I have to admit, having skimmed the indictment, I don't think NZ had much choice; among other things one of the charges is international money laundering (which... the hell? it was just payments via Paypal), and it includes a lot of quoting of emails that wow, these guys were just incredibly stupid to send each other. And the whole thing is couched in the most inflammatory terms, of course -- Mega Conspiracy this, Mega Conspiracy that.
But I'm really hoping there's a strong backlash about how much legitimate traffic, and how many people's personal files, the feds have just completely hosed, because what the fuck. There are people whose legitimate jobs depend on filesharing via MegaUpload, and they've now lost their businesses, too.
Aaaagh. Especially since I had some stuff of my own up there, including something I was working on from my old job, and hadn't yet remembered to dl it onto my new computer. Feh.
I feel like I should have expected it, somehow. I forget if I mentioned to you that talk that happened in my neck of the woods, by the Chief Operating Officer of Paramount. He spent a lot of time complaining about Megaupload, including a bunch of frothing about how much money the owner of MU made and how fancy his lifestyle is (something about him owning two floors of a high rise in Hong Kong? Who knows, I was tuning out at that point). The amount of detail the guy went into should perhaps have made me think, "corporation-supported task force." But alas it did not.
Oh, gah, how frustrating! And maddening -- dammit, they had no right to shut down legitimate files.
And wow, sour grapes, much, Paramout COO? "Our business model is old and creaky and I no longer make enough to own two floors of a high rise. This guy's business model allows him to rake in millions without ever selling anyone else's property. HE IS TEH SUXX0R! HOLLYWOOD SMASH!!"
Y'know, if Hollywood would put up downloadable files of their own work, DRM free, on creaktastic slow servers, and offer faster, clean, multiple downloads for a subscription price like MU did, people would fucking flock to it. They too could be raking in millions based on subscriptions and ads, and all off their own content. Which people would trust more, because you wouldn't be worried about Hollywood or the DOJ uploading infected files to trap people. Seriously, they'd make a fortune.
But no, so much better to spend millions on lawyers and lawsuits trying to stamp out a successful business model than spend thousands emulating it and reaping all the profits.
THIS. Honestly! What part of "people are tired of waiting for you to enter the 1990s (much less the 21st century)" doesn't Hollywood understand?
Not just Hollywood, though, and there's the rub. I was a heavy user (paid up for another year *sniff*) of MU to get overseas programs I can't get anywhere else. Except (sometimes) YouTube, which bleh. (Streaming sucks, IMO.)
And now I get to worry about the govt coming to toss me in jail, since I had files on MU.
Yes, I bet the Paramount COO is living in a *shack* because of all the piracy going on. Boo-hoo-hoo. >:(
Fwiw, although this is starting to vanish out of articles as the focus shifts to Anonymous's takedown of ... everyone, there was a line in some reports saying the DOJ isn't going after end users:
At the moment, at least, it's still in the linked article.
And yeah; I know a lot of people love streaming, and I'll use it sometimes, but I don't want to have to be online on a fast Internet connection to watch something. I want it in my nice big tv, on a drive where it doesn't have to buffer, where a dodgy connection doesn't keep bouncing me back to the beginning of something.
It's just so stupid. Why are they all so determined to refuse to accept a willing customer base! Arrgh. All the media companies everywhere could market to the entire world, and instead they freak out and demand that we close all the old boxes back up. *hands*
Thanks for the link! I hope that remains the case. (And compared to others, I'm probably a very small fish... though that didn't seem to matter to RIAA back in the day.)
My response if they come after me is: "Please, show me where I can buy these programs with English subtitles. I would purchase them if I could!" If they raid my home, they'll see I've spent far, far more on DVDs than I ever spent on a MU membership. The tunnel vision the media companies have is just so... ARGH.
Re: streaming. Exactly! I want it on my TV, not my computer, and I don't want to buffer or worry about blippy connections. Not to mention the YouTube stuff with the wrong aspect ratio, which drives me up the wall. If I DL it, at least I can correct the aspect ratio.
I had so much on my mu account, old PW stuff, queen of swords, and of course, I lost the money from my two year subscription. If the Feds come after me, hopefully the people I uploaded shows for will contribute to my legal defence fund.
I think end users are probably safe, based on something that was showing up in news reports (below) and a breakdown that obsessive24 did on LJ pulling out some of the key points of the indictment, where a lot of the focus seemed to be on things physically happening in Virginia and deliberate acts "for private financial gain".
This was originally showing up more places but got removed as the focus shifted to Anonymous's attacks (and man, I wish news agencies would stop just *changing the story* and start adding updates or additions, argh):
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-01-19 10:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-20 04:52 am (UTC)But I'm really hoping there's a strong backlash about how much legitimate traffic, and how many people's personal files, the feds have just completely hosed, because what the fuck. There are people whose legitimate jobs depend on filesharing via MegaUpload, and they've now lost their businesses, too.
Grargh.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-19 11:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-20 04:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-19 11:58 pm (UTC)I feel like I should have expected it, somehow. I forget if I mentioned to you that talk that happened in my neck of the woods, by the Chief Operating Officer of Paramount. He spent a lot of time complaining about Megaupload, including a bunch of frothing about how much money the owner of MU made and how fancy his lifestyle is (something about him owning two floors of a high rise in Hong Kong? Who knows, I was tuning out at that point). The amount of detail the guy went into should perhaps have made me think, "corporation-supported task force." But alas it did not.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-20 04:57 am (UTC)And wow, sour grapes, much, Paramout COO? "Our business model is old and creaky and I no longer make enough to own two floors of a high rise. This guy's business model allows him to rake in millions without ever selling anyone else's property. HE IS TEH SUXX0R! HOLLYWOOD SMASH!!"
Y'know, if Hollywood would put up downloadable files of their own work, DRM free, on creaktastic slow servers, and offer faster, clean, multiple downloads for a subscription price like MU did, people would fucking flock to it. They too could be raking in millions based on subscriptions and ads, and all off their own content. Which people would trust more, because you wouldn't be worried about Hollywood or the DOJ uploading infected files to trap people. Seriously, they'd make a fortune.
But no, so much better to spend millions on lawyers and lawsuits trying to stamp out a successful business model than spend thousands emulating it and reaping all the profits.
Jackasses.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-20 05:25 am (UTC)Not just Hollywood, though, and there's the rub. I was a heavy user (paid up for another year *sniff*) of MU to get overseas programs I can't get anywhere else. Except (sometimes) YouTube, which bleh. (Streaming sucks, IMO.)
And now I get to worry about the govt coming to toss me in jail, since I had files on MU.
Yes, I bet the Paramount COO is living in a *shack* because of all the piracy going on. Boo-hoo-hoo. >:(
no subject
Date: 2012-01-20 06:22 am (UTC)The site boasted 150 million registered users and about 50 million hits daily. The Justice Department said it was illegal for anyone to download pirated content, but their investigation focused on the leaders of the company, not end users who may have downloaded a few movies for personal viewing.
At the moment, at least, it's still in the linked article.
And yeah; I know a lot of people love streaming, and I'll use it sometimes, but I don't want to have to be online on a fast Internet connection to watch something. I want it in my nice big tv, on a drive where it doesn't have to buffer, where a dodgy connection doesn't keep bouncing me back to the beginning of something.
It's just so stupid. Why are they all so determined to refuse to accept a willing customer base! Arrgh. All the media companies everywhere could market to the entire world, and instead they freak out and demand that we close all the old boxes back up. *hands*
no subject
Date: 2012-01-20 04:31 pm (UTC)My response if they come after me is: "Please, show me where I can buy these programs with English subtitles. I would purchase them if I could!" If they raid my home, they'll see I've spent far, far more on DVDs than I ever spent on a MU membership. The tunnel vision the media companies have is just so... ARGH.
Re: streaming. Exactly! I want it on my TV, not my computer, and I don't want to buffer or worry about blippy connections. Not to mention the YouTube stuff with the wrong aspect ratio, which drives me up the wall. If I DL it, at least I can correct the aspect ratio.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-20 03:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-21 06:32 pm (UTC)I think end users are probably safe, based on something that was showing up in news reports (below) and a breakdown that
This was originally showing up more places but got removed as the focus shifted to Anonymous's attacks (and man, I wish news agencies would stop just *changing the story* and start adding updates or additions, argh):
The site boasted 150 million registered users and about 50 million hits daily. The Justice Department said it was illegal for anyone to download pirated content, but their investigation focused on the leaders of the company, not end users who may have downloaded a few movies for personal viewing.
That line is still in that article, at least.
So fingers crossed...