Dotcom says Joe Biden ordered shutdown
July 4th, 2012 at 4:00 pm by David FarrarDavid Fisher at NZ Herald reports:
Kim Dotcom says the shutdown of his Megaupload filesharing service was ordered by the White House after Hollywood studio executives met with US Vice President Joe Biden. …
“I do know from a credible source that it was Joe Biden, the best friend of former Senator and MPAA boss Chris Dodd, who ordered his former lawyer and now state attorney Neil MacBride to take Mega down,” Dotcom told the TorrentFreak website.
I’m sorry, but I doubt the White House allows Joe Biden to order his own lunch, let alone direct the FBI.
No tag for this post.
July 4th, 2012 at 4:13 pm
I give that as much credence as David Lange’s claim that Dan Qualye told the Oz Cabinet that he was going to be assassinated.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 4:13 pm
doesn’t sound that impossible
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 4:20 pm
Wishful thinking on Dotcoms part. If this can be framed as Bidens idea it gets percieved as being the idea of a fool, someone not even able to order their own lunch.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 4:21 pm
The asinine Biden cannot even order his own lunch. The man is a buffoon.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
Boo!
Hiss!
Democrats!
All Democrats are god-hating communists!
Tea Party!
Birth Certificate!
Obscure reference to the Kool Ade!
(BTW – is Joe Biden ordering his own lunch a meme I’ve been missing out on? Or is that something DPF just made up?)
[DPF: As far as I know I made it up. However his propensity to make gaffes is widely reported]
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 4:41 pm
Cool – as a typical leftist I hate to think I am missing out on something free.
The way the lads picked it up and developed it, I wondered if it was something like the Palin being able to see Russia from her house thing…
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
I don’t think that Neil MacBride needed to be ordered to take down Megaload,
He used to be the “anti-piracy” boss at the BSA (AKA the microsoft police) and ran schemes like “bust your boss” to bribe ex-employees to dob in companies that used pirated software……
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 5:15 pm
That;s right NZ, continue your sycophantic Ned Kelly type love affair with Mr Kim Weirdname (including Journo pool swims), the guy who made serious mega gazillions ‘appropriating’ intellectual property from others and selling it
…meantwhile across town another hysterical march about the salary of some Local Govt CEO…
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 5:38 pm
I’ve lost track- Is Kim Dotcom a good-guy or a bad-guy? I thought he was an evil right-winger for a while when he was mixed up with Banks, then he became a hero to the left for ‘sticking it to those evil yanks’, now it seems he is hated by the left’s beloved Obama administration..
Vote:Anyone else confused? Is he a Saint or a Sinner?
July 4th, 2012 at 6:01 pm
He is accused of facilitating internet piracy – by the #1 most beholden to the digital media Government in the world.
He’s innocent until proven guilty in my book.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:07 pm
What RRM said. Would we arrest the CEO of NZ Post because dope/contraband DVD’s/donkey porn/vids of TGM having a rub n’ tug gets sent through the mail and goes via their postal service. Um, no.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Earlier today the court heard that the officers who raided Dotcom’s Coatesville mansion in January may have to take the stand and give evidence as part of the judicial review process.
The warrants that authorised the searches, carried out by New Zealand police on behalf of the FBI, were deemed illegal in a judgement delivered last week by High Court judge Helen Winkelmann.
She also ruled it was unlawful for copies of Dotcom’s computer data to be taken offshore.
No reporting of this issue seems to quite get to saying what are the consequences of raids without legal warrants. Do they not know yet?
Data has been sent unlawfully – is that inadmissible or is the FBI just using it anycase. Will they find material they want amongst it, providing them with the opportunity perhaps to locate the same information then elsewhere, although without the unlawfully obtained data they would not know what or where to look for that duplicate evidence? Is that legal?
During this morning’s hearing, Crown lawyer John Pike argued there was no need for Dotcom to have access to the files because he was not being tried in New Zealand. The judge in the extradition case needed only to decide if there is a case for him to answer in the United States, Pike said.
So is the extradition to be decided on the original evidence the FBI disclosed [one assumes] to make the case for the search warrants [since declared illegal] and to involve the New Zealand Police?
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:21 pm
RRM
+1.
And while I don’t buy the Biden argument for the same reason as DPF, I’ve no doubt that this is connected to the Obama administration. It’s certainly straight out of their playbook where – when legislative approaches fail (the Protect IP Act is effectively dead in the water) – executive fiat is employed (see immigration, Fast and Furious, the EPA and so forth). Moreover, Tinsel Town is one of the few big sources of cash left for Obama and he’s been milking them hard. So – motive and means.
Oh it’s worse – much, much worse than anything Palin said, especially since he really did say these things himself: the following still being my favourite:
Dan Quayle on stilts – not that you’d ever know it from the amount of media coverage Biden gets. Quayle is still occasionally joked about two decades later – but Bidenisms are largely unknown even now.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
Biden can’t order his own lunch
Yeah right. Whatever suits the theme of the moment.
Cheney can invade the Middle East when thicko Bush is the boss
but Biden can’t get an international criminal arrested .
It’s all “belt way politics”. Same in Washington, Wellington and any other capital ,they all look after their own mates,don’t they?
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:39 pm
Is the CEO obliged not to deliver certain objectionable material if discovered in the postal system? Um, yes. Did Dotcom continue to allow links to copyrighted material each had not been detected and subject to ‘take down’ orders to persist (I.e. remove reported links, but not the copyrighted material itself?) Um, according to the indictment it would seem possibly so.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:39 pm
The meeting is a matter of public record if you read the article. In the White House it was probably also taped.
Shades of Nixon.
Why would we trust or like the yanks?
We get invited to a party as best freinds and then get told to wait out on the street and we will call when the sausages are ready. (the Navy in Hawaii this week and our piss weak PM defends this as normal becuase of our anti nuclear policy.
I would like to know if that same PM would invite his freinds to a BBQ at his place in Remmers and then tell them to stand out on the street and he will pass out a sausge.
What rudness and fucking idiocy.
The more I see of him the less I like his principles or lack thereof.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:44 pm
If he stays out of jail, anyone taking money on how much money he gives to Labour or the Greens for the next election?
I see them both going further towards the we hate the evil capitalist US side of the NZ political spectrum, and Dotcom has no love for the US, and might see it as a way to buy influence in NZ and get some things go his way/have influence, a la what he thought he had brought with Banks.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:54 pm
bhud, apparently every effort was made by the company to remove copy-write material if they were alerted or aware. Documented evidence of contact between MUL and the film companies attest to this, and meetings between the players.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 6:59 pm
hmmokrightitis,
I am not aware of reports that Dotcom (Megaupllad is probably a better descriptor) did in fact remove the content. Part of the case for indictment was that they certainly didn’t remove the material itself.
This is a good reason why it must go to trial – to establish that fact (along with the veracity of other allegations)
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 7:22 pm
While it is true that the VP has few constitutional powers of relevant note (with the specific exception of their ability to cast tie-breaking votes in the senate) their persuasive influence cannot be overlooked, especially as it pertains to influencing other elected representatives with voting power in the senate and congress. Biden has ample opportunity and powers to ascertain resources and powers that organisations such as the FBI would find beneficial in furthering their particular agendas and mandates.
If the opportunity to secure such gains from another involves something as relatively minuscule for such an organisation as shutting down servers, seizing a domain name and coercing our police force to arrest someone with woefully inadequate warrants then they have a reasonable motivation to do so, as such the possibility cannot be dismissed.
And let’s not be too quick to forget that our police force has lately proven it’s self more than willing to go after people based on nothing more than conjecture and with no evidence in hand.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 7:43 pm
Its clear DPF is in the anti-Dotcom camp, for some reason. Can we assume that at some are concerned the spotlight will turn on the government over this debacle?
[DPF: For fucks;' sake go see a psychiatrist for your paranoia.]
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 7:45 pm
Yvette,
I am a layperson but my understanding is that the ‘illegally purloined evidence’ can still be used, despite the method of collection.
It’s a bit of a grey area because the injunction depends on a technicality and the admissibility will be determined by how flimsy the technicality is. Likely to be a ‘win the battle but lose the war’ sort of thing.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 7:50 pm
Have our police explained why they needed to use helicopters to execute the illegal search warrants? Are there other cases where they have used helicopters to execute search warrants in Auckland suburban locations?
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 8:05 pm
[DPF: For fucks;' sake go see a psychiatrist for your paranoia.]
Not paranoid at all. It is just I have observed that you have not posted much on this topic, despite your apparent general interest in internet law, copyright, international politics, etc. We have had judges rule the entire raids illegal, but you didn’t take interest in that. But a snide remark such as this post. I am just saying I am curious.
[DPF: When you invent motives for me, you won't like my response. I have posted on the case. I mocked the FBI for claiming they did not break the law in copying Dotcom's files, as it was "just" a copy.
I am an opponent of stupid laws that damage the Internet in the name of copyright enforcement. I do not however condone people making money out of infringing copyrighted works - which Dotcom is accused of. I'm not saying he has done that, but I see his case as very different to people whose motives are non commercial. Whether or not he has a case to answer will depend on details around his compliance with take down notices.]
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
“Have our police explained why they needed to use helicopters to execute the illegal search warrants? Are there other cases where they have used helicopters to execute search warrants in Auckland suburban locations?”
To me this whole case still seems very murky. What has happened here appears to be far worse on the part of the police than the Urewera charge. In the Urewera charges, the police collected evidence apparently assuming it was legal, and it was only ruled as illegal on a technicality. They also decided to try out some fancy new “terrorism” charges.
But this case, the police must surely have realised they were going outside the law. They had a warrant that said they could basically confiscate everything, and apparently they did. The police would have known that was all a bit dodgy. And as for the chopper, yes that is a bit weird.
I don’t know why our media seem so uninterested in investigating why the police acted in the way they did. Hopefully they wake up soon.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 8:23 pm
and
In the absence of hard intelligence and who has that, I have found the most accurate (as proven by hindsight) way to analyse Washington politics when it involves Hollywood, Israeli, big pharma or Pentagon lobbyists, intelligence matters, the ‘war on terror’ or the ‘war on drugs,’ is normally to take the very worst possible interpretation of the story and see where that leads you in terms of cesspits. Assuming at first blush, as some seem to do, that Washington just doesn’t work like that, I have found, for over a decade now, to be the height of naivity, as proven by hindsight, as the real information comes out, in the years that follow the initial story.
OTY whom you believe over this particular piece of trivia, but if anyone wishes to improve their political analyses and therefore their ability to predict future events, if I was them, I’d start treating Washington (and London) more like a cesspit than a pantheon of mostly sainted but sometimes imperfect figures. History has proven, repeat proven, the former to be far truer than the latter.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 8:32 pm
swan (386) Says:
July 4th, 2012 at 7:43 pm
Its clear DPF is in the anti-Dotcom camp, for some reason. Can we assume that at some are concerned the spotlight will turn on the government over this debacle?
[DPF: For fucks;' sake go see a psychiatrist for your paranoia.]
As swan says.
David, you know more about the internet than most of us. You campaign often about keeping it free of obstructive people, orgnizations and Govt.s and yet at the first really big test of this freedom you have glossed over it.
Like the McD trial where there’s smoke there is fire and it may be a dint of history that you are very attached to the National Party and unfortunate that many of their Cabinet Ministers would appear to be donkey deep in this but surely freedom of the process transcends party politics and loyalties.
The consequences of the behavoir of our state and its agencies are actually quite serious. That the USA/FBI are able to bully a soverign nation to void its responsibilities to its citizens bears serious discussion. Something that is currently subject to Crown ambush and actions that have been ruled by Winkleman to be illegal.
Crown Law of late have been found wanting seriously, in fact one is left wondering if they are buying advice from some cheap call centre in India. It really has been that bad.
Someday perhaps the National Party might actually consider who their customers are i.e. who pays their wages. When they finally figure that out then and only then NZ will become the country it should be and once was.
We were the country that led the world with votes for women, 40 hour weeks, and a thousand other things.
No longer can we hold up our heads and say we continue to value people over politcs, greed or power.
Unfortunately the Nats. (who have morphed to a copy of the left), will never ever understand what the early Labour and National politicans of NZ were actually about.
[DPF: As usual, your hatred of National blinds you to the facts. The NZ Government is obliged under extradition treaties to arrest people for whom valid US warrants are issues, and to extradite them. This is not a voluntary option.
Law enforcement agencies have stuffed up several aspects of the operation. But they are operationally independent from Ministers. Ministers do not have the power to interfere in such decisions]
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 8:34 pm
Of course tom hunter would think that Bidenisms are largely unknown, he detests sites such as Slate:
Vote:http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/bidenisms/2009/09/introducing_bidenisms.single.html
July 4th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Even if Dotcom is extradicted, is it possible he could get people like Zuckerberg and Schmidt on his side? His PR skills clearly are very brilliant, he still has large cash reserves, no doubt dwindling but still large enough to be a serious player in the states with the PR companies and the attorneys he would need. Getting white knights like those two on board would force the issue in the States and it would put the old media companies front and centre against the new. It could be very interesting.
http://swampland.time.com/2012/01/20/washington-sopa-opera-lobbying-power-shifts-from-hollywood-to-silicon-valley/
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 9:43 pm
The judge said the Police search warrants were a bit too wide…was she referring to Kimmy Dotcom?
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 9:52 pm
I think DPF’s relative silence on this issue is justified.
This case will help define the legal structure surrounding cloud computing; that is having your hard drive information stored remotely.
Globally. It’s the future of computing and it’s a really, really big deal.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 9:53 pm
You didn’t read your own link, did you milky?
Sure mikenmild, sure …Unlike their distant cousins..
In other words – when confronted by even the most blatant examples of stupidity committed by a Democrat VP – Slate just can’t help itself but has to twist arguments into a pretzel to still lay claim to the tired old our-politicians-are-smarter-than-your-politicians meme that forms a natural part of the standard pose of left-wing minions the world over. I note that as well as ignoring blatant examples of “ignorance” even in their own list, they also don’t count Biden’s near manic use of the phrase – … and I mean literally, not figuratively … – as a difficulty with the English language.
And the stupidity is not just in terms of gaffes or idiotic statements. As one writer described his performances in earlier days:
Indeed. Slate‘s excuse-making for Biden would still come off as sad even if they were well known to the local journalist / music DJ / late-night TV comedian audience – which is the channel that did so much to popularise Quaylisms and which I’m referring to.
But thanks for giving me such a vivid reminder of why Slate are worth ignoring! What pathetic hacks.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 9:59 pm
Wow, you do have a bad case of hating going on there. So Slate set up Bidenisms to show that he’s still better than Bushisms and Palinisms? Never met a liberal you couldn’t diss, eh?
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:04 pm
As I said once before – and as you well know – I think Bill Clinton is a very intelligent liberal. So that rather knocks on the head your little – Never met a liberal you couldn’t diss, eh? – line, eh!
What I’m getting the hating on is of media double standards – as opposed to your love of them.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Your quote above is a pretty piss-poor example of a double standard. If that gets you going I am surprised you can stand to peruse any media, let alone blogs like this.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:13 pm
But very good about Clinton, though, ha ha.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:14 pm
This case will help define the legal structure surrounding cloud computing; that is having your hard drive information stored remotely. Globally. It’s the future of computing and it’s a really, really big deal.
If that’s what is at stake bb then yes I could see it’s a massive deal. It essentially means your lifetime online signature can be placed on permanent record. So every single site you ever visit in your entire life could be available to say, potential and future employers, any and all govt agencies, etc etc etc. Not to mention, your partner, fiance, dates, etc etc etc. Imagine that. Every single shop, entertainment, political blog, etc etc site you ever visited going back to when you first surfed the web when you were 2. That’s what’s at stake here.
So how many of us are in favour of that entire legacy being made available to anyone, let alone everyone? And bear in mind if you’re not, then how are you going to stop it, since just because there’s a law in one country doesn’t mean another country will respect it in say, 20 years, 50 years, even if they respect it today. And just because in one decade they stop employers asking for your surfing records when you were in college and high school, doesn’t mean employers won’t “bribe” politicians to pass laws so they can ask for them at some point in the future. Etc.
That is a huge deal, thanks bb. Appreciate that heads up.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:15 pm
davidp
I’m delighted the cops used a heli in the raid, Why not?Shows they’re thinking outside the square as they say. The guy is an international criminal ,Speed of the essence,grabbing exhibits that could be wiped at a moments notice etc.
If the fat bastard has to live in a house that a copter can land in then expect it. Fucken bin laden didn’t to his cost hahahaha and he had the whole Paki military on his side!
Having said that i hate how they wait at the bottom of a hill and a change of speed limit zones, that’s naughty.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:24 pm
Which can be answered quite simply by showing me how Slate – or perhaps one of the big MSM’s of the late 1980′s – made similar excuses for Quayle. Perhaps you know of such? I certainly never heard them at the time or since. It was all sneering and all mockery (fully deserved I might add) all the time.
But not for Joe. I’m surprised they did not run the line of his former spokesman, David Wade – he’s authentic! he’s real! he literally talks like a real American! – which the D.C. press corp seems to be buying. One could have said exactly the same of Bush and Palin – but there’s no chance that the same cover would ever be applied to them by the MSM.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:33 pm
Hey, hey. all I did was point out that one of those dreadfully liberal MSM sites ran a column of the VP’s gaffes. How could I be expected to pick up the subtle clues that told you that they really didn’t mean it.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:36 pm
Interesting if cryptic comment. You thought I was being sarcastic? About his intelligence or his liberalness? I’m guessing that old Bill was way too right-wing for your tastes?
Well, we all respond to our particular dog whistles.
Vote:July 4th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
I’m delighted the cops used a heli in the raid, Why not?
What I don’t get is how come they didn’t use giant non-lethal toffee guns and net-guns and suchlike. I mean surely the cops have those by now, they’ve been around for ages and you’d think they’d be cheap so not just the master criminals could afford them.
Vote:July 5th, 2012 at 8:05 am
It will be interesting to see how this case pans out. In essence the US are claiming copywrite fraud which because of Hollywood’s influence in Capitol Hill is now more egregious than rape. It seems the NZ police were out to impress their FBI counterparts with armed police, helicopters and the like to arrest people for theft of movies over the internet, yes that makes all sots of sense to me.
If the media is correct which is always a dangerous assumption the FBI have made an allegation and based on that a multimillion dollar business is shut down, all of its assets seized and as it turns out the seizure was based on an illegal warrant. Not only that but the NZ police who are looking more and more like the keystone cops (which has a certain irony to it) passed on data to the FBI despite being told by the NZ courts they were not to.
I am not sure whether Dotcom is a criminal or not but it seems to me there are some serious issues to consider about the lack of due process. If he is not guilty and sues for compensation who pays? Can’t see the FBI dipping their hands in their pockets. Looks like the NZ government is going to be right in the firing line and if the reports on the size of this business are correct National may be looking to sell a few more assets.
Vote:July 5th, 2012 at 1:18 pm
The story goes way bigger than Biden, it goes all the way to the top, Obama. It has a lot to do with Hollywood moguls pressuring Obama over anti piracy legislation they want introduced to protect their intellectual property rights.
Deadline Hollywood Jan 19,2012.
By NIKKI FINKE |
I’ve learned that Hollywood studio chiefs individually and as a group are drawing a line in the sand on the piracy issue with the Obama re-election campaign and refusing to give any more donations. The blowup came after President Obama on Saturday dashed moguls’ hopes that he would remain on the sidelines in the dispute over the U.S. House Of Representatives’ Stop Online Piracy Act and the U.S. Senate’s Protect IP Act.
In a posting on the White House web site, three of the Obama administration’s top officials for Internet and intellectual property matters said that they share many of the concerns that the Internet community has about the Hollywood-supported bills. The trio said that they “will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.” Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator Victoria Espinel, U.S. Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra, and Special Assistant to the President Howard Schmidt tried to soften the blow to Hollywood by acknowledging that that online piracy is “a serious problem that requires a serious legislative response.”
and:
One of those events is a major January 31st fundraiser attended by First Lady Michelle Obama at the Beverly Hills home of Avant and Sarandos. There’s another LA fundraiser for the First Lady on February 1st. And both President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden will be coming for more fundraisers here in coming weeks. The moguls are telling Avant and Sarandos to count them out. “Now is when all the fundraises are starting. But everyone in my position is really pissed. It’s a real conundrum,” one mogul told me.
Alarmed by the mogul boycott, Sarandos sent a personal plea to the Hollywood studio chiefs over the weekend begging them to continue supporting the Obama re-election campaign even though he knows they are disappointed with the Obama administration’s position on the piracy bills. Several moguls, in response, ”sent back word saying ‘Fuck You’ basically,” one insider tells me, expressing how they feel used and abused by the President despite their campaign contributions. I’ve learned that Fox Filmed Entertainment Chairman Jim Gianopulos even sat down and wrote his good friend (and fellow Greek-American) Sarandos an articulate note over the weekend the gist of which said that he and his fellow moguls won’t give any more money if they keep getting taken for granted. One insider told me, “Jim explained that this notion that the Hollywood community will continue giving regardless of its business interests has to be taken into consideration. The message was, ‘Don’t expect Hollywood to show up and say ‘Who do I write the check to’ anymore.”
Dotcom is right, he has become the whipping boy to Obama’s re election campaign and Biden has been playing the role of negotiator between Obama’s administration and the money men from Hollywood.
Vote: