Featured Audio

February 23, 2012 Radio New Zealand
-US abuse of power in taking down Megaupload
-No such thing as criminal secondary copyright infringement
-The Prosecution is politically motivated

September 26, 2012 NewstalkNZ
-Illegal Gov spying on Kim Dotcom
-Case should be dismissed in the interests of justice
-Trail of Gov illegality
-Hollywood's involvement
-Unfair procedures 

Ira Rothken presentation at e-discovery seminar (excerpt)
- discussion of technical-legal factors to consider in determining whether e-discovery related data is "not reasonably accessible"
- More information can be found here 
 

Featured Videos



Photos

Search
Twitter Alerts
Investigation Tips
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    News Index
    Notice

    The information supplied on this web site is general in nature and should not be relied upon to make legal decisions. Interacting with e-mail, forms, or online forums on this web site does not constitute the creation of an attorney/client relationship. This web site is an advertisement for legal services. The examples of client cases and results discussed on this web site are not a guarantee of your outcome if we represent you in a particular case. 

    Login
    « Profile Technology Ltd Files Complaint Against Facebook for Unfair, Illegal, and Deceptive Business Practices | Main | Megaupload Files Motion for TRO and Preliminary Injunction Against UMG »
    Friday
    Feb032012

    Megaupload Preparing MegaDefense

    Portions of Mr. Rothken's statements below have been taken from an ArsTechnica interview you can read here.

    Megaupload's attorney Ira P. Rothken has a succinct description of the US government case against his client: "wrong on the facts and wrong on the law."

    In Mr. Rothken's words, the government is acting over-aggressively and overbroadly by taking down one of the world's largest cloud storage services "without any notice or chance for Megaupload to be heard in a court of law." The result ignores substantial non infringing uses of cloud storage and is both "offensive to the rights of Megaupload and to the rights of millions of consumers worldwide" who stored personal data with the service.

    Indeed, in Mr. Rothken's view, attempting to hold a cloud storage provider criminally responsible for the acts of its users is known as "secondary" criminal copyright liability and there no such statutory claim under US Law. Secondary copyright liability is judge made law in "civil" cases, such as Grokster, and such theories are not "criminal" in nature.

    Instead, the government's willingness to pursue the case as an international racketeering charge meant "essentially only sticking up for one side of the copyright vs. technology debate." The result, Rothken says, is "terrible chilling effect it's having on Internet innovators" who feature cloud storage components to their business.

    This sort of thing makes Rothken furious. Using "James Bond tactics with helicopters and weaponry, and breaking into homes over what is apparently a philosophical debate over the balance between copyright protection and the freedom to innovate, are heavy-handed tactics, are over-aggressive, and have a detrimental effect on society as a whole," he said. In addition, the raid was a reminder that bills like the Stop Online Piracy Act "ought not to ever be passed, because these tactics [the helicopters, etc.] are so offensive that if you take the shackles off of government, it may lead to more abuse, more aggression."

    Rothken also suggested that the timing of the raid was suspicious; "over a two-year period, they happened to pick the one week where SOPA started going south."

    For now, the case remains in New Zealand, where questions of bail and then extradition are being handled by local courts. Though the entire case could take a long while to wind its way to completion, Rothken concludes, "Megaupload believes strongly it's going to prevail."

    PrintView Printer Friendly Version

    EmailEmail Article to Friend