

Megaupload Founder Kim Dotcom Released From Prison - cleverjake
http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-founder-kim-dotcom-released-from-prison-120222/

======
Joakal
The judge violated human right of Internet access. Regardless, they should be
disbarred and mistrial called until a replacement judge with technical
competence to preside can be found.

You'll understand that this right is inalienable if you can't pay your bills
online, transfer money, etc. In fact, in article, he can't even communicate
with his team overseas.

The order only serves to punish and discourage honest people from society due
to the unenforceable nature of it.

Despicable judge.

~~~
dot
internet access is not a human right. the crimes this guy is on trial for
mostly took place on the internet...

he can talk to his lawyers on the phone.

he should be happy to be out of jail and go enjoy the outdoors!

~~~
Joakal
So how is he going to pay online-only bills? Are the courts going to give him
taxpayer money for late fees? Or it's his own fault for not predicting his
arrest?

Can he read about politics as part of his duty as a voter? Due to Internet as
a medium for accessing news, he's further restricted on being an informed
voter.

How is he meant to send material to his lawyers? "Mail it" So instead of
sending it virtually for free, he has to print it out, determine postage, go
find a postal office and then ship it. Vice versa to receive it but it takes
time. Not to mention the massive phone bill because VOIP is INTERNET.

How is he going to be monitored from accessing Internet that's everywhere?
Anti-Satellite jammers? Anti-Wifi jammers?

How is it possible to prevent him from giving the password to someone to start
a megaupload website? Better prevent phones, mail, etc, in that case.

Since I know he's technically proficient, he's probably using the Internet as
we speak. So this order only serves to pad the ego of the prosecution team,
show incompetence of judge and punish honest people for being honest.

~~~
SquareWheel

      "So how is he going to pay online-only bills?"
    
      "Can he read about politics as part of his duty as a voter?"
    

Paying bills online and reading about politics are not human rights either.
There are alternatives available for any task he's expected to do as a member
of society.

    
    
      "Since I know he's technically proficient, he's probably using the Internet as we speak."
    

That's a really bad argument, and I think you know it. He very well may be
online as we speak, his neighbors probably have an unsecured network, but why
is that a good reason to intentionally give the man internet access? He's
shown time and time again that he uses the internet to commit criminal acts,
there is no reason for him to have that access.

This is not a human rights violation.

~~~
Joakal
> Paying bills online and reading about politics are not human rights either.
> There are alternatives available for any task he's expected to do as a
> member of society.

I'm sorry, but Internet access is the human right. You're putting human right
implications in my mouth.

The alternatives available? Jeez, I wonder how he can find out as an Internet
user. Hopefully he had heard about yellow pages? Yes, there actually young
people who do NOT understand non-Internet alternatives.

> He's shown time and time again that he uses the internet to commit criminal
> acts, there is no reason for him to have that access.

He used electricity too. So, cut off his electricity too? Remember, he needs
electricity to run servers and not necessarily the Internet. Seize all
electronics instead? He may have files embedded in the house alarm.
Personally, I didn't want to respond because your rationale is asinine!

~~~
SquareWheel
You could take that argument as far as you'd like. He used oxygen to help him
commit the crimes, thus we should take away his oxygen.

No, the internet has directly helped him commit crimes. It is a tool he used.
As it is non-essential, and we may disagree on that point but the courts are
agreeing with me, then it is logical to remove his privilege.

I don't believe my rationale is asinine at all. I think you're equating this
man's freedom with the protection of the internet itself, and are overstepping
your position because of it.

~~~
Joakal
The prosecution took it that far and the judge does not understand the
implications of Internet as a necessity. I even highlighted that it restricts
many needs to function as a member of society. The reality is that there are
electronics that can easily tap into the World Wide Internet, which gives
credence to my argument that his electricity should be shut off along with all
electronics (may be battery powered) as part of the effort to prevent access
to the Internet.

The Internet did not help him commit crimes, it's a neutral platform. They are
merely carriers just like roads, servers, etc.

> I think you're equating this man's freedom with the protection of the
> internet itself, and are overstepping your position because of it.

Nope, I'm talking specifically about the human right to the Internet due to
the necessities, abundance of electronics with access to Internet, many
potential outlets and most of all; unenforceable to prevent access. I think
you're overstepping your position again by implicating me with other positions
when I've been quite clear.

~~~
SquareWheel
I don't think you have been that clear, but I don't want to see this
discussion turn personal. I have nothing against you, and your opinion is just
as valid as my own.

On the question of if the internet is a human right, I think it's quite
obvious the answer is no. It has never been viewed as one in the past as far
as I know, I've yet to see a judge rule that to be the case.

A better question is, should it be? I'd like to see that happen, though I
think it will take time to get there.

~~~
Joakal
I apologise. I was explaining that I did not like being misrepresented by
others. I would have been less defensive to a request to clarify my posts.

As for it being a human right from precedent, it's already recognised in some
European countries (some of it even includes minimal Internet transfer rates)
and discussed at UN. Unfortunately for UN, I believe certain influences do not
want it to happen, eg USA based on ACTA's proposal that had included demands
for three strikes among other Internet access restrictions.

There's a lot of information from this article:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_access> and
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Internet_access>

No hard feelings, mate!

------
NegativeOne
Here's hoping he stashed some cash and can make a clean getaway. 50 years is
what they want to charge him with for copyright infringement, ludicrous.
Rapists get a fraction of the time.

~~~
getsat
Rapists don't hurt (allegedly potential) corporate profits.

------
trotsky
Wouldn't any traditional outlet use the phrase "released on bail" or similar?
Released from prison is typically only used after a sentence has been served
or overturned.

------
Pelayo
"Dotcom had been held in custody since an anti-terrorist police squad raided
his Coatesville mansion last month..."

Doesn't anyone find it odd that the entertainment industry can manipulate
governments into sending these specialized teams (anti-terrorist in New
Zealand, SWAT in the US)? What are they telling these people? Are you telling
me that if the police had sent over one or two squad cars with a couple of
cops that Dotcom would have escaped?

How much does an operation like this cost? I can't believe it's that cheap.

------
jrockway
And the US government's attempt to intimidate a foreign national in the name
of piracy fails again. Maybe they'll eventually get the idea and stop worrying
about file sharing and start spending money on schools again.

~~~
pyre
He's still facing extradition. He just gets the be under what amounts to
'house arrest' during the hearings.

------
revelation
What kind of insane argument is that. You can't just start a new MegaUpload
and have the big crime profits flow in instantaneously. It takes time to build
a new user (and data) base.

~~~
sek
I wonder how they shut it down in the first place. They obviously can take the
.com domain, but MU should have been online on a different domain on the same
day.

They were not prepared i assume, what is an argument against then doing
something really illegal.

~~~
Joakal
They're a centralised company, not a de-centralised group of people all over
the world like The Pirate Bay among others.

------
chimeracoder
Restricting access to the Internet? I agree with the defense - in this day and
age, that's absolutely ludicrous.

~~~
sek
This reminds me of the first hacker suits, they were so scared of them, they
thought they could launch an atomic bomb over the phone.

~~~
shalmanese
"Mitnick served five years in prison — four and a half years pre-trial and
eight months in solitary confinement — because, according to Mitnick, law
enforcement officials convinced a judge that he had the ability to "start a
nuclear war by whistling into a pay phone".[12] He was released on January 21,
2000. During his supervised release, which ended on January 21, 2003, he was
initially forbidden to use any communications technology other than a landline
telephone. Mitnick fought this decision in court, eventually winning a ruling
in his favor, allowing him to access the Internet."

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Mitnick>

~~~
firefoxman1
I don't know if it's an urban legend or not, but I heard that they put a
special cover on the light in his retaining cell because they were afraid he
would find some way to "hack" his way out with the wires.

~~~
nitrogen
That would be an entertaining plot device in a spy movie: spy gets captured,
finds that power fluctuations occasionally flip a bit in the memory of the
security system, uses the light in his/her cell to flip all the bits
corresponding to the door locks...

~~~
boredguy8
_Real_ hackers use butterflies:
<http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/real_programmers.png>

------
rms
Odds that he will make it to the safe harbor of Germany?

~~~
rd108
Curious- why is Germany a safe harbor for DotCom?

~~~
rangibaby
IANAL but this is the text of the US-Germany extradition treaty. It seems to
say that neither country has an obligation to extradite their own citizens.

"The article thus takes into account the law of the FRG prohibiting the
extradition of its nationals but allowing for their prosecution in the FRG."

Article 7

EXTRADITION OF NATIONALS

(1) Neither of the Contracting Parties shall be bound to extradite its own
nationals. The competent executive authority of the Requested State, however,
shall have the power to grant the extradition of its own nationals if, in its
discretion, this is deemed proper to do and provided the law of the Requested
State does not so preclude.

(2) The Requested State shall undertake all available legal measures to
suspend naturalization proceedings in respect of the person sought until a
decision on the request for his extradition and, if that request is granted,
until his surrender.

(3) If the Requested State does not extradite its own national, it shall, at
the request of the Requesting State, submit the case to its competent
authorities in order that proceedings may be taken if they are considered
appropriate. If the Requested State requires additional documents or evidence,
such documents or evidence shall be submitted without charge to that State.
The Requesting State shall be informed of the result of its request.

------
lawnchair_larry
What I found most interesting was that the judge said they found no financial
means for him to be a flight risk, just empty bank accounts.

~~~
lwat
He probably has a pile of cash stored somewhere

------
jakeonthemove
And now he's in for a long, slow battle with an unforgiving, bloated system
that will try to boil him alive. Man, seriously, having to spend years in
legal battles with restrictions placed on what you can do is probably worse
than immediate imprisonment... And no Internet? Just shoot me, please...

------
guynamedloren
I wonder how they'd stop a helicopter from landing in his yard. Even if the
place is locked down with police/surveillance, what are they going to do when
they see that helicopter - shoot the damn thing down? If this guy wants to
flee, he'll make it happen one way or another.

~~~
polemic
A helicopter from New Zealand to...?

~~~
terhechte
Germany. It has an extradition law but not for it's own citizens. Thus Kim
would face jurisdiction in Germany, but under their law. And in contrast to
the US, it would far less worse. Maybe two years in jail, or even just a fine.

~~~
polemic
You guys know where New Zealand is, right?

You're going to need something to fly you over about 2000km of water - which
gets you to Australia, which is the _last_ place you want to be if you're
fighting extradition to the US.

[http://maps.google.co.nz/?ll=-43.197167,-177.539062&spn=...](http://maps.google.co.nz/?ll=-43.197167,-177.539062&spn=98.309359,158.027344&t=m&z=3)

------
joezhou
The guy's name is Dotcom... O WOW

