Kim Dotcom’s Extradition Hearing Postponed Until March 2013

In this Feb. 22, 2012 file photo, Kim Dotcom, the founder of the file-sharing website Megaupload, comments after he was granted bail and released in Auckland, New Zealand. The U.S. wants to extradite Dotcom from New Zealand, but his extradition hearing won’t be held until March 2013, 13 months after he was arrested. AP Photo/New Zealand Herald, Brett Phibbs, File

AUCKLAND, New Zealand — The United States’ court case against Megaupload founders Kim Dotcom, Mathias Ortmann, Finn Batato and Bram van der Kolk for alleged copyright infringement was dealt another setback Tuesday, after the New Zealand extradition hearing for the four was moved to March 2013.

Originally, the hearing was scheduled for August 6 this year, about six months after Dotcom’s home was raided in January, but a series of legal complications have pushed that date forward.

These include a High Court judge invalidating the warrants for seizing Dotcom’s property and funds — thus making the armed raid at dawn illegal. The judge also declared that the FBI shipping cloned hard drive images taken at the raid was unlawful, thanks to the warrants used being too broad and general.

Dotcom and his associates, who are now free on bail, face extradition to the United States, after being accused of conspiring to commit large-scale copyright infringement to the tune of $500 million. If convicted, they face 20-year prison sentences and million-dollar fines.

All the accused deny they were part of a conspiracy to commit copyright infringement, saying that Megaupload was a legitimate site for sharing files and that they complied with U.S. companies’ takedown notices, despite being a foreign corporation.

Kim Dotcom didn’t respond to Wired’s request for comment on the postponed extradition hearing, but on Twitter, accused the United States of “dirty delay tactics.”

Dotcom also railed against New Zealand Prime Minister John Key for refusing him due process and a fair defence, as he is entitled to as a permanent resident of the South Pacific nation.”>“.

Dotcom also railed against New Zealand Prime Minister John Key for refusing him due process and a fair defence, as he is entitled to as a permanent resident of the South Pacific nation.
In an earlier interview with Wired.com, Megaupload’s U.S. lawyer Ira Rothken says he expects the extradition hearing to take place no matter what happens as the legal process in Virginia and New Zealand grinds on.

“Dotcom is looking forward to his day in court, to present his side of the story,” Rothken says.

A hearing in the Federal Court of Virginia before Justice O’Grady is up next in the Megaupload legal saga.

Rothken has filed motions to vacate the orders that led to the seizure of Megaupload’s domain names and servers and says he is optimistic that O’Grady will do so.

He also expects O’Grady to order a hearing around the return of legitimate data belonging to Megaupload users. The users’ data was swept up in the confiscation of Megaupload’s assets by the US authorities, which have since then refused to return it to users.

According Rothken, the data people can’t get back include business files in Microsoft Word format, as well as family photographs.

Rothken also slams the U.S. prosecution, calling it “experimental”.

“This is the first time in U.S. history that a cloud storage company has been prosecuted for secondary copyright infringement,” Rothken says.

According to Rothken, twenty-five lawyers around the world – United States, New Zealand, Hong Kong and the Netherlands – are working on the Megaupload defense.

They are patient, Rothken says, but none have been paid yet. Rothken has applied for seized funds to be released soon to pay for Dotcom and Megaupload’s legal bills.

Porn Studios Accused of Screwing Their Fans in BitTorrent Lawsuits

Photo: s-falkow/Flickr

A handful of pornography producers are being accused of racketeering, fraud, defamation and other charges in connection to their BitTorrent online litigation trolling strategies.

The program is simple: They sue IP addresses in court — addresses detected to have allegedly and unlawfully downloaded copyrighted pornography without permission. Often, judges in these cases order internet service providers to cough up the identities of the account holders of the ISP — and the shakedown begins, according to the Kentucky federal court suit (.pdf), which seeks class-action status.

The companies have no intention of litigating, but instead demand settlements from $1,000 to $5,000, and many people settle due to the fear of embarrassment over being accused of downloading pornography. Moreover, under the U.S. Copyright Act, defendants face up to $150,000 in fines for a single copyright violation.

The suit comes a week after a federal judge declared a BitTorrent lawsuit brought by Malibu Media “an extortion scheme.”

We’ve written about the scams repeatedly, and a year ago we were aware of 130,000 IP addresses targeted.

In contrast to the Recording Industry Association of America’s much-criticized and now-abandoned litigation war against music pirates — which targeted 20,000 downloaders in six years — the movie lawsuits appear to have been designed from the start as a for-profit endeavor, not as a deterrent to piracy.

“The pornography purveyors know that this amount of money is less than the cost of defense would be if suit were filed. They also know that individuals such as the plaintiff in this matter are embarrassed to have their names associated with pornography, and therefore, are susceptible to being shaken down,” according to the suit, which claims it could represent as many as 200,000 people.

“In fact, if the individuals could be proven to have downloaded the pornography unlawfully from the internet, the pornography purveyors could collect civil statutory damages of $150,000 for a willful infringement such as they allege, yet they settle for $1,000-$5,000.”

The RIAA was hit with a similar lawsuit years ago, but that eventually fizzled.

Lory Lybeck, a Washington state attorney not connected to the Kentucky class action, said he is defending hundreds of clients accused of downloading porn. “There’s a slime element associated with the porn cases, which makes it much more apparent than the music cases that there is an extortionist element to this,” he said in a telephone interview.

The case targeting the porn studios was brought on behalf of a Kentucky woman named Jennifer Barker. A representative of Intellectual Property Protection, which works for the porn companies named in the suit, allegedly called her at home and at work seeking a settlement for allegedly downloading X-Art videos produced by Malibu Media, the suit said. She claims she is innocent.

The company, the suit said, “demanded that Ms. Barker pay money to settle the lawsuit or she would be identified publicly as having downloaded pornography and would be subject to hundreds of thousands of dollars as a judgement if the suit went forward because there were multiple downloads.”

Malibu Media did not respond for comment. Third Degree Films and Patrick Collins Inc. declined comment. Raw Films was not immediately reached.

Anonymous Group Says It Gave Syrian E-mails to WikiLeaks

Days after WikiLeaks began releasing a trove of more than 2 million e-mails stolen from Syrian officials, ministries and companies, members of an Anonymous group have claimed responsibility for the hacks and document dump to Wikileaks.

In a press release published Saturday, a group calling itself Anonymous Op Syria disclosed that its members hacked into multiple domains and dozens of servers inside Syria on Feb. 5 to obtain the e-mails, which it then gave to WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks began publishing the e-mails on July 5, working with several media partners outside the United States, but didn’t disclose its partnership with Anonymous.

In its intro to the e-mail cache, WikiLeaks indicated that they came from 678,000 individual e-mail addresses and 680 domains, including ones belonging to Syria’s Ministries of Presidential Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Finance, Information, Transport and Culture. At least 400,000 of the e-mails are in Arabic and 68,000 are in Russian.

The documents range from “the intimate correspondence of the most senior Baath party figures to records of financial transfers sent from Syrian ministries to other nations,” according to WikiLeaks.

The Anonymous team, composed of members of three groups known as Anonymous Syria, AntiSec, and the Peoples Liberation Front, says it had been assisting activists in Syria since protests began against the Syrian regime more than a year ago, and that the team worked round-the-clock shifts to hack the servers.

“So large was the data available to be taken, and so great was the danger of detection (especially for the members of Anonymous Syria, many of whom are ‘in country’) that the downloading of this data took several additional weeks,” says the group in its statement.

Last March, the group hinted at the treasure it possessed when it leaked about 3,000 e-mails from the personal e-mail account of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and his wife Asma to the Guardian newspaper in London.

Leaking the entire trove of e-mails, however, proved to be more difficult.

“We gave Syrian mails to Wikileaks after trying unsuccessfully to make a deal with Al Jazeera English,” a member of the group told Wired in an instant message exchange. “We like the Wikileaks concept, and they do a good job of releasing these kinds of things. We successfully released Stratfor together previously, and both learned from our mistakes there.”

Last December, Anonymous hacked into servers belonging to the U.S.-based security firm Stratfor and stole about 5 million e-mails, which the group gave to WikiLeaks. The e-mails were published in February.

The Anonymous member wouldn’t elaborate to Wired on the nature of the mistakes that Anonymous and WikiLeaks had learned from their previous partnership, but added that this time around, the team also gave copies of the Syrian e-mails to the Associated Press news agency, based in the United States.

“We gave a copy to the AP too, for the lulz,” the Anonymous member said.

The group noted in their public statement that there will be “many more disclosures of this type in the future as this wonderful partnership between WikiLeaks and Anonymous continues to grow stronger and change human history.”

So far, only a few dozen e-mails have been published from the cache.

In its intro to the e-mail cache, WikiLeaks boasted that they will “shine a light on the inner workings of the Syrian government and economy” and “reveal how the West and Western companies say one thing and do another.”

But to date, only one item of news value has been uncovered in the published e-mails, according to Forbes. This regards information that an Italian firm Finmeccania offered a communications system to the Syrian and Iranian governments, which the Italian and Spanish newspapers L’Espresso and Publico published in their coverage of the e-mails.

Mobile-Phone Surveillance by Police Targets Millions Annually

Rep. Edward Markey (D-Massachusetts)

Mobile carriers responded to a staggering 1.3 million law enforcement requests last year for subscriber information, including text messages and phone location data, according to data provided to Congress.

The revelation marks the first time figures have been made available showing just how pervasive mobile snooping by the government has become in the United States.

The companies said they were working around the clock and charging millions in fees to keep up with ever-growing demands. At least one of the carriers urged Congress to clarify the law on when probable-cause warrants were required to divulge customer data.

Nine mobile phone companies forwarded the data as part of a Congressional privacy probe brought by Rep. Edward Markey, (D-Massachusetts), who co-chairs the Congressional Bi-partisan Privacy Caucus.

The number of Americans affected each year by the growing use of mobile phone data by law enforcement could reach into the tens of millions, as a single request could ensnare dozens or even hundreds of people. Law enforcement has been asking for so-called “cell tower dumps” in which carriers disclose all phone numbers that connected to a given tower during a certain period of time.

So, for instance, if police wanted to try to find a person who broke a store window at an Occupy protest, it could get the phone numbers and identifying data of all protestors with mobile phones in the vicinity at the time — and use that data for other purposes.

“We cannot allow privacy protections to be swept aside with the sweeping nature of these information requests,” Markey said in a statement. Markey divulged the data Monday, a day after leaking it to The New York Times.

The carriers have refused for years to make clear to Americans how much data they keep and for how long — or how often — and under what standards — data is turned over to authorities. The newly released data shows that the police have realized the country has moved to an age when most Americans carry a tracking device in their pockets, leaving a bread crumb trail of their every move and electronic communication.

 The reports showed that AT&T, the nation’s second largest carrier, received about 125,000 requests from the authorities in 2007 — mushrooming to more than 260,000 last year. It charged $2.8 million for the work in 2007 and $8.25 million last year. Though AT&T promises in its own human rights policy that it will “generate periodic reports regarding our experience with such requests to the extent permitted by the law,” the company has never done so until requested by Congress.

Verizon, the nation’s largest carrier, did not provide a clear breakdown as did AT&T, but said it also received about 260,000 requests last year, and added that the numbers are growing at a rate of about 15 percent annually.

Oddly, the third largest carrier, Sprint said it has received nearly double what each of the top two reported: 500,000 requests last year. Finally, the last of the top four carriers, T-Mobile, declined to divulge how many requests it gets. But it said in the last decade, the numbers have increased by up to 16 percent annually.

Overall, the companies said they respond to tens of thousands of emergency requests annually when authorities ask for data claiming there is an imminent threat of death or serious injury. Sprint, for example, said it handles those via fax from law enforcement.

The figures come as Twitter and Google have also reported a major uptick in the number of government demands for user-information data. Twitter, for example, said it received more requests for data in the first half of this year than all of last year. The United States was responsible for the bulk of the requests.

The carriers said they responded to police emergencies, subpoenas and other court orders. They did not clearly say how many times they responded to probable-cause warrants. That’s because much of Americans’ mobile-phone data is not protected by the Fourth Amendment.

“AT&T does not respond to law enforcement without receipt of appropriate legal process,” Timothy McKone, an AT&T vice president, wrote Markey as part of the congressional inquiry. “When the law requires a warrant for disclosure of customer usage information, AT&T requires that a warrant be required — as is also the case for court orders, subpoenas or any other form of legal process.”

AT&T: The category PSAP stands for Public Safety Answering Point, which takes emergency 911 calls for subscriber data.

McCone said the company employs more than 100 full-time staffers and “operates on a 24/7 basis for the purpose of meeting law enforcement demands.”

All the while, the Justice Department employs a covert internet and telephone surveillance method known as pen register and trap-and-trace capturing. Judges sign off on these telco orders when the authorities say the information is relevant to an investigation. No probable cause that the target committed a crime — the warrant standard — is necessary.

Pen registers obtain non-content information of outbound telephone and internet communications, such as phone numbers dialed, and the sender and recipient (and sometimes subject line) of an e-mail message. A trap-and-trace acquires the same information, but for inbound communications to a target.

According to a separate report, from 2004 to 2009, the number of those have more than doubled to 23,895. The Justice Department has failed to report figures for 2010 and 2011. The American Civil Liberties Union has sued the Justice Department, seeking the records.

What’s more, the government asserts, and judges are sometimes agreeing, that no warrant is required to obtain so-called cell-site data which identifies the cell tower to which the customer was connected at the beginning of a call and at the end of the call. Such location data can be collected by mobile phone companies whenever a phone is turned on, making it possible for police to obtain, without probable cause, a detailed history of the movement of a phone.

Sprint said sometimes it’s hard for the company to know whether it is being properly served, and that the legal standard of whether a probable-cause warrant was needed is unclear.

“Given the importance of this issue, the competing and at times contradictory legal standards, Sprint believes Congress should clarify the legal requirements for disclosure of all types of location information to law enforcement personnel,” Voyan McCann, a Sprint vice president, wrote Markey.

Convicted of Murder, Linux Guru Hans Reiser Returns to Court to Fight Civil Suit

Hans Reiser on the stand in 2008 during his 11 days of testimony that ended with a jury convicting him of murdering his wife, Nina. Illustration: Norman Quebedeau/Wired

Four years after being convicted of killing his wife, Linux guru Hans Reiser returns Monday to court, this time to defend himself from a wrongful-death suit brought by his two children.

Reiser, the developer of the ReiserFS filesystem, was convicted by an Alameda County, California jury in 2008 of the first-degree murder of his wife, Nina. Defendant Reiser and his legal team had argued that his wife was not dead, and had abandoned her children to sneak away to Russia, where the couple met in 1998, after he accused her of embezzling from his software company, Namesys. But jurors didn’t buy Reiser’s story, and weeks after his conviction he led the authorities to Nina’s body hidden in the Oakland hills, for a reduced term of 15-to-life instead of 25-to-life.

Now he has a new story — he killed his wife to prevent her from possibly killing their children. And he plans on telling a new jury about it while wearing his Pleasant Valley State Prison jail smocks and acting as his own attorney.

In his own words: Hans Reiser’s latest defense to killing his wife, Nina.

San Francisco lawyers working pro bono brought the suit on behalf of the Reisers’ 12-year-old son and 11-year-old daughter. The suit seeks unspecified damages for wrongful death and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

The children’s attorney, Arturo González of Morrison & Foerster, isn’t sure if there is any money to recover for the children.

“We want a judgment. If it turns out that Reiser has assets hidden somewhere, like a bank account in Russia, if that turns out to be the case, we want the children to be entitled to those funds,” he said. “It is conceivable he may come up with some idea that is of some value, then that value should go to the children.”

The murder case began with no body, no crime scene, no reliable eyewitness and virtually no physical evidence. It ended with the husband’s conviction after he took the stand, delivered the “geek defense” and proceeded to slowly incriminate himself over the course of 11 days of testimony.

And now he’s got a new twist to the story, a tale that the Alameda County judge overseeing the case has barred, but it’s one he undoubtedly will tell anyway.

He claims his wife was abusing the kids, that she had Factitious disorder by proxy – often referred to as Munchausen syndrome by proxy – where a caregiver harms or even kills someone they are in charge of in order to gain sympathy and attention. During the 2008 trial, Reiser alluded to that as well, accusing his wife of having the disease when she wanted to get their son surgery for severe hearing loss.

Nina Reiser, at age 31, was last seen alive at Hans Reiser’s house in the Oakland hills on the day of her 2006 murder, when she dropped off the once-happy couple’s two young children to stay with him the Labor Day weekend. The couple were in the middle of a heated divorce.

According to a confession as part of a sentencing deal, he said he first punched her in the mouth, cutting his hand, then strangled her to death.

In the unlawful death case, he now says why: “I defended my children from harm.” He added that, by murdering his wife, “I stopped multiple felonies by doing so.”

In his papers, he accuses the courts, the prison system, county children’s services, his trial attorneys and others of conspiring against him, during his murder trial and now in the civil case.

“There are extensive legal grounds under multiple arguments for defending an innocent child when the state will not, at the cost of a non-innocent party’s life,” Hans Reiser wrote.

Jury selection is set for Monday morning in Alameda County Superior Court. Superior Court Judge Dennis Hayashi has allowed a total of six hours of testimony from both sides.

Reiser’s children are not expected to take the stand. “People who knew the family,” González said, will testify on behalf of the children, who are living in Russia with the victim’s mother.

The lawsuit says the children suffered a “loss of love, support, companionship, comfort, (and) affection.”