Was this the real reason why Megaupload was closed down?

reply to post by Gixxer


How About the poor people?

reply to post by Gixxer


Im sorry but there would be now reason for anyone to be mad. These days there is no middle man necessary. Think about it like the websites Youtube, Google, Bing, Etc..All these websites started from nothing. It was their popularity that made them who they are now. The same goes for artists and so on. If the masses really love them they will be heard no matter what and still get payed. No record labels, just work for themselves, advertise themselves, the ones who are good at what they do will have no problem remaining wealthy.

I just had a thought while in the shower (rare, but happens );

When technology started its rapid rise and we saw the introduction of automated machines on production lines around the world, many many thousands of people lost their jobs; protests from people losing their livelihoods fell on deaf ears as the people in charge made more profit from these improvements to the process and advances in technology. Now that technology has progressed to the point of replacing some of the higher tiers of the process, threatening the income of those further up the ladder, those people are now abusing their positions to try and block the same form of progress they gained from all those years ago. Tell me; why should people feel sorry for them?

These actions are the dying breath of an over-inflated industry that's finding that it simply cannot keep up with the progress of technology.

As an aspiring professional musician, I felt somewhat obligated to chime in on this thread.

The first point I want to make is that there is no money boat. The VAST majority of artists are embarrassingly broke. I'm not just talking about the casual singer/songwriter that gigs at your local Starbucks either, I'm also including some of the artists you actually listen to and love. Did you know some artists rent cars or even entire houses on MTV cribs? They definitely rent all that stuff in the music videos. It's true, a handful are rich, but let's be clear: all the talk about the 99% applies tenfold to the music industry!

Second, there already are a bunch of sites out there that serve as storefronts for artists-- Bandcamp for instance lets you sell music and keep 85%, so I don't think that was anything terribly innovative on Megaupload's part. Maybe the paying artists for the free downloads could have had some weight, but it's also bit unclear exactly how much and whether that would've "saved" the industry. My guess is that it is what it is-- Megaupload woke up the beast that is MPAA, whom I've heard has way more political pull than the RIAA due to the size of the industry.

The last point I wanted to make is slightly off topic (and I'm still relatively new here so go easy on me! ), but in light of some of the comments I felt I should point it out-- illegally downloading music is NOT "sticking it to the man!" If you're gonna do it, then so be it, but don't delude yourself into thinking that you're somehow empowering the artists who are getting screwed over by the label anyways. In fact, I'd even go as far as to hypothesize that this is actually part of the reason music is so cheap and manufactured today.

I know this is an incredibly unsexy position to take, but let me break it down. For starters, the $16.99 CD wasn't exactly a $16 markup on the one dollar disc. There's all sorts of costs artists have to deal with, including recording, mixing, and mastering their songs, paying songwriters or producers (if they don't do that themselves), album designers, printing etc. To create an album that doesn't sound like garbage, artists have to spend at least a few thousand dollars, possibly tens of thousands. That's just for the product itself-- there's marketing and distributing, and whole bunch of other issues that need to be considered too, possibly doubling the cost. Think I'm kidding? Consider the fact that Rihanna, one of the most popular artists today, possibly spent an estimated one million dollars for the release of a SINGLE SONG.

The bottom line is that there tends to be not only plenty lot of blood, sweat and tears going into each song you like, but also often a lot of dollars going in as well, and unless it's Jay-Z or Rihanna, that artist you love is going to actually feel the hit when you illegally download it. I've known artists who have had their CD sales completely stop once they hit the P2P sites a few weeks after the release. Is there irrefutable scientific evidence that piracy causes loss of music sales? No, I'm sure there are multiple variables at play, but I feel like you just have to use a little bit of common sense and realize that in the 10+ years of endless debate about this since Napster began in 1999, music sales in the US declined by more than half, so there's definitely some correlation. Now, labels are now taking less risks than ever, pushing only garbage they know will generate sales. It's a vicious cycle!

reply to post by VoidHawk


I wrote something else originally but then realized that you were being facetious.

I listen to a lot of EDM (Electric Dance Music) and a lot of the big artists create their own labels and release most of their stuff online. I use Beat Port for my downloads and pay anywhere from .99-2.99 for a song.

There is no way I want to spend $15-$20 for a full CD when half of the songs are garbage. Mainstream artists have done this for years. They release 3-4 singles that are good songs and then just fill the rest of the album with crap.

If Im going to buy a hard copy of a song/album, it'll be on vinyl, not CD.

Originally posted by solarjetman
illegally downloading music is NOT "sticking it to the man!" If you're gonna do it, then so be it, but don't delude yourself into thinking that you're somehow empowering the artists who are getting screwed over by the label anyways. In fact, I'd even go as far as to hypothesize that this is actually part of the reason music is so cheap and manufactured today.

I hypothesize that music is cheap and manufactured because it created better profit margins for the record industry.

For instance, looks at Miley Sirus or Justin Beaver. This kind of music, "popular" as it is called, is total mind-washing garbage with no soul. However, it is produced specifically with demographics in mind, meaning that the music is designed by producers to target a certain group of customers (in this case, children). On top of this, this garbage music happens to be among the most profitable around.

Real music is created from the soul, and it contains a real message. And let me tell you, the artists that I listen to care more about their message than making money. And while money is still important for them to earn, selling records isn't comparable to the money that they make doing live shows.

I mean, think about it. If you're willing to pirate music from a specific artist and listen to the music over and over because you really enjoy it... then isn't that more important to the artist than profit from sales?

reply to post by Alaskan Man


Check out this young company in Atlanta. F3 Technologies. (FTCH) It's doing that right now and have contract with Ditto.

It's for Films and Music and Book (including Text Book) and Tubes. www.FargoTube.com

It's cloud based. This could be a golden opportunity for investors especially it's not run by Google who will track what you watch and so on starting in March.

Hi all, just wanted to throw my two cents worth in. I have had several books published with a fairly big publishing company in 2005. Well I was one happy guy until I found out how much the book was going to cost versus how much I was going to get paid per book. Now I will be the first one to admit that my first two books were ok, but by no means great so I knew it wasn't going to sell bucket loads and that became more apparent when I saw the price. 17.95 for a book that in my opinion should have been no more than 5. I was ticked off and in 2008 I decided to put it on my own website for free. I was told by my publishers to take it down or face a fine. Keep in mind the book had not sold anything since mid 2006 and it was MY OWN WORK! After two more threats I went to see my lawyer and he said legally there was nothing they could as I still owned 100% of the digital rights. Long story short I ended up getting all my rights back and now use the digital publishers, Smashwords, where I get to set my own price and get most of the money the books make. I think the business is evolving and honestly I have and never will set a book price higher than 3 bucks. With that said I would not be angry if people were getting it for free mainly because a lot of people ( granted not all) could buy the next one, especially when they see it's rather cheap. Main point, charge less and you might be shocked at how much more you could make. As far as "stealing" it from the internet, as a guy that can't afford millions for advertising I say the more people it reaches, the better free or not. At least there is hope that some of those could buy the next one, whereas before they would have never heard of it. Just my opinion on the subject.

Maybe mr Manning his files was stored there? just a tought.

even with upload and the like running an succesful artist or actor still earns way more than your average 9 to 5 just like the goverment members and business men who are all involved, as for upload getting taken, its because of the recent activity at the megaupload mansion, where theve found information relating to mega upload being the source of missing pandas and bees, and it in fact is a gian soul harvesting corpartion, who do there corpation thingys basically takin all out sooouls n joooobs

reply to post by VoidHawk


So you think that most mainstream artists who have labels and are supported by big corporations are not abusing this power of image to control information? If anything, we need freedom to have a balance. If we don't have freedom we don't have anything.

Originally posted by radiotracker350
reply to post by Razimus

 

sure it hosted illegal files, but MU wasnt made for that, it was made and intended as a legal file sharing service, its certain users that started the illegal uploads, from what i seen, MU tried what it could for awhile to keep their servers clean, but the attempts got crushed by re uploads and more illegal uploaders.

the files that got uploaded to MU mightve been illegal, but the feds are out of control, seriously

edit on 25-1-2012 by radiotracker350 because: (no reason given)

keep telling yourself that go read up and maybe you can work out why they were hit.

Originally posted by wrathchild
hundreds of other sites just like mega.....been operating for a long time

Why mega???....why them...not rapidshare...etc etc...??

Because rapidshare changed the way they operate the big one being the removal of rewards for uploading. The rest of the hosts will either follow or will get shut down. IMO fileserve or hotfile will be next, servers in america

Also megaupload have been in the crosshairs for at least 2 years.

July 7, 2010
Another site in the cross hairs appears to be MegaUpload. Although a domain seizure was suggested, it now seems that another route has been taken, at least for now.

torrentfreak.com...

This is why MEGAUPLOAD is under arrest.

The closure of Megaupload and arrest of its operators has focused attention on Kim Dotcom, also known as Kim Schmitz, the file sharing website’s flamboyant founder. The obese, 6ft7ins, 37-year-old playboy is accused of leading a $175m conspiracy of criminal copyright infringement, money laundering, and racketeering. In 1998, Dotcom was handed a two-year suspended prison sentence for a string of hacking offences stretching back four years, including theft of trade secrets. He had penetrated security systems at banks and utility companies, and stolen tens of thousands of pounds. Following his conviction, Schmitz then went straight and set up Data Protect, a computer security company. He sold his 80 per cent stake in 2000 at the height of the dotcom boom and became a millionaire. The firm went bust in 2001. He began living a playboy lifestyle and bought hundreds of thousands of dollars of shares in Letsbuyit.com, an almost-bankrupt shopping website. He announced he would invest tens of millions in the firm, which sent its shares soaring again. Unfortunately for investors, Schmitz didn’t have the money, and sold his own stake at a profit of more than a million pounds. German authorities caught up with him in Bangkok in 2002 and prosecuted him for insider trading. He received a suspended sentence after serving five months awaiting trial. Soon after he also picked up an embezzlement conviction over an irregular loan arrangement between two of his companies.Schmitz next emerged as the founder of Hong Kong-based Megaupload in 2005. It capitalised on the falling prices of data storage and internet bandwidth to offer users a free “cyber locker” they could use to share files via the web. For a monthly membership fee downloads would be quicker, too. The website was a huge success, becoming the leading service of its type. Schmitz, who took up residence in a mansion close to Auckland, New Zealand, became a hate figure for copyright holders. Megaupload's success allowed Schmitz to indulge his expensive love of fast cars, which extended to participaring in the Gumball Rally across Europe and posting videos of his 200mph exploits on YouTube under another alias, “Kimble”. As part of yesterday’s raids, authorities seized more than 20 cars from Schmitz’s New Zealand properties, which reportedly include the country's most expensive mansion. Many of the cars had vanity licence plates, including a Rolls-Royce Phantom bearing “GOD”, an AMG Mercedes carrying “HACKER”, and another labelled “MAFIA”. US authorities are seeking to extradite him from New Zealand. If he is convicted of the charges his faces, he could be sent to prison for up to 20 years. Dotcom's lawyers say he "emphatically denies" any wrongdoing, as do his co-defendents. His application for bail has been delayed until later this week. Judge David McNaughton said that he wanted to delay his bail decision because of "the breadth of issues covered in this bail application and the seriousness of the issues". At one point, according to the indictment, Megaupload was the 13th most frequently visited site on the web. Users could upload material to the company's sites which then would create a link that could be distributed. The sites, which included video, music and pornography, did not provide search capabilities but rather relied on others to publish the links, the indictment said. © Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2012

The law that I live by and which is holding us all bonded is called PRAECEPTAE CAELENIUM (tm). I did not read it in a book. You will not find it in any book. It was revealed to me by audio clairvoyance during the celebrations of the New Millennium in 2000. Summed up it basically means no sex no drugs and no violence. (1) From eternity to eternity, infinity to infinity, there be the one absolute. The One True God. Her names are many but she be the one true God there be no other God. The one judge there be no other judge. (2) La Deus Nostra, Notre Dame, Our Lady, The Holy Spirit, the cause the maker Cosmica. (3) Angelic powers of truth and beauty and righteousness be sure to be loving Her Holiness Above with all your mind and with all your heart and with all your strength. (4) So as to be pleasing to Her Holiness Above therefore do not be serving the masculine. (5) Do not be and do not allow masculinity into positions of government. (6) Honour and respect the virgin pureness of the christae. (7) Honour and respect the Immaculate Conception [parthenogenesis] reproductive process of the christae. (8) Do not fornicate or adulterate or sodomize. (9) Do not bully or torture or murder. (10) Do not lie. (11) Do not steal. (12) Do not be covetous. (13) Do not be jealous. Copyright NGL(c)2000.

He who trusts in violence to be his security cannot speak that he trusts in God to be his security.

AVE RAEGINA CAELINA LA DEUS NOSTRA CAELI LA VERA DEUS

When rapidshare get shut down start to worry. Why do you think loads of people left rapidshare when they stopped rewarding people? Why do you think people should be rewarded for uploading pirated material? What happened to sharing to share, seems to of died and been replaced by actual bootleggers who are just out to make a buck and who are destroying by there greed avenues of sharing.

reply to post by CAELENIUM

 

The law that I live by and which is holding us all bonded is called PRAECEPTAE CAELENIUM (tm). I did not read it in a book. You will not find it in any book. It was revealed to me by audio clairvoyance during the celebrations of the New Millennium in 2000. Summed up it basically means no sex no drugs and no violence. (1) From eternity to eternity, infinity to infinity, there be the one absolute. The One True God. Her names are many but she be the one true God there be no other God. The one judge there be no other judge. (2) La Deus Nostra, Notre Dame, Our Lady, The Holy Spirit, the cause the maker Cosmica. (3) Angelic powers of truth and beauty and righteousness be sure to be loving Her Holiness Above with all your mind and with all your heart and with all your strength. (4) So as to be pleasing to Her Holiness Above therefore do not be serving the masculine. (5) Do not be and do not allow masculinity into positions of government. (6) Honour and respect the virgin pureness of the christae. (7) Honour and respect the Immaculate Conception [parthenogenesis] reproductive process of the christae. (8) Do not fornicate or adulterate or sodomize. (9) Do not bully or torture or murder. (10) Do not lie. (11) Do not steal. (12) Do not be covetous. (13) Do not be jealous. Copyright NGL(c)2000.

He who trusts in violence to be his security cannot speak that he trusts in God to be his security.

What the hell are you talking about?

Aivlas, you're right. I started sensing trouble the moment that I saw that people were making money by having a reputation of getting pirated material out first. That's where you don't have a defense anymore really. There needs to be a better way and not simply a replacement group that the money goes to instead.

I foresee the future...

In a few years time, there will be no more MPAA or RIAA or record labels or Hollywood.

In their replacement comes

1. Independent artists (Basically anyone with a talent)
2. Independent & outsourced technical specialist for music/movie production
3. Internet marketing via media portals like youtube, blip.tv and various other media streaming sites.

My suggestions to technical nerds listen up.

1. Advertise your expertise online on blogs or freelancer sites on music/movie editing/producing.
2. Showcase your works on youtube and or other media streaming sites and put a contact link
3. Put your price online

My suggestions to artist with talents

1. Kill your contract if any with labels or studios.
2. Become independent freelancer artist
3. Become your own producer
4. Learn as much as possible all technical know how from youtube to use softwares like garageband or iMovie.
5. Experiment with viral marketing

My suggestions to future streaming sites

1. Have a good automated system to check videos/audios upload to compared with registered copyrighted materials.

2. If found inform the uploader of the "Great" earning opportunity to put more descriptive "tags" of where the music/video is from, who the material belongs to, what quality it's being copied (DVD/BlueRay/CD & etc), What category it belongs to (Horror, Comedy, Scifi Etc), self subtitle the video (more $)

3. Pay 90% advertising revenue to original copyright holders, 5 - 9% to media streaming host site, 1 - 5% to up-loader. (Depending on how much info the uploader provides like subtitles & above)

4. Uploader won't get paid if the content (movie or audio) is duplicated content that's already available at that site uploaded by others (of the same quality eg. DVD) but will remain payable to copyright holder & host (90% holder 10% host)

5. If songs are "covers" of existing songs e.g. youtube singers singing popular songs online will be given 30% ownership of the copyright holding of that cover while the original singer holds 70%.


6. If music are used for back ground sounds/music for videos then the same will apply 70% of the copyright goes to the music owner

7. If the music & movie are totally original from the uploader, the hosting streaming site gets 10% fixed & the rest goes to the content creator at 90%.

This system give the incentives to upload to servers in the future to be "employed" as "distributors" instead of illegal uploader.

The reason why this system works because without this system, with the terabytes of hard disk gets cheaper & faster bandwidth....it's quite possible to host privately own servers at home with good encryptions shared download links with private individuals with password lock.

However, if websites/host pay users to upload self curated media contents to their servers...NO ONE will upload to torrent anymore...eliminating piracy totally.

Consumers will play streaming music & movies with advertising much like the ones on youtube or blip.tv now, with very specific targeted audience and information about "registered" users...advertisers will put more quality advertising to such media streaming sites!

Consumers can also PAY a monthly subscriptions to the service for no commercials when viewing but subscription pricing models like variable pricing model OR high fixed pricing model.

e.g.
Variable pricing model = (no. of video clips & music played per month) x potential advertising revenue
Fixed pricing model = High but fixed subscription cable tv pricing model per month
Free viewing = short videos have bottom pop up ads, medium length videos can have video advertising that can be skipped after 5 seconds, long videos can have full 25 -30 seconds advertising in between 30 minutes intervals.

THERE WILL BE COMPETITION to such online streaming media sites and the competition will be fierce depending on the infrastructure and user base.

1. Youtube - already established online viewer based both on desktops & mobile (Faster to approve videos)
2. Amazon - Video purchase/subscription can easily add advertising model
3. Netflix - Same
4. iTunes - Same but with better curated contents by both uploader & content creators & Apple (Slower to approve)
5. Others - streaming sites are popping up everywhere

Other pirated sites in other countries have no choice but to follow the same system.

Objectives
1. Piracy - Eliminated
2. Content accessibility - GLOBALIZED.
3. Profitability - EVERYONE WINS.

reply to post by simontay78

However, if websites/host pay users to upload self curated media contents to their servers...NO ONE will upload to torrent anymore...eliminating piracy totally.

filesevers already pay people to upload pirated material and the people who want to share to share still use those free non profit ways to do it, while the people in it for the money will continue to jump from fileserver to fileserver trying to keep the cash flow coming..

reply to post by aivlas


That's true some how but because there's no better easier alternative then free torrents or free streaming out there that are legal.

If there's a legal streaming sites that actually pay people to upload approve by studios & content creators...and have massively stable streaming service or download services with advertisements supported by the world viewers....(targeted audience)...and it's double click play 5 seconds load time.

Who in the right mind will continue to support illegal torrents then...once they know they can consume for free with a peace of mind and giving millions of jobs to "distributors"