Department of Justice closes piracy conduit. Is SOPA needed?

Department of Justice conducted a two-year investigation of MegaUpload before closing it down. So why does the Department of Justice need new antipiracy laws like SOPA? 

|
Greg Bowker/New Zealand Herald/AP
Megaupload.com employees Bram van der Kolk, also known as Bramos, left, Finn Batato,second from left, Mathias Ortmann, third from left, and founder, former CEO and current chief innovation officer of Megaupload.com Kim Dotcom (also known as Kim Schmitz and Kim Tim Jim Vestor) appear in North Shore District Court in Auckland, New Zealand, Jan. 20, 2012. The four appeared in court in relation to arrests made to Megaupload.com, which is linked to a US Department of Justice investigation into international copyright infringement and money-laundering.

A strange confluence of events brought the question of how to deal with online piracy to the forefront of the American consciousness this week. Protests against the anti-piracy bills, SOPA and PIPA, were the major news of the day on Wednesday with blackouts of big sites across the web. The very next day, MegaUpload, one of the largest sites enabling piracy on the internet,was shut down as the result of a two year FBI investigation.

By taking unilateral action against a rogue site who’s owners were scattered across the globe, the DOJ showed that it doesn’t need new legislation like SOPA or PIPA to handle piracy. Advocates of the legislation have always said that piracy was costing America billions in jobs and endangering jobs. Stronger laws were needed, they argued, even if they might pose risks of censorship, chill investment in tech and damage the fundamental architecture of the internet.

But the DOJ was able to rely on ProIP, a law passed back in 2008, in order to shut down MegaUpload and arrest seven of its founders. It also worked with the government of New Zealand, which denied bail to the four people arrested there, including the site’s infamous founder, Kim Dotcom. Extradition to the U.S. for trail is under way.

Of course, the debate over how best to deal with piracy is far from over. In response to the indictment of MegaUpload, the hacktivist group Anonymous took down the websites of the DOJ, MPAA and RIAA. And while MegaUpload and its partner sites, like MegaVideo, might seem like a clear cut villian to those who have used it for downloading albums or streaming films, there is still a strong contingent who sees the sudden arrests of its executives as overreaching.

The comment thread on the tech forum Hacker News provides a sample of this strain of thought. “It’s better to allow these sites to continue to exist and demand that they comply with the requests than take them down with the FBI or whatever law enforcement agency. The precedent is far too dangerous. Today it’s Megaupload, tomorrow it will be YouTube,’ wrote user Kermit the Hermit.

A more informed opinion from Mike Masnick at TechDirt gets to the same core issue. “Why do we need SOPA/PIPA again? It seems like the DOJ/ICE just undermined the key argument of the MPAA/RIAA/US CoC for why they need these laws. After all, Megaupload was one of the key examples used for why the law was needed.” He also keyed in to the fact that the arrest will only heighten the already tense debate around copyright and piracy. “Wow is the timing dumb on the government’s part. Not only does it undermine the argument for PIPA/SOPA, but it raises significant questions about whether or not the feds already have too much censorship power.”

See also:

Senate majority leader delays vote on PIPA 

App maker Skygrid hits the big time with LG deal (video)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Department of Justice closes piracy conduit. Is SOPA needed?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0120/Department-of-Justice-closes-piracy-conduit.-Is-SOPA-needed
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe