**NEW LINK** http://www.scribd.com/doc/78786408/Mega-Indictment *head for around page 28 of the indictment for the real damning stuff. E-mails showing clear knowledge of pirated content they were going to and did reward their users for uploading.
Now I've seen a lot of people around making the point that if Megaupload can be taken down then, like with SOPA, youtube and google are next in line. When clearly the megaupload takedown is a good thing while SOPA was not.
One of the biggest criticisms behind SOPA was that it would give the corporations too much control and too much leeway in deciding what exactly "infringed" their copyright and then could take too much action on sites like Youtube or Google that served major purposes that were unrelated to piracy in the first place.
Enter Megaupload.
It is similar to Google and Youtube in that independent artists and regular law-abiding people can upload legitimate files to it to store how they want, but if that is your only criteria in comparing them you are simplifying it down far too much.
Megaupload was a much safer haven for piracy for one. The steps places like Youtube took to prevent copyright infringement were far more than the ones Megaupload took. The charges bring a good explanation as to why that was the case as well.
The charges brought against Megaupload aren't just for copyright infringement, but also include money laundering, conspiracy, and racketeering. The difference between Youtube and Megaupload is how they each approach the fact that people will seek to upload much copyrighted content with their services. Megaupload's damning actions are that they seeked to exploit the fact that users were uploading copyrighted material to their servers and profit off it. The charges include allegations that they were rewarding their members for uploading content that became popular and attracted a lot of traffic regardless of whether that content had any kind of copyright protection.
Youtube has its partnership program but if they rewarded someone who decided to upload a full movie just because it was popular the law would be in the right to press charges against Youtube for having Youtube themselves promoting or profiting off illegally uploaded content.
There still is the possibility that the charges are false, maybe even someone would believe that they're just a conspiracy brought up by the government instead to suppress the internet's freedom until there is no more left.
While it is impossible to prove the former wrong, something will have be done about piracy and in a case like this it's not right to condemn the government when they finally go after one of the real culprits that is liable for piracy in the first place.
Now I've seen a lot of people around making the point that if Megaupload can be taken down then, like with SOPA, youtube and google are next in line. When clearly the megaupload takedown is a good thing while SOPA was not.
One of the biggest criticisms behind SOPA was that it would give the corporations too much control and too much leeway in deciding what exactly "infringed" their copyright and then could take too much action on sites like Youtube or Google that served major purposes that were unrelated to piracy in the first place.
Enter Megaupload.
It is similar to Google and Youtube in that independent artists and regular law-abiding people can upload legitimate files to it to store how they want, but if that is your only criteria in comparing them you are simplifying it down far too much.
Megaupload was a much safer haven for piracy for one. The steps places like Youtube took to prevent copyright infringement were far more than the ones Megaupload took. The charges bring a good explanation as to why that was the case as well.
The charges brought against Megaupload aren't just for copyright infringement, but also include money laundering, conspiracy, and racketeering. The difference between Youtube and Megaupload is how they each approach the fact that people will seek to upload much copyrighted content with their services. Megaupload's damning actions are that they seeked to exploit the fact that users were uploading copyrighted material to their servers and profit off it. The charges include allegations that they were rewarding their members for uploading content that became popular and attracted a lot of traffic regardless of whether that content had any kind of copyright protection.
Youtube has its partnership program but if they rewarded someone who decided to upload a full movie just because it was popular the law would be in the right to press charges against Youtube for having Youtube themselves promoting or profiting off illegally uploaded content.
There still is the possibility that the charges are false, maybe even someone would believe that they're just a conspiracy brought up by the government instead to suppress the internet's freedom until there is no more left.
While it is impossible to prove the former wrong, something will have be done about piracy and in a case like this it's not right to condemn the government when they finally go after one of the real culprits that is liable for piracy in the first place.
