Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 11, 2016, 07:44:00 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: DOTCOM saga - updates  (Read 48278 times)

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,341
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #175 on: December 07, 2013, 06:22:14 PM »
I can see both sides above.

Getting political below I suppose, so I'll stick it in a spoiler:

Spoiler
I often wonder about the idea that we couldnt say it or do it, because they would have done this or that or the other. Before/in case you take this as an attack on your post Iain: this struck me strongest in the last years in the way that Obama didnt stand up to the banks when he was first elected.

There is so much in this world that is done or not done because of fear. I'm not naive enough to think that we or our governments should be fearless - but currently it's the opposite that's happening. I'm heading into basement territory if I'm not there already, so I'll shut up.

Tom

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #176 on: December 07, 2013, 08:39:29 PM »
Yes, you are quite right, I feel sure. But there is a difference between a politician caving in and reneging on his election promises because it is politically expedient to do so, and confronting a bully who is about to punch your lights out and do you some serious injury.
Something done out of fear is generally likely to be corrosive and destructive of the self and of one's self-respect - but there's a lot of it about. Like RC churchgoers, for example, who go to confessional because - well, if they don't, they believe they will be damned, because God loves you and is your friend and wants you to confess and pray for forgiveness, or something.
But there's a difference between a fear of a threat of something imagined like that and a threat of something more existential and that is really very likely to happen. Lange knew from New Zealand's economic history (e.g., why it even has a role in the EU CM in the first place) that the economic excommunication threatened by the French was not an empty threat but something that they could and probably would pull off if they lost patience with him, and he couldn't take that risk. It would have been politically reckless and could have led to economic suicide. So he caved in. No option really.
Similarly, for example, where you live under Islamic Sharia law, apostasy is a sin against Allah and is punishable by death. You know it's going to happen, so you don't do it. You stay in the Islamic faith. Allah is your friend.

So, imagine having this friend in the shape of the US, who is a bit like Allah in that you had better do as he wants, or else.
We would all be wise to be very, very afraid of such a friend.

I don't suppose that those police/SAS/GCSB personnel who screwed up or committed perjury in the Dotcom case did so because they were basically stupid or dishonest. I suspect they more than likely had high professional standards and integrity and were likely very good at their jobs. But you can really act out of character and make all kinds of professional mistakes if you come under unbearable pressure from a powerful friend to do something that you know is intrinsically wrong.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2013, 08:54:34 PM by IainB, Reason: Minor corrections. »

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #177 on: December 07, 2013, 11:09:48 PM »
confronting a bully who is about to punch your lights out and do you some serious injury.

A polite exaggeration?

What exactly is the US threatening? To send in the drones? Order a cruise missile strike? Put "boots on the ground" and demonstrate some "shock and awe" to the Kiwis? Stand by idly and allow China to invade the The South Island and cart its population off for forced labor?

I hardly think so.

The US is not omnipotent. Not by a long shot.

Quote
So, imagine having this friend in the shape of the US, who is a bit like Allah in that you had better do as he wants, or else.

If that's a euphemism for "being bought" or saying the powers that be in NZ have "sold out" however, isn't that an entirely different story?

Because I can agree NZ's current government sold itself and it's people out on this one. Possibly with the best of intentions. But certainly for all the wrong reasons. And definitely with the lamest excuse if "arm twisting" on the part of the Obama administration is the best it could come up with.

I guess I'm a bit old-school when it comes to something like this. To wit: there are always reasons why somebody may - or may not - do something. And of those reasons, some may very well be "very good reasons."

But at the end of the day, all that really matters is what was - or wasn't - done. That's the diamond in the equation. The reasons given are merely its price tag.
 :)

End-of-World-cartoon.gif



IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #178 on: December 08, 2013, 04:37:10 AM »
Yes, of course I am exaggerating.
And I think you are quite right where you say:
..But at the end of the day, all that really matters is what was - or wasn't - done. ...
From an NZ perspective, in the Dotcom case, the judgement was clear that there has been illegal action by the State - the police/SAS and GCSB - and it certainly looks like the police committed perjury. Oops.
We are all interested to know when and how  these matters will be properly addressed by the judiciary.
(Sounds of crickets chirping.)

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #179 on: January 19, 2014, 09:05:30 AM »
Well, no new developments in the fiasco, but apparently Dotcom was planning a big party to set up an NZ Political party, as reported in an NZ Herald report (below). But the party was called off, for apparently important reasons - see below. Note the bits I have emboldened towards the end.
We shall see whether he can pull it off.
(Copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)
Quote
Irked Dotcom takes a swipe at Key
By Jonathan Milne
5:30 AM Sunday Jan 19, 2014

Party plans are on hold, but mogul keen to lead NZ in internet economy
The launch of the Internet Party has been postponed until Feb 20. Photo / Getty Images

Internet mogul Kim Dotcom has bitterly criticised Prime Minister John Key, after he was forced to postpone the launch of his political party and cancel a birthday party for more than 10,000 guests.

In an exclusive interview, Dotcom told the Herald on Sunday of his plans for the huge birthday party set for tomorrow night.

More than 25,000 people had registered for tickets (though the venue, Auckland's Vector Arena, has capacity for only 12,000). "The Party Party was to be a four-hour show leading up to my 40th birthday," he said, "starting with a 30-minute live set to perform six songs from my upcoming GoodTimes album.

"At midnight I would have celebrated my 40th birthday with a full Vector Arena. We asked everyone to dress in white for the laser and light show, including black lights which would have made everybody glow in the dark."

Now Dotcom will launch his album and his new music download site, Baboom, tomorrow, as planned, with an extensive advertising campaign on radio and on the back of more than 100 buses.

But the launch of the Internet Party - his tilt at political power - has been postponed until February 20.

His birthday party has been cancelled. "I was sick to my stomach for two days. I could not eat or sleep. It feels so bad to let so many people down. I decided to have no birthday party at all this year. Instead we are going to celebrate the birthday of our son, Kimmo, at the beach. We share the same birthday and he will be 5 years old on January 21."

The Electoral Commission had warned Dotcom that throwing a free party for thousands of New Zealanders might constitute "treating" - essentially buying - people's votes. "If I continued with the event I would lose the Internet Party. If I cancelled the event I would disappoint 25,000 Kiwis who registered for tickets. The political party and the future of New Zealand is more important to me than one night of fun."

Dotcom said that instead of pouring the Internet Party's resources into winning one seat, as Act, United Future and the Conservatives had done, his party would try to break the 5 per cent threshold to guarantee him at least seven MPs.

"We ask voters for a chance to impress them. I know how to make New Zealand a leader in the internet economy which will lead to more jobs and prosperity."

Labour leader David Cunliffe was cautious about the prospect of a Labour-Dotcom coalition. "I think there's a wide range of people I can work with," he said. "I wouldn't rule it out but I'm not ruling it in either."

Key has already dismissed Dotcom's party. Dotcom hit back yesterday: "John Key and his partners have lost the connection with the people and their original purpose. I would never have gone into politics if it wasn't for the abuse that I have experienced. I have been a victim of numerous unlawful actions by both the New Zealand and US Governments. There's something seriously wrong with a government that engages in this kind of activity to please another government.

"When the Internet Party makes it into Parliament, the NSA Five Eyes spy network will lose one eye. We intend re-evaluating the relationship between New Zealand and the US Government."


- Herald on Sunday

Some people (not me, you understand) might say that any government of a country or group, such as NZ or the EU, that tries to unFriend/unLike the US will pay for it dearly - and they would know it - so it's an economic/political suicide that's not going to happen, but I couldn't possibly comment.
Interesting times.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #180 on: February 04, 2014, 06:04:28 AM »
...From an NZ perspective, in the Dotcom case, the judgement was clear that there has been illegal action by the State - the police/SAS and GCSB - and it certainly looks like the police committed perjury. Oops.
We are all interested to know when and how  these matters will be properly addressed by the judiciary.
(Sounds of crickets chirping.)

Well, the crickets are still chirping - except it's mid-summer in NZ now, so really all you can hear are the cicadas - but if perjury wasn't enough, it looks as though meanwhile there's been another "Oops!" by the NZ government. This time it's the turn of the GCSB (again), who, apparently not content with accidentally-on-purpose carrying out illegal spying on NZ citizens, have now apparently accidentally-on-purpose deleted some/all of the evidence that was to be used to ... prove that GCSB had been carrying out illegal spying, in a court of law.

Dearie me, what a kerfuffle! And such a puzzle too - I mean, how would one go about proving that the illegal spying had been going on if the proof had been deleted?   :tellme:

Quote
GCSB deleted key evidence - Dotcom
1:12 PM Tuesday Feb 4, 2014
Quote
BREAKING NEWS: The GCSB spy agency seems to have deleted evidence relevant to my case against the GCSB for illegally spying on NZ residents.
    — Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) February 3, 2014

____________________________

The spy agency which illegally monitored Kim Dotcom's communications has admitted deleting information needed in
the upcoming $6 million damages hearing, according to the tycoon.

Dotcom last night tweeted the claim, saying: "The GCSB spy agency seems to have deleted evidence relevant to my case against the GCSB for illegally spying on NZ residents.''

He quoted Crown lawyers as saying "some communications have automatically aged off. We propose to include ... those communications which are still recoverable''.

Dotcom claimed lawyers acting for the GCSB told him the material had "aged off'' the system, suggesting it had automatically deleted.

He also posted a video of Prime Minister John Key, who is in charge of the agency, saying: "This is a spy agency. We don't delete things. We archive them.''

Mr Key's office said he was speaking specifically about allegations the GCSB deleted a video of him talking about Dotcom inside its top secret building.

"He stands by what he said,'' said a spokeswoman.

The claim that evidence was deleted has brought fresh calls for an independent inquiry into the agency, described today by the Labour and Green parties as operating outside the law.

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said: "If it is true, then they are a rogue agency operating in contempt of the law and courts.''

Information sought as part of a court process is meant to be preserved - and doing otherwise was "basic contempt of court'', said Mr Norman.

He said Mr Key was attempting to distance himself from his statement in Parliament, saying the comments were made "in the most general terms''.

"He has misled the House.''

He said an independent inquiry into the GCSB would be part of an coalition negotiations after this year's election.

Labour associate spokesman on security issues Grant Robertson said he was concerned about the implications of Dotcom's claims.

"If true, it speaks of an agency that has operated where they don't believe they need to pay attention to the law.'' He said people would ask why they should "trust an agency like this if it's not going to comply with the law''.

He said Mr Key needed to "come clean'' about what he knew about the deleted information.

The inquiry into the GCSB by former Cabinet secretary Rebecca Kitteridge, the incoming Security Intelligence Service boss, referred to material being "aged off'' its systems.

The process was referred to when detailing how the GCSB dealt with failure to follow its own law or rules. She wrote "the information concerning the target will be deleted within GCSB if it has not already 'aged off' the system''.

Speaking in Auckland later, Mr Key said Dotcom was "completely and utterly wrong''.

"I can't talk specifically about Mr Dotcom's evidence because it's before the courts. But what I can say is the claims that he's making that there's some kind of inconsistency with how we treat things is quite wrong,'' he said.

"Essentially, legal documents that are created by GCSB are held in their system and archived for evidence. Raw intelligence has to actually, by law, age off the system if it's no longer relevant or required,'' he said.

"The great irony is, if you cast your mind back to the GCSB debate, there were many people arguing that the GCSB shouldn't hold on to data for as along as it does. Now these same people seem to be saying `ah well, we should be holding onto this data forever'. They're just trying to join dots that cannot be joined and confuse people.''

This amazing theatre-farce is being acted out in front of the probably by now bewildered NZ public who would presumably have thought, up to this point at any rate, that on the whole NZ was about as far as one could get from a State that was corrupt and repressive. Given the apparent and surprising disappointments on those fronts, the last bastion of freedom and justice would be the judiciary and the courts of law. Let's hope they are up to the task.

Some people (not me, you understand) might say that, unless he can pull a rabbit of considerable integrity out of a hat, Prime Minister John Key looks like he could be at risk of becoming dog tucker come the next election, but I couldn't possibly comment.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #181 on: February 19, 2014, 04:59:29 PM »
Now the NZ judiciary have apparently reversed the decision that the Dotcom raid was illegal, though the FBI's taking of evidence is apparently still deemed as being illegal. One has no idea what the heck is going on or how long it may be before the decision(s) are changed again. PM John Keys seems to be wanting to make little comment and is keeping the thing at arm's length (as he should). No mention yet of how the apparent perjury by the police is to be addressed.
Here's a a very good summary from Stuff.co.nz
(Copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)
Quote
Dotcom raid legal, FBI taking evidence not
AIMEE GULLIVER AND KIRSTY JOHNSTON
Last updated 14:24 19/02/2014
Fairfax NZ

The Court of Appeal has ruled that the raids on Kim DotCom's mansion were legal - however the removal of electronic goods was an unauthorised breach.
Kim Dotcom
RAIDS WERE LEGAL: Though the warrants to raid Kim Dotcom's Auckland mansion in 2012 were flawed, the Court of Appeal says they were still valid.
Related Links
Court of Appeal judgment: Her Majesty's Attorney-General v Kim Dotcom
Crime
Man dies in river fall Lundy retrial delayed Dotcom raid legal, FBI taking evidence not Police not called over possible $15m fraud Top court throws out killer's claim for damages Sorry mum, your car's been confiscated Sikh leader escapes jail Sex worker heard about Mob 'tax' Stabbing was self defence, jury finds Home detention for fatal race

Police raids on Kim Dotcom's mansion in 2012 have been declared legal, but FBI removal of electronic information seized in the search was an unauthorised breach, the Court of Appeal has found.

    Court of Appeal judgment: Her Majesty's Attorney-General v Kim Dotcom (.pdf)

Dotcom's legal team was reviewing the rulings, and would likely seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court over the validity of the warrants, the internet tycoon's lawyer Ira Rothken said.

Police executed search warrants on the properties of Dotcom and computer programmer Bram van der Kolk on January 20, 2012, seizing 135 electronic items including laptops, computers, portable hard drives, flash storage devices and servers.

In a judgment released today, the Court of Appeal said the warrants were executed at the request of the United States Department of Justice which is seeking the extradition of Dotcom, van der Kolk and others to face trial on a number of charges including breach of copyright and money laundering involving "substantial sums of money".

The High Court ruled last June the search warrants executed on Dotcom's mansion at Coatesville in Auckland's rural north, were invalid because they were not sufficiently specific.

Justice Winkelmann ruled the search warrants "did not adequately describe the offences to which they related" and "authorised the seizure of such very broad categories of items that unauthorised irrelevant material would inevitably be captured".

No offence was identified in the warrants which merely referred to "breach of copyright" - an offence in the United States, but there is no criminal offence of breach of copyright in New Zealand.

The warrants also did not stipulate which country's laws the alleged offence was committed under, Justice Winkelmann found.

The other defects went "to the heart of the warrants and could not be properly categorised as minor", she ruled.

The attorney-general appealed this decision, acknowledging the search warrants were "far from perfect", but that leading authorities required the court to adopt a "common-sense approach taking into account the particular circumstances of the case".

In its judgment today, the Court of Appeal said that while the warrants were defective in some respects, the deficiencies were not sufficient to mean they should be nullified.

Dotcom and the other respondents would have understood the nature and scope of the warrants, especially in light of their arrest warrants – which were not defective - and the explanations given to them by the police when the properties were searched, the Court of Appeal found.

In these circumstance, no miscarriage of justice occurred.

"[We] are satisfied that the defects in the search warrants have not caused any significant prejudice to the respondents beyond the prejudice caused inevitably by the execution of a search warrant," the Appeal Court judgment said.

In relation to the electronic information, the court said the police wrongly permitted the FBI to take to the United States copies of some of the electronic items seized in the raid.

In June the High Court ruled the removal of the copies of the electronic items was in breach of the solicitor-general's direction to the commissioner of police that the items were to remain in the commissioner's "custody and control" until further direction.

The Appeal Court dismissed the Attorney-General's appeal on that matter, and held the removal was unlawful and contrary to the solicitor-general's direction.

None of the other issues relating to Dotcom currently before the courts were dealt with by the Court of Appeal's judgment today.

POLITICAL REACTION

Prime Minister John Key said the case would drag on well past the election.

"What the Court of Appeal has found is that the police search warrants were valid. The only point I would make is there are going to be a lot of twists and turns in terms of litigation with Mr Dotcom. These matters are highly likely to be appealed so we'll just leave it at that."

He said the ruling proved the police were correct when they said the mistakes they made in relation to the raids were "form over substance".

"One of the major arguments were that the police acted in an invalid way that's just not the finding of the Court of Appeal.

The case would likely not be done before the election, he said.

"If somebody wants to appeal an extradition and take legal action at every nook and cranny then it can take a very long time."

Key would not say whether the finding increased the likelihood of Dotcom being extradited.

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman, who last week called the case against Dotcom flawed and said he would move to block any extradition, refused to say whether the verdict had changed his view.

The case had a long way to go "and I'm not going to get into every twist and turn of it".

"It's not really a matter for me, obviously it's between the Crown and Kim Dotcom."

His comments last week were based on the information available to him at the time and he would not reconsider those until the court process was complete.

"There will no doubt be new facts arise over the course of the year ... Let's see what happens over the course of the year and then we'll see what's going on."

DOTCOM EXPLAINED

Kim Dotcom's legal case is made up of four separate strands in four different courts and it's got a long way to go yet, so here's a bluffer's guide.

1. Disclosure: Kim Dotcom's lawyers want to know what evidence the US Government has against him. The US says "disclosure" of evidence isn't required for an extradition hearing. Although the High Court ordered the evidence to be handed over, the Court of Appeal overturned that decision. This argument is now awaiting a ruling by the Supreme Court.

2. Search and Seizure: Last year, the High Court ruled the search warrants used in the January raid on Dotcom's house were too broad, and therefore illegal. Today, that was overturned and the Court of Appeal ruled that while the warrants were defective, they were legal. However, the Appeal Court judges agreed data taken from Dotcom, "cloned", and given to the FBI was unauthorised. Dotcom is likely to take the search warrant decision to the Supreme Court as overturning it could help with his extradition case.

3. Compensation from police and the GCSB: This is related to the search and seizure. Dotcom's team are effectively suing police and the spy agency for $6m for illegally monitoring his communications, then searching his home and taking his property. While today's judgement undermines part of this case - the use of unlawful warrants - Dotcom could still sue for the spying, the unlawful removal of data, and what he believes were "over-the-top" tactics and human rights breaches by the police during the raid.

4. The Extradition: Originally set down for March 2013, due to the myriad of complications in the case, the extradition has now been moved to later this year, with further delays likely. Usually extradition hearings are relatively straightforward, but don't cross your fingers in this case.

TIMELINE

2010

Kim Dotcom, an internet businessman with old convictions for hacking and insider trading (wiped under Germany's clean-slate law), applies for New Zealand residency. Rents mansion of Chrisco founder Richard Bradley in Coatesville.

November: Granted residency.

2011

Early 2011: FBI asks NZ to help investigation of Dotcom's file-sharing business Megaupload.

December 2011: GCSB spies on Dotcom at request of police.

2012

January 20: Armed raid on Dotcom's home. He, Finn Batato, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk arrested. FBI accuse him of half-billion-dollar copyright theft. He denies it.

February 16: Ofcanz and GCSB debrief; police raise concerns surveillance may have been illegal because of permanent residency status.

February 22: Dotcom is granted bail.

February 27: GCSB's lawyer concludes surveillance was lawful.

June 28: In the New Zealand High Court, Justice Helen Winkelmann rules the raid on the Dotcom mansion was illegal.

August 10: Ofcanz's Detective Inspector Grant Wormald tells High Court about a "mystery group" of officials at

December 14 meeting.

August 16: Deputy PM Bill English signs certificate suppressing GCSB involvement in Dotcom raid. The fact gets out anyway.

September 13: GCSB says it became aware the spying was illegal.

September 17: Key launches an inquiry, headed by Inspector-General of Intelligence Paul Neazor.

September 24: Crown files memorandum confirming GCSB involvement. Key goes public.

September 27: Key apologises to Dotcom after Neazor says GCSB surveillance was illegal as Dotcom is NZ resident.

September 28: Greens' Russel Norman lodges complaint with police over GCSB.

October 1: Cabinet Secretary Rebecca Kitteridge begins review of GCSB.

All year: Numerous legal hearings in NZ and US over bail conditions, the legality of the raid and attempts to extradite Dotcom.

2013

January 20: Dotcom launches his new "Mega" file-storage business, with a celebrity-studded party.

March 7: The Court of Appeal rules Dotcom can sue the GCSB and NZ police, upholding a previous High Court decision.

April 3: Scrutiny of GCSB head Ian Fletcher reveals he got the job after an approach by Key. The pair were childhood friends.

April 8: Fairfax's Andrea Vance reveals details from leaked copy of Kitteridge's report into GCSB, which says more than 80 people may have been illegally spied on.

April 9: Kitteridge Report officially released.

June 9: CIA whistleblower Edward Snowden reveals Prism surveillance programme by American NSA. Dotcom talks up links between GCSB and NSA.

July 3: Dotcom appears at select committee hearings on proposed law to let GCSB spy on NZers. Dotcom and Key trade insults.

July 30: Dispute over evidence disclosure reaches the New Zealand Supreme Court.

August 21: New Zealand Government rushes through law change giving GSCB powers to spy on NZers.

2014

January 15: Dotcom unveils a logo revealing his political venture, the Internet Party.

February 19: The Court of Appeal deems the raids on the Dotcom mansion to be legal.

- © Fairfax NZ News
« Last Edit: February 19, 2014, 05:12:51 PM by IainB »

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #182 on: May 21, 2014, 11:14:43 PM »
Here it comes.
(Copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)
Quote
Dotcom Heads to Supreme Court to Appeal Raid Decision
    By Andy     on May 6, 2014

The argument over whether or not the raid on Kim Dotcom's mansion back in January 2012 was legal is heading to the highest court in New Zealand. Yesterday the Supreme Court gave Dotcom permission to appeal a February Court of Appeal ruling that overturned an earlier High Court decision that the raid was unlawful.

Following the huge raid on Kim Dotcom’s mansion in January 2012, questions started to be asked about the legality of the warrants used to launch the operation.

In mid 2012 a High Court judge found that the warrants were not only overbroad but also illegal, providing a big boost to Dotcom’s extradition battle prospects with the United States.

However, this February the Megaupload founder suffered a setback when the Court of Appeal overturned the earlier High Court ruling. While it was agreed the warrants contained flaws, the judges found that overall the warrants were legal.

But it’s not over yet.

The Supreme Court has now granted Dotcom leave to appeal the Court of Appeal ruling from February.

“The Supreme Court granted us permission to argue the validity of search warrants used in this raid,” Dotcom announced on Twitter.

The hearing is set for June 11 to June 12.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #183 on: July 12, 2016, 09:21:16 PM »
Well, it's now July 2016 and Dotcom apparently still hasn't been extradited from Kiwiland to Merika. Lots of appeals etc.
I guess, like well-matured cheeses, "These things take time.".

Meanwhile, prompted by this comment on DCF under Re: Interesting "stuff":
... Megaupload is coming back and your old account will still work ...

- I watched the video and then found this following and rather interesting video interview and report by VICE (they're usually pretty objective):
Kim Dotcom: The Man Behind Megaupload - https://www.youtube..../watch?v=gMxhIfG0MpY

Deozaan

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Points: 1
  • Posts: 7,725
    • View Profile
    • The Blog of Deozaan
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #184 on: July 13, 2016, 02:58:59 AM »
I recently heard Kim Dotcom is no longer behind Mega: somehow someone else got 51+% of ownership so he's abandoning/abandoned it and working on a new project. But I have no sources to back it up. Anyone else know anything about this?

Edit: I realize now that it's possible the video linked above may have explained everything I just said, and that relaunching MegaUpload may be the "new" project I heard about. I haven't watched the video yet, as it's late here and I'm heading to bed.

« Last Edit: July 13, 2016, 03:15:11 AM by Deozaan »

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,143
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #185 on: July 13, 2016, 05:37:09 AM »
Mega is incorporated as an NZ company, and its articles of association, AGM decisions and shareholder changes, etc., are detailed on the NZ Companies Register: https://www.business.govt.nz/companies
It's a relatively transparent system that the public can access, and which needs to be easily accessible so that directors of NZ companies can update their company's status - e.g., file an Annual Return.

I was looking at the Mega details about a year ago, and it was evident that there had been a series of decisions by the Board to  accept significant changes to the ownership, and someone with a Chinese-looking name (could have been a Kiwi) appeared to have become a majority shareholder, with Dotcom progressively reducing his share to what looked like (from memory) a non-controlling or insignificant stake, whilst others had increased their shares/proportions. One shareholder in NZ seemed to have been allocated a small stake. I surmised that this was possibly as part of an employee share-incentive scheme. I did at the time wonder what was going on, as it certainly seemed that Dotcom was either being removed, or was removing himself, from any controlling interest on the Board. I wondered whether it was in anticipation of his deportation.

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,408
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #186 on: July 13, 2016, 07:24:09 AM »
I recently heard Kim Dotcom is no longer behind Mega: somehow someone else got 51+% of ownership so he's abandoning/abandoned it and working on a new project. But I have no sources to back it up. Anyone else know anything about this?

Edit: I realize now that it's possible the video linked above may have explained everything I just said, and that relaunching MegaUpload may be the "new" project I heard about. I haven't watched the video yet, as it's late here and I'm heading to bed.

https://www.rt.com/n...relaunch-kim-dotcom/

https://mega.nz/#blog_40

Renegade

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,220
  • Tell me something you don't know...
    • View Profile
    • Renegade Minds
    • Donate to Member
Re: DOTCOM saga - updates
« Reply #187 on: August 07, 2016, 03:10:57 PM »
https://www.rt.com/n...relaunch-kim-dotcom/

From there:

Quote
“I’ll be the first tech billionaire who got indicted, lost everything and created another billion $ tech company while on bail,” he tweeted.

Original:

https://twitter.com/...s/752288313252257793

Still definitely one of the top bad-asses on the Internet. Right up there with John McAfee.

And he just doesn't stop:

https://twitter.com/...s/762200591170887680

Madman! :D

https://twitter.com/...s/761407503041073152

Absolutely wild.

Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker