Justice minister signs extradition order for Megaupload founder 12 years after FBI-ordered raid over filesharing site

Kim Dotcom, who is facing criminal charges relating to the defunct file-sharing website Megaupload, is to be extradited to the US, the New Zealand justice minister has said.

German-born Dotcom has New Zealand residency and has been fighting extradition to the US since 2012 following an FBI-ordered raid on his Auckland mansion.

The justice minister, Paul Goldsmith, had signed an extradition order for Dotcom, a spokesperson said on Thursday.

“I considered all of the information carefully, and have decided that Mr Dotcom should be surrendered to the US to face trial,” Goldsmith said in a statement.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Dotcom said: “The obedient US colony in the South Pacific just decided to extradite me for what users uploaded to Megaupload,” in what appears to be a reference to the extradition order.

  • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
    1573·
    3 months ago

    the whole math of “stole $500 million” is stupid. That is hypothetical money. It is just not true that all people would have purchased instead without megaupload.

    “Which generated $175 million for the site” that’s more like it. Making money with other people’s content is shitty and Kim knew it was happening.

    I don’t think he should be extradited but that is at least a decent reason.

    • thericofactor@sh.itjust.works
      541·
      3 months ago

      “Making money with other people’s content is shitty”

      What reddit, xitter, meta and pretty every big corporation is doing right now with A.I.?

            • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
              5·
              3 months ago

              I think it only makes sense to criminally charge the CEO’s of AI companies if the same thing is being done to Kim Dotcom

              —Regardless, my initial post was meant to be satire

              —Personally speaking I don’t think all laws on the books are ethical, nor do I think everything that’s unethical is against the law. With that in mind, I don’t care if Kim Dotcom was an asshole because I can’t earnestly argue on behalf of our Intellectual Property laws in the first place. I think they create a framework that is so far beyond reasonable, that my only response is to condone piracy as I have done since long before they raided his mansion.

      • yo_scottie_oh@lemmy.mlEnglish
        122·
        3 months ago

        Except that when you post to Reddit, you grant them “a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable, and sublicensable license to use, copy, modify, adapt, prepare derivative works of, distribute, store, perform, and display Your Content and any name, username, voice, or likeness provided in connection with Your Content in all media formats and channels now known or later developed anywhere in the world. This license includes the right for us to make Your Content available for syndication, broadcast, distribution, or publication by other companies, organizations, or individuals who partner with Reddit.”

        ~ Sauce

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          62·
          3 months ago

          oh its written somewhere, that makes it totally ok to steal content then, carry on

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            2·
            3 months ago

            Yeah seriously. The whole idea that people can be fucked by fine print in some one sided agreement specifically designed to discourage people from reading is one of the dumbest things our species collectively goes along with.

    • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
      26·
      3 months ago

      Aye, me too. But does it not make you think… Is there anything we can collectively do to help?

      I know he’s had his issues, but man, he gave us access to do many things back in the day

  • Dkarma@lemmy.world
    217·
    3 months ago

    Gonna be hilarious when he spanks the us government in court after 12 years of their bs.

    • ulkesh@lemmy.world
      2331·
      3 months ago

      Not that I condone anything the US government does or may do, but the guy literally profited off of people using his site for piracy. Not sure what defense he can muster that will succeed in the US court system.

      Edit> I guess people don’t understand the words I’ve written. Downvote me, please! Fake internet points are meaningless :)

      Edit 2> So many attempts at completely illogical analogies. Wow. And the funny thing is all I said is the US sees what he has done as illegal and therefore will pursue him, and that he would probably have little defense of it since he profited by doing so. It’s impressive how people go from that to inferring that I am on the US’s side with this pursuit. I honestly couldn’t care less what Kim did or what the US does to him…but it sure as hell would be nice if people stopped assuming more than what was actually fucking typed. It’s impressive the sheer lack of comprehension that exists on this Lemmy instance.

        • AngryishHumanoid@reddthat.com
          133·
          3 months ago

          Not a good analogy. More like he set up a bunch of lockers on his land, and some people put drugs in them. Not as cut and dry.

          • cornshark@lemmy.world
            141·
            3 months ago

            Wait is this for real? Liability works like this? I rent a storage unit – does that mean I can send the owners of the storage company to jail if I put drugs in my unit?

            • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
              93·
              3 months ago

              It’s more like you had a storage unit, and let people do whatever they want with it, but it’s implied it’s used for illegal activity. And then you have full control to stop or prevent them from doing illegal activities, and choose not to.

            • batmaniam@lemmy.world
              2·
              3 months ago

              If it’s determined there’s liability, maybe. I don’t know about jail but a victims family absolutely could sue in civil court in the US.

              I don’t know about specifics but there are absolutely cases and laws around determining when and if a storage company in this case should have known. Also for things like kids breaking into your derelict building and hurting themselves and a million other things.

              Don’t ask me to get into whether the laws around establishing liability are correct or ethical, I barley know any details in my own country let alone others (and what international treaties apply). But you asked a question and the answer is: it depends but, yes, sometimes.

        • ulkesh@lemmy.world
          54·
          3 months ago

          People can get injured on my land by actions they take, and I get sued. I’m not saying it makes sense.

          But the dude knew full well what he was doing and profited off of piracy. The US has some things to say about that. But apparently no one can read that I said I don’t condone the US here. Maybe the word “condone” confuses people, I don’t know.

      • wolfpack86@lemmy.world
        161·
        3 months ago

        Can we hold the US government liable when a drug runner uses the interstate to move his shit from A to B?

      • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
        51·
        3 months ago

        not only that. kimble was a skid and paid at&t folks for cards. he was a shit person from day one on. there are too many shit things he did. the idiotic videos of himself in whatever car and women he paid to hang out. also you dont feed off of the Scene. you will have a bad time. kim is shit!