Kim Dotcom: I'm suing NZ Govt for billions

[Canada EH]

Ignore helps unless its personal, family, friends or work. I find its wonderful on the train with irritation, or rush hour road ragers. Gotta pick my battles son. This Kim guy from NZ has his own battle. Taking it to the courts, heck even judges are corrupt.

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, Canada EH said:

Ignore helps unless its personal, family, friends or work. I find its wonderful on the train with irritation, or rush hour road ragers. Gotta pick my battles son. This Kim guy from NZ has his own battle. Taking it to the courts, heck even judges are corrupt.

He’s not from NZ. He’s from Germany. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

7 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

You don’t understand. He’s sueing the government. The current government is not the same one that sanctioned the operation.

He's suing the state. Saying "it's no the same government" is like issuing public debt, having elections, and then saying "we don't have to pay back anything, it's not the same government".

Government officials act int he name of the state, and therefore, your name. That's why you shouldn't elect idiots or criminals for your government.

 

7 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

The only consequences that will happen to the ‘crooks’ (not that he’s actually sueing he people directly responsible as you said) is loss of taxpayer.

Well, judging by your posts here, maybe it's not a bad idea for taxpayers to face the consequences. Maybe they'll realize why they can't stand behind a government that abuses power and breaks the law. Either way, it's not like I will get any money, so this doesn't come near enough to holding the true wrongdoers accountable. However, it's ultimately the people of New Zealand who must / can hold them accountable for how well/bad they represented them (and for using NZ taxpayer money to lapdog for US corporations).

 

7 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

 

I know im pretty bias here (...) I see where you guys are coming from and it’s pretty fair. 

Nothing to add here. Once things got in motion the wrong way, we are going to get second best, third best, or 9999th best, but it certainly won't be what it should one way or another.

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

He's suing the state. Saying "it's no the same government" is like issuing public debt, having elections, and then saying "we don't have to pay back anything, it's not the same government".

Government officials act int he name of the state, and therefore, your name. That's why you shouldn't elect idiots or criminals for your government.

 

Well, judging by your posts here, maybe it's not a bad idea for taxpayers to face the consequences. Maybe they'll realize why they can't stand behind a government that abuses power and breaks the law. Either way, it's not like I will get any money, so this doesn't come near enough to holding the true wrongdoers accountable. However, it's ultimately the people of New Zealand who must / can hold them accountable for how well/bad they represented them (and for using NZ taxpayer money to lapdog for US corporations).

 

Nothing to add here. Once things got in motion the wrong way, we are going to get second best, third best, or 9999th best, but it certainly won't be what it should one way or another.

 

I still stand by my government. They didn’t do anything wrong really. They still represent us very well and will continue to do so.

 

To say punishing the taxpayer is a good idea is rediculous. I’d hardly call using an invalid warrant to arrest a criminal an abuse of the law.

[kirashi]

21 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

Just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have been done. 

Um... so what you're saying is it's OK to kill Donald Trump because he is incompetent? Or it's OK to break into Apple or Facebook's offshore money laundering bank accounts to distribute their wealth among countries that actually need it? I'm not a lawyer or anything, but I'm pretty sure I'd go to jail for all of those things...

16 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

At the end of the day, Kim broke the law and so his house got raided by the Police. The Police should be free to do their job. 

You don’t have to be afraid of anything like this if you don’t break the law in the first place. 

This lawsuit is rediculous on so many levels. Sueing the wrong government, and sueing the government just means taking it out of tax. 

Hes just making a big publicity stunt. If he didn’t pirate on that level then all this wouldn’t have happened. 

He didn't break any New Zealand laws, and he technically did not pirate anything either - Megaupload was a filesharing service, no different from Dropbox, Google Drive, or OneDrive. If you think for a second that people don't use G Suite accounts for unlimited storage of pirated content, then I suggest you head on over to /r/datahoarder or /r/piracy and do some research.

To be clear, I'm not advocating whether piracy is right or wrong; that's a discussion for another time. What I am saying is that a service provider cannot be held fully liable for any crimes committed when its' providing a generic service. If Megaupload specifically advertised all over the website "STORE YOUR ILLEGAL FILES HERE" then I'd 100% agree with you they'd be asking for prosecution.

 

But they never did that because it was always meant to just be a generic file storage service, which is not something anyone should be prosecuted for. Otherwise, this logic would require that paving companies be held liable for all hit and runs on roads they paved, or that metal foundries should be liable for all weapons made out of any metal that passed through their factory. Just because something can be used for an illegal purpose doesn't make the item, object, idea, or service illegal in itself. Remember, it's not about what you have - it's about how you use it.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

15 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

I’d hardly call using an invalid warrant to arrest a criminal an abuse of the law.

It is literally an abuse of the law.

[mr moose]

25 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

I still stand by my government. They didn’t do anything wrong really. They still represent us very well and will continue to do so.

 

To say punishing the taxpayer is a good idea is rediculous. I’d hardly call using an invalid warrant to arrest a criminal an abuse of the law.

He's not punishing the taxpayer, he's seeking compensation from a guilty government organisation/s.  And using an invalid warrant to steal property then claiming it to be evidence is a very severe abuse of the law.

 

I think the only way you are going to appreciate the need for due process is if a crooked cop runs into you in a car park then issues you with a fine and charges you for causing an accident.  And until you accept responsibility for his accident his cop mates keep pulling you over and harassing you.

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, kirashi said:

Um... so what you're saying is it's OK to kill Donald Trump because he is incompetent? Or it's OK to break into Apple or Facebook's offshore money laundering bank accounts to distribute their wealth among countries that actually need it? I'm not a lawyer or anything, but I'm pretty sure I'd go to jail for all of those things...

He didn't break any New Zealand laws, and he technically did not pirate anything either - Megaupload was a filesharing service, no different from Dropbox, Google Drive, or OneDrive. If you think for a second that people don't use G Suite accounts for unlimited storage of pirated content, then I suggest you head on over to /r/datahoarder or /r/piracy and do some research.

To be clear, I'm not advocating whether piracy is right or wrong; that's a discussion for another time. What I am saying is that a service provider cannot be held fully liable for any crimes committed when its' providing a generic service. If Megaupload specifically advertised all over the website "STORE YOUR ILLEGAL FILES HERE" then I'd 100% agree with you they'd be asking for prosecution.

 

But they never did that because it was always meant to just be a generic file storage service, which is not something anyone should be prosecuted for. Otherwise, this logic would require that paving companies be held liable for all hit and runs on roads they paved, or that metal foundries should be liable for all weapons made out of any metal that passed through their factory. Just because something can be used for an illegal purpose doesn't make the item, object, idea, or service illegal in itself. Remember, it's not about what you have - it's about how you use it.

He did break New Zealand laws. I’d hardly say that arresting a known criminal is comparable to murder or burglary. 

[divito]

2 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

He did break New Zealand laws. I’d hardly say that arresting a known criminal is comparable to murder or burglary. 

What NZ laws did he specifically break? I'd prefer some quotes rather than your zealotry that I've seen in this thread so far. Your fallacious cognitive bias towards authority is rather infuriating.

As kirashi pointed out, I haven't seen proof that he was personally uploading, promoting, or advocating for the use of his service specifically for pirated media/software.

From what I remember reading, the judge ruled that copyright infringement could lead to a civil suit, and was not a criminal offence, and therefore was not enough for extradition. However, he also stated that the other alleged activity of Dotcom could be constituted as fraud, to which those could lead to criminal liability, which might lead eventually to extradition.

That would still have to be determined and still needs due process, something you don't seem to believe in for some strange reason.
 

[Canada EH]

4 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

invalid warrant

that is corruption at its core

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, divito said:

What NZ laws did he specifically break? I'd prefer some quotes rather than your zealotry that I've seen in this thread so far. Your fallacious cognitive bias towards authority is rather infuriating.

As kirashi pointed out, I haven't seen proof that he was personally uploading, promoting, or advocating for the use of his service specifically for pirated media/software.

From what I remember reading, the judge ruled that copyright infringement could lead to a civil suit, and was not a criminal offence, and therefore was not enough for extradition. However, he also stated that the other alleged activity of Dotcom could be constituted as fraud, to which those could lead to criminal liability, which might lead eventually to extradition.

That would still have to be determined and still needs due process, something you don't seem to believe in for some strange reason.
 

He is charged with criminal fraud and dangerous driving. He is being extradited for criminal fraud, which is endorsed by the court. 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Canada EH said:

that is corruption at its core

 

It’s not really black and white. If it was your average joe being raided it would be corruption. 

 

We we don’t really have the full facts behind the arrest and the lead up. Obviously there was communication for a long time between the FBI and the GCSB about this. 

 

 

[AresKrieger]

After reading some of the OPs posts it seems quite clear he doesn't understand the magnitude of the situation, if a government doesn't follow its own laws the government is illegitimate, if the government doesn't honor its debts then it will lose the ability to borrow money, if a government ignores the rights of non citizens then it will lose international favor.

 

So if they swept this under the rug, or tried to after it blew up like this they would have the potential to lose their international standing, which for non super power countries that standing means quite a lot. Getting loans, tourism, and having favorable relations are all vital to a country like NZ and if they were to just blow it all off as you seem to want it could put all of them in jeopardy

 

This is why you must follow your own laws, and hold those who don't responsible, law enforcement isn't exempt. (though his damages are not a high as he is suing for there is likely some level of compensation owed)

[Canada EH]

a lie is a lie and authority who lie well they are corrupt

[mr moose]

On 1/21/2018 at 12:06 PM, RorzNZ said:

He is charged with criminal fraud and dangerous driving. He is being extradited for criminal fraud, which is endorsed by the court. 

Driving charges he pleaded guilty to and served his sentence for.  That is irrelevant, both to back then and now as you can't arrest and charge someone twice for the one offense.  If you think that driving charge has any bearing on this case you may as well dismiss any wrong doing that happens to me because I have a few speeding fines from the past too.

 

 

Link to the criminal fraud charges please.  As far as everything I have read he was arrested and imprisoned based soel on extradition charges.  He had not broken any laws in NZ.