
Megaupload’s Kim Dotcom Gets $750,000 Back - DiabloD3
https://torrentfreak.com/megauploads-kim-dotcom-gets-750-000-back-120428/
======
jmitcheson
I come from New Zealand, and I'd like to chip in that if anyone thinks the
behaviour of the NZ Govt is confusing then they probably aren't aware that NZ
Govt is eagerly gunning for a Free Trade Agreement with the USA

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NZ-
US_relations#Proposed_Free_T...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NZ-
US_relations#Proposed_Free_Trade_Agreement)

This is my personal speculation but it's also the spirit of what was behind
the new "three strikes" copyright law (which almost no citizen wanted)
introduced to NZ in September 2011 which makes NZ ISPs do the police work of
the MPAA/RIAA

<http://3strikes.net.nz/information/law-basics>

The next thing that is going to be attacked is the New Zealand abolition of
software patents - [http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/opinion-us-heavies-nz-
software-...](http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/opinion-us-heavies-nz-software-
patents-ck-106373)

Please don't downvote this if it comes across as "anti-US" - it's not meant to
be and I'm only posting a collection of facts which I think everyone here
would find interesting about US-NZ tech relations

~~~
Joakal
Sounds like a de ja vu of Hew Griffiths:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Griffiths>

------
kijin
> _New Zealand authorities didn’t investigate the US request, but Judge Potter
> said that the Attorney General is not required to evaluate the legitimacy of
> the US order._

So the NZ Govt will seize your stuff just because some other country tells
them to do so, without even making sure that all the paperwork is in place? Is
that the same standard of evidence they use to justify domestic searches and
seizures?

~~~
btn
I think that the "legitimacy of the US order" refers to the evidence that will
be presented to the US grand jury, not the search warrant in New Zealand. The
Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act [1] requires that the Attorney
General be satisfied that the request be related to a foreign criminal matter,
but they do not have to ensure that the order would be held up in the US.

[1]
[http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1992/0086/latest/D...](http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1992/0086/latest/DLM274456.html)

~~~
kijin
That makes more sense, though it still looks like a dangerous abridgment of
due process if the country that actually seizes the assets feels no need to
launch an independent investigation to find out whether or not the allegations
have any merit.

~~~
Joakal
I hope the NZ government revises their extradition treaty in this light. USA
has a legal reputation of trumped up charges to force a plea deal despite no
trial. Especially if they can play the card of 'money laundering' which
legally allows them to seize every asset and cash.

USA is becoming a very dangerous country.

~~~
erichocean
It's been that way for awhile, mostly due to the War on Drugs (although the
War on Terror also helped kick things into gear on the surveillance side).

Given the sum of world history, I don't see how this ends well.

~~~
rbanffy
We are now between two stable states - the US will not be as an important
player in the early 21st century as it was in the late 20th - and a lot is at
stake right now. I can only hope we can all elect governments wise enough to
ensure a smooth transition because trying to prevent - or even postpone - it
will only make it more violent and unpredictable.

------
w1ntermute
Hopefully we'll see a stricter application of rule of law going forward.
What's happened up till now is an appalling example of the US government
forcing domestic police forces in other countries to do things that violate
their own laws.

------
RawData
It's a start at least!

------
locusm
Wheres David Lange when you need him...

