
Megaupload data could be deleted this week - ukdm
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-pick/megaupload-data-could-be-deleted-this-week-20120130/
======
tomp
> The most logical thing to do would be for prosecutors to pay both data hosts
> using cash from the seized Megaupload bank accounts.

Maybe the most logical, but certainly also the most immoral and illegal.
That's basically stealing money - why should Megaupload pay for data hosting
if it can't use? As long as it's not ruled illegal by the court, it still has
the right to use its money just the way it wants.

~~~
michaelfeathers
I suspect a Judge could just order the data hosts to retain the data, or seize
it as evidence through an order to transfer it.

~~~
VonLipwig
I would guess that would depend where the hosting resides. If the host is non-
US then it is out of the courts jurisdiction.

You need to think about the cost to the hosting company. I assume they are
holding a lot of data and a large number of servers are tied up doing nothing
without payment. They have every right to clean the server and allocate it
elsewhere.

If anyone should be footing the bill it should be the prosecutors themselves.
They can't take it from MegaUpload. The defense shouldn't pay for it as the
data may actually damage their case. You would expect them to be in a stronger
position with the proof gone.

You also need to think about the damage to the company. I am sure the
prosecutors think they have a slam-dunk but what if they loose? They would
have effectively destroyed a multi-million dollar company as a result of a
failed prosecution. You could expect a fairly large compensation package in
this scenario.

~~~
ttt_
That's the problem with the shoot-first-ask-later approach that they have
pursued. I'm positive they did not think this through all possible
ramifications and now they are left with a great big mess on their hands.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
I think their _real_ goal was to destroy MU. If the case happened to go away
in the process, that might even be better, since you wouldn't have to worry
about pesky precedence being set. If the government can blame the case going
away on somebody else, they might be able to duck any civil consequences in
the process (IANAL). They may have thought this through _very_ well.

One reason this may be patently false is that I'm sure Hollywood would _love_
to see people put in jail for copyright infringement.

------
dodedo
The MU takedown was ostensibly justified in terms of seizing evidence. Why
would Carpathia and Cogent not be subject to the same process of seizing the
storage as evidence?

It very much looks like the seizure process is being used as a directed
punitive measure and not merely as an evidence gathering process. We need
better laws in the US to protect against seizure being used as non-judiciary,
extra-legal punishment.

~~~
axusgrad
Such as the 4th amendment? It's really been eroded, it will take a lot to
restore it.

------
sschueller
Wow, if this is true you could call it a MegaFail by the US Justice
Department.

Am I the only one that finds the use of the word ‘Mega Conspiracy’ in the
indictment utterly inappropriate and childish?

~~~
LoneWolf
No you are not, I think the same. Now about letting the files be deleted, this
is good and bad, legitimate users will lose their data (obviously bad, but not
knowing the rules of the storage I'm not sure), evidence will be destroyed
(good for pirates, bad for the prossecution, about the defense I'm not sure)

~~~
av500
Only legitimate users who did _not_ keep a local copy of their files will lose
their data...

Unfortunately Google cache has stopped serving the MU terms of service, but
this link still has them: [http://www.scribd.com/doc/78876728/Megaupload-
Condiciones-de...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/78876728/Megaupload-Condiciones-
del-servicio-Terms-of-service) and there it says:

"No Warranty

You expressly understand and agree that: (a) your use of the Service is at
your sole risk. Megaupload Services are provided on an "as is" and "as
available" basis. Megaupload and its suppliers, to the fullest extent
permitted by law, disclaim all warranties, including but not limited to
warranties of title, fitness for a particular purpose, merchantability and
non-infringement of proprietary or third party rights. Megaupload and its
suppliers make no warranties about the accuracy, reliability, completeness, or
timeliness of our Services, software, or content; (b) Megaupload makes no
warranty that (i) the Service will meet your requirements, (ii) the service
will be uninterrupted, timely, secure, or error-free,(iii) the results that
may be obtained from the use of the service will be accurate or reliable, (iv)
the quality of any products, services, information, or other material
purchased or obtained by you through the Service will meet your expectations,
and (v) any errors in the software will be corrected; ..."

~~~
Anderkent
As if anyone read the ToS.

~~~
av500
Agreed, nobody did, but everybody is screaming bloody murder now it seems...

------
andrewreds
"""On the flip side, Kim Dotcom will lose the ability to use the data to
defend himself after pleading not guilty to piracy."""

Is it me, or is this saying: "We [the author(s) of the page] don't care if he
has any evidence proving he is innocent. We just want to see him in jail"

~~~
tomp
No, in context of the previous sentence:

> But just as serious, prosecutors will lose valuable evidence with which to
> prosecute Megaupload’s owners.

they just pointed out that both sides will lose evidence that might help their
case.

~~~
VonLipwig
Surely the prosecutors loose their case if the data goes. Doesn't the defense
shift from 'we moderated content, majority was legal' to 'prove that we hosted
illegal content'.

With the data deleted isn't it like trying to commit someone of murder after
the murder weapon mysteriously vanished?

~~~
hobin
Yeah, that's sort of what I thought. This "On the flip side, Kim Dotcom will
lose the ability to use the data to defend himself after pleading not guilty
to piracy," seems very strange to me. Obviously, if the data were to be
deleted, it would be because the FBI stopped Megaupload from paying for those
data-center services. Thus, we would get a situation where the feds are at
least indirectly responsible for destroying evidence, and then argue "well,
prove that the data which has just been conveniently destroyed wasn't
pirated!" That makes no sense at all, only makes for a stronger defense, so I
don't think that's what they're going to try (which is why they had better
preserve the damn data).

Perhaps even more importantly, if this data gets destroyed and they can't find
further evidence to use against the Megaupload bosses, this would mean a
federal bureau effectively destroyed a company _without having any evidence of
them having committed a crime_. That would be a very bad thing, and would set
a very, very bad precedent.

~~~
hga
It's happened many times before. Anderson Consulting
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen>), then one of the "Big 5"
accounting companies, suffered a "sentence first, verdict afterwords"
execution when they were prosecuted for their putative crimes in the Enron
debacle.

The reversal by the Supreme Court a few years later was cold comfort to the
shell of the company that was left, the 85,000 people it once employed, the
partners who lost the value of their holdings in the company, etc.

(And this hysteria lead to Sar-Box, which just happened to be the final nail
in the coffin of the traditional IPO startup exit except for a very few
massive successes.)

~~~
hobin
I stand corrected. Unfortunately, this makes it only sadder.

------
joshz
It's a bit strange that they can do that. FBI didn't have a problem grabbing
Core IP/Croydon equipment when they investigated the Paypal attacks couple
years ago, but here, they somehow can't find some legal justification to force
Cogent/Carpathia to keep the data. Isn't it evidence? It pretty much seems
like DOJ or whoever wanted to destroy Megaupload and they will have achieved
that regardless of how they pursue it. No data, no company, they're still in
jail.

------
Mordor
Finding it sad the top stories are about the US ruining the internet. Not sure
this is what people vote for. How can any government be so opposed to the
reasons it was elected in the first place?

------
corin_
If Megaupload were to win the case, get their domain/money/etc. back, would
they be able to seek compensation?

I don't know if they have any chance of winning, but if they did I can't
imagine their being able to rescue the company - even if they did, they surely
wouldn't have a hard time showing how much damage the downtime did to them
financially. What options would they have?

~~~
celticninja
Proving the lost costs would be a case of saying we made $Z per day and were
off line for Y days, Z*Y= lost revenue. Add to that compensation for lost data
for end users plus an arbitrarily large figure for lost "goodwill" in the
business and punitive damages. Lawyers are good at this sort of sum as they
usually get to stick a few 0's on the end of the figure they come up with.

~~~
av500
there is no need to compensate end users for lost data as the MU terms of
service explicitly ruled out any such compensation...

~~~
dodedo
Only for MU; not from a third party such as the federal government. The ToS is
a private contract between MU and their customers. It is completely
inapplicable to any issue between their customers and the federal government.

That said, the users will likely never see a dime because the government's
sovereign immunity prevents anyone from suing the federal government over
damages relating to law enforcement seizing evidence of a crime.

This immunity is what enables the executive branch of the government to abuse
this authority and treat seizure as a form of extra-judicial punishment
without going through the courts.

------
res0nat0r
This article is incorrect.

[http://www.slashgear.com/megaupload-host-denies-data-
delete-...](http://www.slashgear.com/megaupload-host-denies-data-delete-..).

From a Carpathia rep: “In reference to the letter filed by the U.S. Department
of Justice with the Eastern District of Virginia on Jan. 27, 2012, Carpathia
Hosting does not have, and has never had, access to the content on MegaUpload
servers and has no mechanism for returning any content residing on such
servers to MegaUpload’s customers. The reference to the Feb. 2, 2012 date in
the Department of Justice letter for the deletion of content is not based on
any information provided by Carpathia to the U.S. Government. We would
recommend that anyone who believes that they have content on MegaUpload
servers contact MegaUpload. Please do not contact Carpathia Hosting”

------
pmuhar
I think they should at least allow users to access their data temporarily.
Open up users accounts for downloading only the files that they have
personally uploaded for 48 hours and after that they can wipe everything
clean.

------
mrtmanning
I would have thought it would be evidence tampering if they did delete the
data.

~~~
astrodust
Their hosting bill had to be staggeringly high. I'd hate to be an ISP with all
this equipment sidelined, sitting idle, not generating revenue.

~~~
rmc
It could be high, but if no-one's accessing it, then you have no bandwidth
costs. Just turn off the machines, and take out the harddrives, and store them
somewhere safe. You now don't have to pay for bandwidth, power or cooling.
Could be much cheaper than when they were left on and used.

~~~
Dylan16807
Only if they have a sufficiently flexible bandwidth contract.

~~~
rmc
I'm not saying that MegaUpload need to pay for this, but more of how the
hosting company can not destroy evidence and not have to spend a lot of money.

------
tuananh
so there's no going back. :(

------
maeon3
By doing all this raiding of ptp stuff, you actually harm everybody involved,
RIAA doesn't make more money, the freedom index of america shifts down from
the 20's to the 40's, net neutrality dies as everyone puts a "This website,
button, service, etc is not available to you".

The internet is trying to be transmogrified into fox news, where you can "tune
in" to any government authorized channels. If we don't kick and scream to stop
this, we'll wake up and the internet will be "one-way", like TV was in the
1960's.

