TorrentFreak Email Update

Megaupload: U.S. Government Trying to Rewrite the Rules
Feds Drag Rapper Swizz Beatz Into Megapload Case
Court May Order Google to Censor ‘Torrent,’ ‘RapidShare’ and ‘Megaupload’

Megaupload: U.S. Government Trying to Rewrite the Rules

Posted: 19 Jul 2012 04:01 AM PDT

kim dotcom Earlier this month Megaupload asked the court to dismiss its case because U.S. law doesn't permit criminal proceedings against foreign companies.

The issue has become crucial in the ongoing Megaupload proceedings, as it may lead to a premature dismissal of the case.

According to "Rule 4″ of criminal procedure the authorities have to serve a company at an address in the United States. However, since Megaupload is a Hong Kong company, this was and is impossible.

However, the Government disagrees and in a filing last Friday asked the court to deny Megaupload’s motion. The Government claims that the federal rules shouldn't be interpreted so narrowly. A company should only be served on a U.S. address if they have one, they argued.

The Government further claimed that because Megaupload was doing business in the U.S., there is no requirement to mail the summons to the company. Finally, if the court does decide that Megaupload has to be served, the Government says it could send it to an address of their choosing, such as the office of rapper and former Megaupload employee Swizz Beatz.

Responding to the Government’s claims, Megaupload’s legal team has now filed a rebuttal.

According to Megaupload none of the arguments presented by the Government are supported by case law. Instead of presenting cases that prove a legal precedent, the Government is rewriting Rule 4, Megaupload’s lawyers argue.

“None of the Government's arguments squares with the plain language of the Rule or with any known precedent construing it. Each should be dismissed, along with the indictment against Megaupload,” they write.

The filing step-by-step refutes the Government’s attempts to amend the rules. Megaupload’s lawyers see no valid argument why the company can be brought to justice in the U.S., and they ask for a dismissal instead.

Only by dismissing the case can the court protect Megaupload’s due process rights, which are clearly at stake here according to the lawyers.

“It seems beyond dispute that (1) Megaupload has been deprived of its property, has had its reputation tarnished, and has had its business destroyed by the Government's actions in this case; (2) to date, Megaupload has not been afforded a hearing or any other proceeding to contest these deprivations; and (3) absent service of process, this Court altogether lacks jurisdiction over the company.”

Talking to TorrentFreak, Megaupload lawyer Ira Rothken previously noted that the Department of Justice is intentionally trying to keep this “flawed criminal action” alive.

It is now up to the Court to decide who’s right and who’s wrong.

Source: Megaupload: U.S. Government Trying to Rewrite the Rules

Feds Drag Rapper Swizz Beatz Into Megapload Case

Posted: 18 Jul 2012 01:04 PM PDT

On the day Megaupload was shut down, the company website listed rapper/producer Swizz Beatz as company CEO.

The popular rapper/producer was one of the stars who endorsed MegaUpload in public, and he reportedly recruited several artists for the Mega Song promotion.

Beatz, real name Kasseem Dean, is married to R&B superstar Alicia Keys. He won his first Grammy Award in 2011 with Jay Z for the song "On To The Next One."

But despite his strong ties to Megaupload, Beatz was not named in the indictment as a member of the “Mega Conspiracy.” However, now that the case is progressing, Beatz is being involved by the U.S. authorities.

In the most recent filing the U.S. opposes Megaupload’s motion to dismiss based on a lack of jurisdiction. The defense team argued that Megaupload can’t be subjected to a criminal prosecution, because the law doesn’t allow foreign companies to be served. However, the U.S. disagrees.

United States Attorney Neil MacBride sums up a variety of reasons why it can, and in a footnote it is mentioned that Megaupload previously employed two CEOs living in the U.S.

“After Defendant Dotcom became Defendant Megaupload's Chief Innovation Officer, the company appears to have employed at least two Chief Executive Officers in the United States: first David Robb and then Kasseem David Dean (also known as Swizz Beatz),” the filing reads.

Beatz plugs Dotcom’s Twitter

swizz

MacBride goes on to state that Beatz officially represented Megaupload before the United States Trade Representative, when it was accused of being a piracy haven December last year. In addition, the authorities have requested Beatz’s cooperation with the Megaupload investigation, which he has refused.

“Mr. Dean through counsel has refused to cooperate with the government's investigation,” the United States Attorney writes.

Voluntarily or not, the U.S. authorities believe Beatz may become involved in the case since they view him as one of the individuals through which they can serve the company.

“Delivering a summons to Mr. Dean, a resident of the United States, in his capacity as apparent Chief Executive Officer should also constitute proper service of process upon an officer of the company,” the filing reads.

Whether the above will help to overcome the jurisdiction issues, and the fact that foreign companies can’t be served, is now for the courts to decide.

A few months ago District Court Judge O'Grady already acknowledged that this "issue" warrants further investigation, suggesting that it could be the beginning of the end for the Megaupload case. A case that just got even more high-profile now Swizz Beatz has been dragged into it.

Source: Feds Drag Rapper Swizz Beatz Into Megapload Case

Court May Order Google to Censor ‘Torrent,’ ‘RapidShare’ and ‘Megaupload’

Posted: 18 Jul 2012 08:21 AM PDT

google bay Early 2010 the French music industry group SNEP initiated legal action against Google in an attempt to force the search giant to filter certain terms from its “Instant” and “Autocomplete” features.

SNEP argued that when users enter the name of popular artists into the search box, Google often adds piracy related keywords including 'torrent', 'RapidShare' and 'MegaUpload'.

According to the music group this means that Google is facilitating piracy, and it asked the court to order Google to censor the three search terms in question.

After SNEP lost the case in two lower courts, it took the matter to the Supreme Court which decided in favor of the music group last week. The Supreme Court ruled that keyword filters are an appropriate measure to curb online piracy.

While the Court recognizes that Google is not accountable for any of the infringements that take place on other websites, it says that Google does have a responsibility to make it more difficult for the public to “discover” unauthorized content.

By filtering these search terms, Google helps to prevent future infringements, the Court noted.

The Supreme Court based its verdict on Article 336-2 of the Intellectual Property code, a provision which allows courts to take almost any emergency measure to protect rightsholders. The same article is being relied on in a separate case brought by the French movie and TV industry in which ISPs and search engines are being asked to block several popular streaming sites.

Following its ruling the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Court of Appeal for a final decision.

For Google, fighting the French case is a matter of principle. The search engine has already been filtering "piracy-related" terms from its 'Autocomplete' and 'Instant' services for more than a year, worldwide. Google users searching for terms like "torrent" and "RapidShare" will notice that no suggestions or search results appear before they type in the full word.

While Google hasn’t removed any content from its search results, Google’s measures do indeed lead to fewer searches for the terms that are censored.

We assume that Google is nevertheless fighting the decision to keep control over what they choose to censor. If the case is decided against them, they can expect more requests for keywords to be added to the filter, or even entire websites.

Source: Court May Order Google to Censor ‘Torrent,’ ‘RapidShare’ and ‘Megaupload’

The Pirate's Press

Thursday, 19 July 2012