U.S. Govt. Equates Megaupload to Bank Robbers
by Ernesto
The U.S. Government has responded to Megaupload’s request to dismiss the criminal proceedings, and to return the money that was seized by the authorities. The U.S. attorney argues that it’s not a problem that Megaupload was not served and notes that it would be unprecedented to dismiss the case at this time. The Government further objects to returning any funds to aid Mega’s defense, as this money was “stolen” from the entertainment industries.
Two weeks ago Megaupload’s lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case on the basis that the company was never properly served.
This issue was previously acknowledged by Judge O’Grady, who had doubts that the case would ever go to trial due to this procedural matter.
However, the Government believes that the case should continue. In a response filed today, US Attorney Neil MacBride argues that the notion that a non-U.S. company can’t be served should be rejected by the court.
“This line of reasoning leads to the incredible conclusion that foreign corporations can commit crimes in the United States without risk of being brought to justice here,” McBride writes, adding that it would be unprecedented to dismiss the case at this time.
According to the Government the federal rules shouldn’t be interpreted so narrowly. A company should only be served on a U.S. address if they have one, it is argued.
“The provision should be interpreted to require mailing a copy of the summons to the organization’s address or to its principal place of business in the United States, only where such an address or place of business exists.”
Moving on to the money side, the U.S. asks the court to reject Megaupload’s request to return seized funds so these can be used to aid the company’s defense. Previously, the company pointed out that the Government’s argument that all revenue the site ever made came from “infringements” is flawed.
However, the U.S. stands by this assessment and tells the court that returning Megaupload’s assets is no different from handing back stolen money to a bank robber.
“The Government’s interest in forfeiture is virtually indistinguishable from its interest in returning to a bank the proceeds of a bank robbery; and a forfeiture-defendant’s claim of right to use such assets to hire an attorney, instead of having them returned to their rightful owners, is no more persuasive than a bank robber’s similar claim,” MacBride writes.
In addition to the above the Government points out that Megaupload’s motions should be rejected, because the court hasn’t yet decided whether defense lawyer Andrew Shapiro of Quinn Emanuel Urguhart & Sullivan is subject to conflicts of interest.
Shapiro’s law firm previously defended media companies that may be called in as witnesses in this case.
Attorney General MacBride concludes by asking the court to strike Megaupload’s requests. It is now up to Judge O’Grady to come to a decision on the various issues that were raised.
It is clear that the Megaupload case is heating up, even before getting into the factual allegations of the indictment. While it’s too early to conclude anything, the above suggests that the Government is uneasy with the strength of Megaupload’s defense.
It also strikes me as the US Government for all it's attempts has not come to a basic understanding of the internet. They are not taking advice from those who know. They are taking advice from those whose vested interests would like to see some constantly changing goals. It seems the US has no investigative powers of it's own when it comes to copyright infringement and depends on the IP industry to find, identify both the evidence and the laws involved, but only the US can really bring criminal charges. The whole thing behind this is the IP industry doesn't want to spend their money to enforce their monopoly. They want to spend the tax payers money to do it.
Where that leaves the prosecution department of justice at, is at the whim of the IP industry. Need an example?
Look at the confiscated domain debacle that Rojodirect and DaJaz1 became. Both domains were held for over a year. What the law says, and what was done, weren't the same things. In the DaJaz1 case, it turns out after over a year of holding the domain, when the case documents were unsealed, it came down to the RIAA making the claim that the site was infringing but could not produce evidence to back their claims. The domain confiscation and the issue of stifling free speech were carefully neglected. The domain was quietly handed back to the owner without comment nor apology.
Here again we have the same sort of screw up. In such a hurry to do something that it couldn't really be done legally by the book, as the law requires. it is doubtful this case will ever come to court. Because if it does, the first issue any competent lawyer will do, is raise the illegality of all the actions taken.
The US government has played spoiled school yard bully. From objecting to the high powered lawyer Kim DotCom choose (Andrew Schapiro), to claiming that those seeking to kill the extradition process as being fugitives from justice. The screwy notion that the US DOJ has put forth is that by seeking to not be extradited, they are fleeing justice. That the proper paperwork that was supposed to be presented to the company officers before the seizure can be properly done, after the fact, once they are on US soil. Just as well claim, the world over should follow all US law. The whole thing is a fallacy in practice and slimy at best.
The rest of the case they are presenting ranks about the same in moral standing. Right now, the US should be digging law books out from under the sunken Spanish Galleons trying to find exceptions that might hold up in court.
Should Kim Dotcom make it to US court, I would suspect he will find quite a few kangaroos in the jury.
U.S. Govt. Equates Megaupload to Bank Robbers
PUTIN TRUMP & Netanyahu Will Meet in HELL
1.. 
Linear Mode
