Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Scale of Kim Dotcom and Megaupload

  • Many reject framing him as “small folk”; he had a mansion, dozens of luxury cars, ~$175M in cash, and 64 bank accounts.
  • Others argue wealth alone doesn’t prove serious criminality, just that Megaupload was a huge cash-generating service in its era.

Cash, Assets, and Suspicion

  • Debate over whether holding massive physical cash is inherently suspicious.
    • Some see “two tons of $100 bills” as cartel‑level behavior.
    • Others say distrust of banks and fear of asset seizure (especially by the US) is a rational motive, not proof of crime.

Nature and Severity of Alleged Crimes

  • Charges go beyond copyright infringement: conspiracy, racketeering, money laundering, wire fraud.
  • Key prosecution claims cited:
    • Megaupload allegedly deduped files; DMCA takedowns removed links but left infringing files accessible via other links.
    • Internal communications allegedly show active encouragement of piracy and paying uploaders for popular copyrighted content.
    • Strong counter‑claim: they did have takedown tools and shouldn’t be liable for what users upload if they comply.

Extradition, Jurisdiction, and US Power

  • Many object to extraditing a non‑US citizen for acts done abroad, seeing it as US “world police” behavior and a chilling precedent for foreigners.
  • Others note NZ–US treaties, US‑hosted servers, and international copyright treaties; argue this is “boring international justice,” not imperialism.
  • Long delay (12+ years) seen by some as “punishment by process,” by others as the natural result of extensive appeals.

Piracy, Copyright, and IP Legitimacy

  • Strong split between:
    • “IP is legitimate, artists and studios deserve protection; Kim knowingly built a piracy business.”
    • “File sharing isn’t theft; damages are wildly overstated; current copyright regime and term lengths are abusive.”

Comparisons to Other Platforms and Figures

  • Frequent comparisons to YouTube, Spotify, RapidShare, Google Drive, Plex:
    • One side: all bootstrapped via piracy, but YouTube et al ultimately built strong takedown systems and partnerships; Megaupload doubled down on infringement.
    • Other side: differences are mainly political power and lobbying; big US firms are tolerated where Dotcom is made an example.
  • Broader analogies to Assange, Snowden, Ross Ulbricht; many see disproportionate, example‑making prosecutions for tech‑enabled offenses.

Broader Political and Geopolitical Threads

  • Discussion of US influence over NZ and Australia (Assange case, AUKUS subs), five‑eyes, and copyright lobby power.
  • Side debates on Russia/Ukraine, Gaza, and accusations that Dotcom amplifies Russian/CCP narratives; others warn against dismissing dissent as “on the payroll.”