Ontario tells US Megaupload prosecutors to get lost

Discuss

17 Responses to “Ontario tells US Megaupload prosecutors to get lost”

  1. That_Anonymous_Coward says:

    You mean the US lied, and that we should apply the law evenly to everyone despite the laughable claims?
    What a wacky idea.

  2. gwailo_joe says:

    Go away US prosecutors: go actually prosecute the folks in Guantanamo Bay that need actual, like, real legal action if you MUST prosecute SOMEBODY.

    Hey, look.. Wall Street!  Much closer…just a quick jet jaunt and a Towncar and BAM go prosecutorial on them bitchez!

    • soylent_plaid says:

      Actually, considering the sort of stuff I’ve been reading lately on the Aaron Swartz case, maybe US prosecutors shouldn’t be prosecuting anybody.  Find somebody else to do the prosecuting.

      Of course I wouldn’t mind seeing some Carmen Ortiz level “justice” done on Wall Street, but those guys all wear expensive suits so that’s out.

      • That_Anonymous_Coward says:

        They were to busy trumping up charges against people like Aaron Swartz to find any evidence of wrongdoing on Wall Street.

        • Slartibartfatsdomino says:

          They found plenty of evidence of corporate malfeasance, as they told us in breathless press-conferences designed rhetorically to make it seem like they were on the side of the little guy. They just couldn’t bother to, y’know, actually prosecute people for those crimes. They were too busy persecuting people like Swartz. In the case of prosecutor Ortiz, I mean that quite literally, as this post on Ortiz’s molly-coddling of health care corporations makes clear: http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/the-tragic-case-of-aaron-swartz-unequal.html

          • That_Anonymous_Coward says:

            No DOJ reported that couldn’t find enough evidence of wrongdoing at Goldman.  And they spend more time making up more imaginary charges against mega

          • Slartibartfatsdomino says:

            Well, I think it’s a bit more complicated than that even with Goldman (although I agree that what they have been allowed to get away with is beyond scandalous and demonstrates the tiered nature of justice in the US), but I was thinking in particular of HSBC, where the DoJ detailed quite a bit of the wrongdoing and then decided to settle for a small fine. 

          • Brad Bell says:

            Ironically, the stumbling block for Swartz was being forced into being defined as a felon. In contrast, Banks never admit any wrongdoing, and pay a relatively tiny fine. Swartz should have been able to settle for $35 and admitted no wrong doing.

  3. Darg says:

    Well it’s more like “this costs too much and you haven’t convinced us of the worth, if you ask for less, like a summary of the contents we can comply, but we don’t want to go out and buy 100 1TB disks just to placate your requests.”

  4. feetleet says:

    As – apparently – I’m the only person on the entire Internet willing to admit I used MU for porn and porn alone, I think this is in bad taste. Removing the conversation to the niceties of extradition deflects the question of guilt. A proper civil disobedient does time, or worse. I realize the context in which I’m saying this. And that’s exactly why I’m comfortable saying: this is NOT the appropriate time to bring up .Com. The comparison offends me.

  5. ffabian says:

    Oh noes – the bully got rejected. Next step: Drones over Canada

    • Lemoutan says:

      I suppose drones might send a clear, unsubtle, message. But the narrative is that the USA’s all about money, so shouldn’t we rather be expecting rises in import duties, Canadianly-unfavourable exchange rates etc?

  6. Tarliman says:

    About time someone told the government of my country to take a hike. Pity it wasn’t done in clearer terms. This decision allows too much room for the US to come back with a wording that the judge finds acceptable. A stinging rebuke would have been better. Sorry, folks, we’re trying to get control of our country back from the asshats that have seized power, but it’s hard without resorting to violence, and they have drones and all we have are protest signs.

  7. Baldhead says:

    They want the whole thing because they’re sure there’s evidence of wrongdoing on those servers. Too bad you need some evidence of wrongdoing to get at them in the first place.

    • That_Anonymous_Coward says:

      They had that… they were alerted to some infringing files, demanded they be kept in place while they investigated, and then used those files to launch the case.

Leave a Reply