjoy keeping my followers informed, I have to tweet less. Dotcom media overload. #Backlash imminent," he tweeted late Monday. The 38-year-old German national is free on bail in Flamboyant Megaupload boss Kim Dotcom, seen here in New Zealand ahead of an extradition hearing in Auckland in February 2012, has vowed to lie low as he March. awaits a US attempt to extradite him from New Zealand, fearing a backlash after making a series of high-profile He faces up to 20 years jail if convicted of money announcements. laundering, racketeering, fraud and online copyright theft in a US court. Dotcom insists he is innocent and free to start a Flamboyant Megaupload boss Kim Dotcom has new file-sharing venture dubbed Mega, which will vowed to lie low as he awaits a US attempt to run on the website www.me.ga—.ga is the Internet extradite him from New Zealand, fearing a domain associated with the west African nation backlash after making a series of high-profile Gabon. announcements. Details of the new service are scant but a teaser Dotcom, who communicates publicly almost website linked to www.me.ga said commonly used exclusively through his Twitter feed, unveiled plans domains such as .com and .net were vulnerable to last week to relaunch his file-sharing empire on prosecution by US authorities.
    [Show full text]