Kim Dotcom Warns Mega Users to Backup Their Files

[november_ra1n]

Kim Dotcom Warns Mega Users to Backup Their Files

 

Kim Dotcom is warning users of Mega, the cloud storage company he founded in 2013, to back up their files. According to the entrepreneur, Mega is now under the control of Bill Liu, a New Zealand-based Chinese national that is currently fifth on China's most-wanted criminal list.

In 2012, a combined effort by the United States and New Zealand governments brought Kim Dotcom’s Megaupload empire to its knees. Coordinated raids in multiple locations carried out by heavily armed officers ensured that a clear message was sent to copyright infringers.

 

But despite the overwhelming show of force, Dotcom refused to lie down and just a year later he launched a brand new file-hosting service. Known simply as ‘Mega’, the platform launched to great fanfare in 2013.

 

Mega quickly became a force to be reckoned with in the hosting market, with Dotcom promoting the platform at every turn. Nevertheless, controversy was never far away.

 

In September 2014, Mega was branded a “piracy haven” in a Digital Citizens Alliance report into the activities of “shadowy cyberlockers.”

 

As a direct consequence and under pressure from the U.S. government, in early 2015 PayPal stopped processing payments for Mega. There can be little doubt that hurt the site.

 

But behind the scenes other matters were becoming a distraction. In May 2015, Mega’s bid for a stock listing fell through and just two months later Dotcom’s earlier praise for the company turned sour.

 

“Mega has experienced a hostile takeover and is no longer in the control of people who care about Internet Freedom. The New Zealand Government and Hollywood have seized a significant share of the company,” Dotcom told TorrentFreak.

 

“The combined shares seized by the NZ government and Hollywood were significant enough to stop our listing on the New Zealand stock exchange.”

 

Dotcom had already resigned as a director of Mega in September 2013 but now he was publicly warning people against using the site.

 

Today Dotcom repeated those calls, warning users of Mega over what he sees as the precarious position of the company.

 

“Mega had to survive without a credit card payment processor for almost 2 years now. The air is getting thin. Backup your Mega files,” he told users via Twitter.

 

But while a lack of payment processing options certainly won’t be helping Mega, Dotcom sees more danger in the reported controller of Mega, Chinese national and New Zealand citizen Bill Liu.

 

Back in 2009, Liu made headlines when it was revealed that despite being wanted for fraud in China, he was granted citizenship in New Zealand. Now it’s been revealed by kiwi Prime Minister John Key that Liu is ranked number five on China’s “Top 100” extradition list.

 

“I haven’t seen the list, but there is a list,” Key said.

 

“They’ve also put out a list worldwide of the Top 100. Bill Liu is number five on it,” he said of the Chinese government.

 

New Zealand police have already seized millions of dollars of assets that are believed to belong to Liu, including some held in Mega, although Liu denies all wrong doing. Dotcom, however, remains unconvinced.

 

“The 5th most wanted criminal in China is in control of Mega and he wants to float the business in HK? Good luck,” he said this morning.

 

As these situations go, the short history of Mega is utterly unique. Never before has a platform in the file-sharing space had two entrepreneurs each worth millions of dollars being pursued for extradition by two of the world’s most powerful governments for entirely different reasons.

 

It’s currently very late evening in New Zealand so we’re not expecting an immediate response from Mega to our requests for comment. We’ll add them here as soon as they arrive.

 

Update: Statement from Mega chairman Stephen Hall

 

“Mega has significant funding and strong support from shareholders so its financial position is certainly not precarious. Dotcom’s comment is factually incorrect and the motive is unknown,” Hall informs TF.

 

“Mega continues to experience strong growth which illustrates the global appreciation of the quality of its services. Mr Liu has a shareholding interest but has no management or board position so he certainly doesn’t control Mega.”

 

Via: torrentfreak

[november_ra1n]

How The US Government Legally Stole Millions From Kim Dotcom

from the the-fun-of-asset-forfeiture dept

About a month ago we covered the basics of the lawsuit by which the US government was seeking to keep pretty much all of Kim Dotcom's assets, despite the fact that Dotcom himself hasn't been tried -- and, in fact, it hasn't even been determined if he can be extradited to the United States (a country he's never visited). This week, that case took another step, with the judge, Liam O'Grady, who had already ruled that Kim Dotcom could be considered a "fugitive," more or less finalizing the theft of Dotcom's assets by declaring a default judgment in favor of the US. This isn't the end of the process (not by a longshot), but it highlights just how the US government can use some ridiculous procedures to steal millions in assets from someone who hasn't been shown to be guilty of anything.

As we discussed last time, the story of the raid on Kim Dotcom's rented home in New Zealand, the seizure of all of his cars, money, bank accounts, computers, servers, etc. is well known. That was part of a case for which Kim Dotcom was indicted (under what appears to be questionable legal reasoning -- but that's a separate issue). As has been widely reported, that case is still on hold while Dotcom fights extradition from New Zealand. The extradition fight will finally go to a New Zealand court later this summer. Once that's done, if Dotcom loses, he'll be sent to the US, where he'll face a criminal trial based on the indictment.

But this is actually separate from all of that. You see, when the US government grabbed or froze all of Dotcom's assets, they did so using an asset seizure procedure. Asset seizure is allowed in such cases, but the government then has to give that property back. What the government really wanted to do is keep all of Dotcom's tens of millions of dollars worth of assets -- and in order to do that it has to go through a separate process, known as civil asset forfeiture. It's technically a civil (not criminal) case, but (and here's the part that people find most confusing), it's not actually filed against Kim Dotcom at all, but rather against his stuff that the government already seized. Yes, it's technically an entirely separate lawsuit, that was only filed last summer (two and a half years after the government seized all of his stuff and shut down his company), entitled United States Of America v. All Assets Listed In Attachment A, And All Interest, Benefits, And Assets Traceable Thereto. And, as we noted last time, Attachment A is basically all of Kim Dotcom's stuff.

This whole process is known as an "in rem" proceeding -- meaning a lawsuit "against a thing" rather than against a person. And the "case" basically says all this stuff should be "forfeited" to the US government because it's the proceeds of some criminal activity. You would think that in order for such civil asset forfeiture to go forward, you'd then have to show something like a criminal conviction proving that the assets in question were, in fact, tied to criminal activity. You'd be wrong -- as is clear from what happened in this very case. Once the Justice Department effectively filed a lawsuit against "all of Kim Dotcom's money and stuff," Dotcom did what you're supposed to do in that situation and filed a challenge to such a ridiculous situation. And here the DOJ used the fact that Dotcom was fighting extradition to argue that he was a "fugitive." Judge O'Grady agreed with that last month, and that resulted in the decision earlier this week to then declare a "default judgment" in favor of the DOJ, and giving the US government all of Kim Dotcom's stuff.

A "default judgment?" As you know if you regularly read Techdirt, that's usually what happens when a defendant simply ignores a court case filed against him. As the court notes in this ruling, for that to happen in a civil asset forfeiture case, it means no one tried to block the claim:

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 permits the court to grant a motion for default judgment when the well-pled allegations of the complaint establish plaintiff's entitlement to relief, and where a defendant has failed to plead or defend as provided by the rules.... In the civil forfeiture context, default judgment is permitted where no potential claimant has filed a response to the complaint...

A defendant in default, and a claimant who fails to assert a claim in rem, is deemed to have admitted all of the plaintiff's well-pled allegations of fact, which then form the basis for the judgment in the plaintiff's favor.

But, wait, you say: Kim Dotcom did file a complaint about the asset forfeiture, so how could a default judgment happen here? That's where the whole "fugitive" bit comes in. Because Dotcom won't come to the US, he's been deemed a fugitive, and thus the Judge simply hands over all of his stuff to the US government. And thus, without any sort of criminal conviction at all, the US gets to steal millions of dollars from Dotcom.

If that sounds insane, you're absolutely right. And, again, it is entirely possible that when all of this is over, Kim Dotcom will be found guilty of "criminal conspiracy." If that's the case, then at that point it's reasonable to discuss whether the government should get to keep all of his stuff. But it seems an absolute travesty of concepts like due process for the government to be able to take all of his money and stuff based on purely procedural reasons having to do with a separate criminal case that hasn't even been tried yet.

The process isn't over yet. Dotcom can still appeal this ruling, though the real problem is with the civil asset forfeiture process, rather than how it was applied in this particular case. Dotcom also has other options for the assets that are in New Zealand and Hong Kong, in using the local courts in those places to try to block the transfer of those assets to the US government. Not knowing enough about the law in either place, it's difficult to say what the chances of success of such a strategy would be. Either way, this seems like a classic case demonstrating how the civil asset forfeiture process appears to be little more than legalized theft by the US government.

 

Backup earlier news Via:techdirt.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jogs]

Every thing about Mr. Dotcom has always been confusing. 
 

[luisam]

Pirates' life might not be as easy as seems. Just remember all those "Caribbean" and "South Sea's" pirates: ended hung up! As for host sites selling "premium" subscription fees, starting with Rapidshare, Megaupload and including this infamous Mega, I found them always too risky to "invest" my money for getting those fast and unlimited up and downloads.

[TrasMontano]

Where to go from Mega?

[mikie]

Its really shameful America doesn't have some common sense requirement of Judges.  Judges almost always are lawyers - lawyers, most know how to manipulate the laws for their own benefits - its crazy.   Lawyers are the Pirates more so than Kim DotCom.    My xwife's divorce attorney lost his ability to practice law.. 6 months suspension .. my moms attorney seemed to have lost his ability to practice law completely.   So lawyers do get hung somewhat, wish it was just like old pirates would..its very few that actually make the news ... and all seem to take advantages of every opportunity for fame and fortune that they can with absolutely no morals or any kind of a normal common sense..  

[steven36]

If you used megaupload services back  back before 2012  they weren't free  only  there were  2 ways  too get free downloads  They had megaupload happy hour witch was 12 hours  a day you had to install  this adware called Megakey and let Kim Dotcom harvest  you're  data  for it being free 12 hours a day  or use Mega Happy Hour leecher  witch with was ran by vinaget not Megaupload  . If you tired  to use it as free user it could take hours to get a download slot.

 

Kim Dotcom never followed DMCA  or did he ever delete anything , when a link was reported he only deleted  the link and if you uploaded something and  it was already on megaupload  they never really stored  you're  file  a 100 people could upload the same file  and  they never uploaded nothing but the 1st person who uploaded it .,

 

There's  a risk with any file host you  could you could lose you're  files  but at lest  the new Mega is a free download and they give you plenty free space . Its a much better service than what Kim Dotcom had before he got raided .

 

 

[CODYQX4]

.

[Jaley]

Guys consider building your own FreeNAS should you have any spare hard drives and motherboard lying around. Having your own hardware would be much safer as compared to storing them on someone else computers/servers