Print 36 comment(s) - last by toyotabedzrock.. on Jan 25 at 3:54 PM

The stink of differential justice is yet again smelled surrounding a massive "anti-piracy" effort

There are a number of things curious about the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigations and U.S. Department of Justice's haphazard takedown of the popular content storage site Megaupload among them:

+ If the site was truly involved in $500M USD in copyright threat, what took the FBI so long to act?  The site has been live for seven years now and used by millions of Americans.

+ How is Megaupload fundamentally any different than Google Inc.'s (GOOG) YouTube?  Like YouTube users upload content which the site cannot control.  Megauploads admins have suspended accounts in the past for users who were caught uploading copyrighted work.

+ If Megaupload was so evil why did many major artists support it?  (Last we checked big pop artists are no fans of sites who deliberately promote infringement.)  And why did these big music labels try to stop those artists from showing their support?

+ But most of all:

Why is Megaupload's CEO, famous American DJ, rapper, and producer Swiss Beatz (best known as the husband of Alicia Keyes, perhaps) not named in the lawsuit?

Virtually every other employee -- including the company's CMO and CTO -- at Megaupload is facing criminal piracy charges, but for some reason this key American music insider was not even mentioned in the Grand Jury's complaint [PDF].

Some have pointed out that Swiss Beatz owns no stake in Megaupload, merely served as its leader.  But that hardly makes a difference, given that he was leading a company that the feds claims was profiting off infringement.

Swiss Beatz
[Image Source: GQ Magazine]

To Swiss Beatz credit, he surely never wanted Megaupload to be whacked down like this -- he was its biggest fan, and convinced many artists of its merits.  And it's hard to fault him for keeping quiet -- after all who would rather be in jail than free?

Swiss Beatz
[Image Source: HipHop DX]

But this yet again shows the differential brand of justice that is applied to piracy in America.  Major music labels troll the internet looking for people to sue, yet at the same time steal hundreds of millions in yearly revenue from small independent artists by seizing and selling their work under questionable laws.

SOPA House author Rep. Lamar Smith (R- Tex.) or his staff stole copyrighted images from a small artist and used them without payment or citation on the campaign site that helped elect him, yet now he wants to imprison Americans for intellectual property theft?

And what about the rest of Congress, who were initially so supportive of SOPA/PIPA, while their offices were caught illegally torrenting pornography and other copyrighted work?  

And how can Rupert Murdoch support SOPA when his own employees were caught stealing text messages and voice mails from the families of murdered children and dead soldiers, in a sickening profit scheme?

Clearly the American justice system consists of two groups -- "the proles", which contains everyone from your college educated professionals to your McDonald's Corp. (MCD) fast food workers, and then "the inner party", a fortunate lot that includes millionaire musicians, big media executives, and their hired help (politicians).

Source: New York Post

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Bought and paid for
By StevoLincolnite on 1/20/2012 3:26:53 PM , Rating: -1
You did realize that you linked to an article talking about PERCEPTION of corruption, yes?

Well, that is obvious, I did read it before I pasted the link.

And the higher number is actually BETTER, lower (and red) is WORSE? So the article shows that it's LESS prevalent in the USA (according to your linked article)

I don't know why you're jumping up and down and telling me how I should be reading the wikipedia article... It doesn't take a university degree to read and understand.

I live in Australia, the US is perceived to be more corrupt in comparison.
In-fact I think it's fairly spot on in the rankings, the US is far less corrupt than allot of other super powers on this planet, but also doesn't rank as highly as some of the more developed middle powers.

The main difference that I can see from the US in comparison to here is that the US has allot less transparency in it's Government departments.
Here at-least if a politician does even the slightest thing wrong... The whole country is going to know about it and not get covered up.
The Government isn't under the thumb of corporations either, getting paid off for policy changes and such.

RE: Bought and paid for
By Keeir on 1/20/2012 7:21:25 PM , Rating: 2
Errr.. the issue is that your taking a very local approach to your comment though...

Looking at the world population, more than 80% live in areas of higher perceived corruption and less than 10% live in areas of significantly lower perceived corruption. At some point in time "most" becomes "all" or at least for the purposes for state

Australia should be commended. They are highly ranked and still have a fairly large and diverse population. (A characteristic of the top ten are fairly small populations and fairly high cultural/racial dominate groups) But it probably should be noted that 75%+ of Australians are British Island immigrants or descended from British Island immigrants and most are fairly standard Christian religions or grew up in such families.

Perceptions of corruption often is related to feelings of fairness. Its easier to feel treated fair in a small homogeneous society.

“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls

Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki