"I do not believe you should profit off the content of others."
This is the problem. Distribution is a perfectly legitimate business model, as is hosting. Think, I dunno, Youtube? They don't generate any content; should they not be allowed to make a profit?
Your stance is just strange. Megaupload can have revenue from piracy, just not too much? Once revenue from their illegal content passes operating expenses, they should stop making money off it? I don't understand what you want such a business to actually -do-.
There is a notion that "at some scale, significant quantitative differences are qualitative differences". This drives a lot of legislation around misdemeanors vs felonies and regulations that only apply to businesses/operations of a certain size.
Personal sharing vs mass piracy is a major example. Usually the boundary is drawn at money changing hands, but other boundary lines could be debated.
You might want to see my post below (or above, if the votes move it around). I don't have any issues with distribution as a business model, but essentially due to ideological reasons, I don't believe it should be primarily focused on illegal content, if profit is to be made.
This is the problem. Distribution is a perfectly legitimate business model, as is hosting. Think, I dunno, Youtube? They don't generate any content; should they not be allowed to make a profit?
Your stance is just strange. Megaupload can have revenue from piracy, just not too much? Once revenue from their illegal content passes operating expenses, they should stop making money off it? I don't understand what you want such a business to actually -do-.