Blog

Copyright case against Kim Dotcom rebuffed by US presidential candidate

Posted on by Jimmy Nicholls
Kim Dotcom portrait, October 2012 via Thierry Ehrmann

Internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom has enlisted an influential ally as he entered the last leg of a battle to prevent extradition to the United States on charges of copyright infringement and wire fraud related to his website Megaupload.

Lawrence Lessig, an outsider in the Democratic presidential nomination race and Harvard Law School professor, filed an affidavit in defence of Dotcom, who will face the New Zealand courts on Monday in a bid to prevent the extradition.

Challenging the allegations of copyright infringement, Lessig claimed that the facts of the case do not establish that Dotcom and his co-defendants themselves infringed:

“A showing of willful criminal copyright infringement requires compact factual proof identifying a specific copyrighted work, a right of the owner that has been violated, the geographical location of the infringement and other specific facts needed to establish a violation of United States criminal law. Such compact facts are absent here.”

He added:

“The generalized accusations, defective and irrelevant allegations, scattered facts of alleged multiple infringements and statistics set forth in the superseding indictment and record of the case do not satisfy requirements of proof but rather manifest unreliability of the overall approach.”

The Harvard professor went on to argue that the crime of “secondary copyright infringement” that Dotcom stands accused of does not exist under American law, with Lessig saying that American Congress has never defined such a crime even though such infringement is recognised in civil law.

Defending Megaupload in general, Lessig referred to the so-called Sony Doctrine which defends technologies that can be used for illegal purposes so long as they have substantial legal purposes, the standard having originated in the Betamax case against Sony over the use of its video cassettes to record copyrighted television shows.

“Under civil copyright law, internet service providers, such as Megaupload, do not have a duty to investigate potential infringement,” the law professor argued.

Lessig then went on to reject the case against Dotcom for conspiracy to commit copyright infringement…

“There is no showing of specific criminal ‘willful’ infringements committed by specific individual users. There is an even more serious lack of evidence of communications between respondents and such alleged users needed to prove an agreement that is subject to laws of conspiracy.”

…and then turned to the case against Dotcom for Megaupload’s online abuse tool’s alleged failure to take down all links to a given file rather than just the ones being reported:

“The DOJ [Department of Justice] appears to be asserting that an ISP [Internet service provider] like Megaupload, which receives copyright take down notices identifying one URL, must search for and delete all duplicate files used by different users in the cloud system or be subject to a copyright or fraud claim. In my opinion the DOJ’s novel theory of copyright or fraud liability is erroneous.”

In summary Lessig concluded that extraditing Dotcom was not possible:

“It is my opinion that the Superseding Indictment and Record of the Case filed by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) do not meet the requirements necessary to support a prima facie [“on first appearance”] case that would be recognized by United States federal law and subject to the US – NZ Extradition Treaty.”

The hearing against Dotcom and his co-defendants will begin next week.

Image Credit – Kim Dotcom portrait, October 2012 via Thierry Ehrmann

Blog

Jeb Bush: Let’s put Margaret ‘Milk Snatcher’ Thatcher on US $10 bill

Posted on by Jimmy Nicholls
Margaret Thatcher on US $10 bill by Al Jazeera

Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush suggested on Wednesday that British prime minister Margaret Thatcher should be put on the American $10 bill.

Talking in a televised debate for Republican candidates vying to run for the White House, Bush was quizzed on his preference on which woman should feature on American money, and used the opportunity to praise the Milk Snatcher.

“I would go with Ronald Reagan’s partner, Margaret Thatcher,” he said, referencing the close relationship between the British prime minister and the American president of the same era, both revered in Republican circles.

“Probably illegal, but what the heck?” he added, explaining Thatcher probably wouldn’t pass because she is not American.

“A strong leader is what we need in the White House, and she certainly was a strong leader that restored the United Kingdom into greatness.”

Shortly after this suggestion a subsidiary of Al Jazeera, a Qatari-backed media group, threw together a mock-up of what the Milk Snatcher bill might look like:

Under plans from the US Treasury a woman will be added to an American bill for the first time in 2020 to celebrate 100 years since women were given the vote in the States through an amendment to the country’s constitution.

Candidates other than Thatcher for the bill included the wife of candidate Mike Huckabee, the mother of candidate Ben Carson and Ivanka Trump, daughter of the Donald.

In entirely unrelated news Bush also admitted during the presidential debate that he had smoked marijuana 40 years ago.

Image Credit – Margaret Thatcher on US $10 bill by Al Jazeera

Blog

First Corbyn vs Cameron PMQs clash bemuses hacks as leaders behave respectfully

Posted on by Jimmy Nicholls
PMQs September 16 2015 via BBC Parliament

The first prime minister’s questions (PMQs) since the election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader was the most anticipated political event since the North Islington MP surged past his leadership rivals in the polls.

Yet in the event Corbyn’s strategy of crowdsourcing questions from his supporters was fielded respectfully (and perhaps even gratefully) by prime minister David Cameron, who calmly knocked each one back to a largely silent Commons.

For some this is PMQs as it should be, minus the usual jeering and braying from the Commons that arouses such distaste from the members of the public regularly canvassed by journalists.

For others the steady plodding of questions on topics such as housing and welfare made the session more like a phone-in show:

And some were not happy with Corbyn’s lack of response to Cameron, who was left largely free to answer the questions without challenge from the leader of the opposition, whose main role is to, well, “oppose” the government.

Perhaps most importantly for the public relations war surrounding PMQs, Cameron was not prompted to the sneery anger that many observers believe shows him at his least sympathetic, evoking the fictional school bully Flashman from Victorian novel Tom Brown’s School Days.

Whether the good will, which was later spoiled by jeers from both Labour MPs and the Scottish National Party (SNP), will last beyond the first few weeks remains to be seen.

And whether any of it really matters that much at all is another question yet to be answered.

Image Credit – PMQs September 16 2015 via BBC Parliament

Blog

Corbyn rightly dismisses national anthem furore and sandwichgate as ‘tittle tattle’

Posted on by Jimmy Nicholls
Fleet Street splashes 16 September 2015, via Nick Sutton

Furore over Jeremy Corbyn not singing the god-bothering monarchist national anthem at a memorial service has been dismissed by the Labour leader as “tittle tattle” as allegations he stole sandwiches intended for war veterans also turned out to be bollocks.

The North Islington MP faced a wave of criticism from Fleet Street on Wednesday for not singing God Save the Queen at a remembrance service for soldiers that fought in the Battle of Britain during the Second World War.

Much of Fleet Street splashed on the non-story about the atheist republican, who presumably refused to sign the anthem out of principle, whilst their Scottish brethren had their minds on other matters.

Writing on Facebook the North Islington MP criticised the media for entertaining trivia, asking what it is that “scares” the press about debating “real issues”.

Corbyn was backed up in his non-singing by Labour campaigner and Royal Air Force veteran Harry Leslie Smith, who tweeted:

Graham Smith, chief executive of the lobby Republic, also weighed in:

“A national anthem should be about the country, not the queen and god. For republicans, atheists and anyone with good taste God Save the Queen is an awful song set to a funereal dirge. I’m as patriotic as any supporter of the monarchy, I would love it if my country’s anthem wasn’t offensive to my principles.  I have no doubt that’s also Jeremy’s Corbyn’s view.”

Corbyn also defended himself to Sky News early on Wednesday, though did not say whether he would or would not be singing national anthems at future events:

“I am going to be at many events and I will take part fully in those events. I don’t see a problem about this. I was there and I will show my respect in the proper way at all future events. The proper way is to take a full part in it and I will take a full part.”

In another attempted smear rightwing blog Guido Fawkes reported allegations that Corbyn stole some sandwiches intended for war veterans after the Battle of Britain event, thought it has since emerged he was given them by Costa.

The Labour leader is due to make his first appearance at prime minister’s questions since winning the leadership election on Wednesday, where his performance will be closely scrutinised.

Image Credit – Fleet Street splashes 16 September 2015, via Nick Sutton

Blog

BBC cameraman ‘in hospital’ after scuffle outside Jeremy Corbyn’s doorstep

Posted on by Jimmy Nicholls
Jeremy Corbyn at People's Assembly Demo, June 2014 by David Holt

A cameraman from the BBC apparently went to hospital on Tuesday night with neck and face injuries after an incident outside the front door of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s house.

Writing on Twitter, Channel 4’s political correspondent Michael Crick reported an alleged assault on journalist James Webb who was doorstepping Corbyn, adding that a Corbyn aide was believed to be behind the attack.

Though the details of the incident are still unconfirmed, footage has emerged in which a camera pointed towards Corbyn’s door falls to the ground, with the Belfast Telegraph video claiming a “taxi driver pushed past a cameraman”, knocking the camera to the ground.

In the clip a man, presumably Webb, can seemingly be heard complaining: “You’ve smashed me camera!” And later on somebody says: “That was his taxi driver, wasn’t it? Everyday we’ve had trouble down here.”

However Jim Pickard of the Financial Times reported that Labour attributed the incident to the “government’s car service”.  

Crick has claimed there has been a number of incidents like this, and such events are unlikely to help the impression that some Corbynites are a little militant in their approach to politics.

Update: A Department for Transport spokesman has told the Spectator: “We are investigating media reports of an incident yesterday involving a Government Car Service vehicle. We are looking at whether the driver was involved and the extent and nature of that involvement.”

Update 2: Previous Labour prime minister Gordon Brown’s spin doctor Charlie Whelan has some alternative advice on how to deal with pesky cameramen:

Update 3: A spokesman from the BBC had this to say on the matter:

“The BBC can confirm there was an incident involving a BBC cameraman while filming Jeremy Corbyn leaving his home yesterday. He sustained some injuries for which he’s received treatment. The BBC has spoken to the Labour party, who has confirmed the incident involved a government driver, not a Labour party member of staff.”

More details to follow. Image Credit – Jeremy Corbyn at People’s Assembly Demo, June 2014 by David Holt