When TF was alerted to the issue this week the video had received under 10 views, yet someone already had their eye on it.

“A company called Believe Digital has made what I believe to be a fraudulent copyright claim against me for [the speech] I posted on YouTube,” Homer explained. “They’ve threatened no legal action, but have merely asserted ownership for the purpose of monetizing the video via advertising.”

Believe Digital, a digital distributor for independent labels and artists, looks like a professional outfit. However, taking over the monetization rights of what should be a public domain speech and then on top refusing to respond to Homer’s dispute encouraged us to dig deeper. It would prove an interesting exercise, even though we already suspected there had been a monumental screw-up.

After Believe Digital ignored TF’s attempts to discuss the issue, we spoke with Adam Holland, a Project Coordinator at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, where he works on projects including the DMCA ‘clearing house’ Chilling Effects.

“Works produced by the Federal government are public domain. So the text of the speech itself is in the public domain,” Holland told TF.

“If the federal government made a recording of the speech, then that recording is public domain. The JFK Presidential library confirms that that at least one version of the recording is still public domain.”

Drilling down into Believe Digital’s repertoire we see that they represent a pair of artists called Harley & Muscle. Their track, Open Society, features something of interest throughout most of the track.

Were Believe Digital really trying to suggest that the original JFK speech infringes their rights, or could there be another explanation?

As pointed out by Adam Holland, a government audio recording of the speech would be in the public domain, meaning that Harley & Muscle could have simply sampled that. However, their use of a separate and private recording would be a different matter.

“It’s possible that someone else, a private individual, made a recording of the speech in question, and the copyright status of that sound recording or A/V work would be more complex, but it’s likely the individual would have a valid copyright in that exact recording,” Holland explains.

“This is only germane to the issue at hand if Harley & Muscle own that original recording, of course, and if it is that recording that was used to create their YouTube video. Otherwise, there’s a 3rd party involved who has rights that may or may not be infringed here by both parties.”

Adding yet more complexity to the mix, Holland goes on to explore another potential, albeit hugely unlikely scenario, but one in which Believe Digital could have a legitimate claim.

“It seems extraordinarily unlikely, if not impossible, that the speech excerpt on YouTube [uploaded by Homer] was made by copying the samples within the [Harley & Muscle] song and pasting them together. It may well be impossible, I haven’t listened to the full extent of both. What seems likely is that both of the parties involved had access to another, more complete recording of the speech,” Holland adds.

Which would be, of course, the original public domain work. With that established and a fun detour into the public domain and back again, all roads branched back to what we initially believed to be the source of the problem – YouTube’s ContentID.

Somehow the system has ‘awarded’ Believe Digital and Harley & Muscle “the rights” to go around monetizing this particular JFK speech based on their remix of the work more than 50 years later. That may have happened because speeches themselves don’t qualify for ContentID, potentially designating Harley & Muscle as the original publisher. However, those very same rules could also exclude their track from ContentID, but clearly didn’t.

“Generally, [these kinds of mismatches are] unquestionably the downside of ContentID, and the extent to which it streamlines procedures for content holders. It’s certainly a shame that Believe Digital won’t engage, but this is really a place where YouTube needs to step in,” Holland concludes.

While Believe Digital did not engage with either Homer or TorrentFreak on the matter whatsoever, during the week came a development.

“Thanks to your intervention this claim has indeed been silently dropped, just as I suspected, without an apology or even so much as an explanation, and I presume also without any consequence to the opportunistic claimant,” Homer told TF.

With Homer’s ‘strike’ gone he can relax again once more, but something clearly needs to be done about the one-sided nature of the YouTube complaints process.

Companies like Believe Digital should be made to stand and engage once they have made a claim, not ignore the issue until they come under pressure. In this instance it was ‘just’ a claim against the original speech, but a claim against another artist remixing the same content could mean loss of earnings – or the loss of his YouTube account entirely with a third strike.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The notorious BitTorrent site encouraged visitors to take part in a survey into people’s file-sharing habits and their views on copyright enforcement. In total 75,000 people from all over the world eventually participated in the study, making it the largest of its kind.

Since the study took place the researchers have already shared many of their findings. For example, we know that girls are just as much into porn as guys, and that the majority of Pirate Bay users planned to use VPNs or other measures to become more anonymous.

Today the Cybernorms research group has opened up all the findings to the public, sharing a wealth of information. On The Survey Bay people can check a wide variety of statistics, and compile their own graphs.

The graph below, for example, shows how many North American Pirate Bay users, who share daily, had a VPN or wanted to use one in the future.

In addition to answering the fixed questions, roughly 25,000 people provided a comment to explain why they use The Pirate Bay. Recurring themes that we have identified are an inability to pay, either because respondents have no money or because there are no decent legal options available. In addition, many respondents feel that they have a right to share.

The justifications come in all shapes and sizes, and we have made a selection of a few notable ones from a diverse range of demographics.

—

A 66+ year old woman from United States writes:

“I don’t know these things. Even though I’ve been in computers (pause) since 1965. The corporations are out to make us slaves and to rule through fear. And I am certain, life will find a way. I will support communication. People need it for freedom and decisions. (just to recall, the corporations have made copy-write law a tool of money and not of encouraging innovation. Remember Microsoft’s words echoing 1984, (have to paraphrase) Innovation through standardization. Information wants to be free. (Because you are Swedish Ill remind you that those are words of the Internet pioneers. We built this for the people.)”

A 25-29 year old man from United States writes:

“As an artist myself, along with being an avid Sci-Fi buff, I believe that if we focused more on sharing ideas and less on making ourselves filthy rich that we would currently be at a point of technological advancement far beyond our imaginations. Law is necessary to prevent anarchy but not at the oppression of ideas or the people who imagine them. Most laws in the USA go against our founding fathers original ideals. Most laws in the USA are tailor made to suit corporations who, above all else, desire money and power. File-sharing will never die, regardless if laws are passed to prevent it, as long as people in the world are willing to fight for the right to share information.”

A 18-24 year old woman from Western Europe writes:

“The authorities just don’t understand the zeitgeist and continue to unintentionally encourage illegal filesharing all over the place. In Germany you can’t access most YouTube videos with commercial music because of a GEMA lawsuit: if you just wanted to check out this one song by an artist for free to see whether you liked it (as you would do on the radio which nobody listens to anymore) you are encouraged to download their album (after seeing it on YouTube some may have bought it instead). More generally: you may not buy the music but pay for concert tickets. Well not anymore because ticket prices are skyrocketing because the music industry is out of money.”

A 66+ year old man from Europe writes:

“I am so old and find it rather expensive to buy anything these days, being a pensioner it does not leave a great deal of money to spend on goods once you have paid all the usual bills, gas, electric and like wise. but keep up the good work and thank you.”

A 37-45 year old woman from South East Asia writes:

“If it wasn’t for file sharing, I wouldn’t be able to watch movies. In the country I live in, I cannot go to the cinema/movies to see an American film or other films in the English language. I’m pretty thankful for these sites.”

A 30-36 year old man from East Asia writes:

“I only file share because I live on US military bases and the MPAA and other stupid laws don’t exempt us from the blocks they put in place to watch things legally. So…why I do it? I do it just to give them the proverbial finger. If it was on TV out here, I would watch it. If it was available overseas to me, I would watch it. The problem is, there is NO LEGAL means to watch it from.”

A 53-65 year old woman from Australia writes:

“Hi, as an Australian academic researcher and a file-sharer am very interested in your survey as I had intended to run a similar project via an ISP, and many of my questions were similar to yours! As you will probably know Big Content has recently lost (twice, once on appeal) its case against major Aussie ISP iinet that the ISP was helping copyright infringements. This case is likely to be heard one last time, before the highest court. In the meantime iiNet has developed a model proposing an independent authority mediate between content owners and alleged file-sharers. Despite our relatively slow net speeds and high chargers, Australians download much content — in part because TV is woeful here and popular UK and US seasons take often 1-2 years to reach the airwaves. I predict more people will use TOR and VPN as the government is likely to implement anti-file-sharing regulations following the final episode of the iiNet court saga..whatever the outcome.”

A -17 year old man from New Zealand writes:

“I believe the biggest problem facing file-sharing is the idea of forcing ISPs to monitor traffic to make sure people aren’t illegally sharing file. This is a blatant breach of privacy and unless major corporations take a step back and stop interfering in the processes involved in catching cyber-criminals, they face widespread backlash from the file-sharers and activists of the world.”

A 30-36 year old woman from Southern Africa writes:

“In my opinion developing countries cannot cater to the huge demand for current commercial tv series. TV series are sometimes years behind the country of origin. The demand is out there, people get hooked on their favorite shows but their countries conditions may cause them to satisfy the demand by means of file-sharing. Many people would not mind paying eg $1.99 per show download as is available on amazon, but the facility is not available outside the US. So, in my opinion, file-sharing will probably soon force networks to expand their services to include the international online demand.”

A 18-24 year old man from Central Africa writes:

“In Africa most online services are unavailable, file sharing is the at times the only way to have some material coming from developed countries so most Africans use file sharing more as a means of staying at the same level as the rest of the world than trying to somehow forge or steal copyrighted products. It is their right for people to share things they came to own, so it is as well their right for people to take what is shared! The assets of sites like google, youtube or ebay tend to neglect the third world where a real market is present. Hopefully changes will be made in a near future we cross our fingers.”

A 18-24 year old woman from South America writes:

“In my country its common to see street vendors with pirate copies of films. Some of them are linked to organized crime (the kind that also deals with drugs and politics). I remember one particular national film made it to the streets way before it was out either in Theaters or at download sites (it actually helped with the marketing, but the point is whoever was responsible was well positioned in the film industry, had some interesting friends and didn’t do it for the sharing). I wish file sharing was legalized and the time and public resources spent on it were focused on dismantling *those* networks. And that artists\crew\creators (and local communities, when applicable) had a larger cut of the earnings.”

A 37-45 year old man from Paraguay writes:

“Hello! I live in Paraguay, i consume incredible amounts of music (Rock-Metal) and Video Games, I only use file sharing to like trial stuff, for example, I download some mp3s, and if I like the music, I buy the original CD online, in Amazon or The End Records etc. For me, is wrong to download software, or videogames, but in the case of music, helps me to discover new bands, styles etc. In the software or video games, i do the same thing, but as we all know, a downloaded software or game never works well, so I tested it, then if I like It, I deleted the download and buy the original stuff..!! Thanks!”

—

The above is of course just a small and rather random selection of the responses. There are plenty more gems available on The Survey Bay website.

To all Pirate Bay users that haven’t filled out the survey, but want to have their say, feel free to do so in the comments below. Links to other notable comments are welcome too.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

In a guest post for TorrentFreak, Dotcom said his revolutionary music platform called Megabox was about to go public, but due to a well-known intervention from the U.S. Government that launch never happened.

Dotcom, however, is not giving up that easily. With a team of developers he’s working hard to get a new Megaupload (or Mega as it’s correctly titled) as well as Megabox ready for a public release.

The separation between the two projects hasn’t been made entirely clear in the press with several news outlets reporting that Megabox will launch next month, confusing it with the new file-storage platform Mega.

However, presently there is no official launch date for Megabox.

“Megabox will launch a few months after Mega,” Dotcom informs TorrentFreak, adding that he can release no further details at the moment.

The music service is currently being developed by the Portuguese company Triworks, also featured in the teaser video below.

When it’s released later in 2013 Megabox will give the public access to free music, while compensating artists through advertising revenue.

Dotcom believes that this “free music” business model has the potential to decrease music piracy while giving artists proper compensation for their work.

This revenue is expected to come from the Megakey application users will be required to install in exchange for free content. Megakey works like an ad blocker, but instead of blocking ads it replaces a small percentage with Mega’s own ads. Those who prefer not to install the app have the option to buy the music instead.

“Music will be free for users who install the Megakey App. Anyone who does not like the App can just purchase the music,” Dotcom told TorrentFreak previously.

Most of the revenue generated will go directly to the artists with Megabox keeping a small share. This fraction pales in comparison to the amounts held back by the major labels.

“These new solutions will allow content creators to keep 90% of all earnings and generate significant income from the untapped market of free downloads,” Dotcom said.

According to Dotcom there are several “top artists” lined up for the launch. Whether Megabox will be able to challenge the mighty influence of the major labels will become clear in a few months’ time.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Not through piracy, but with the release of a revolutionary music platform called Megabox.

A month later, however, the Megabox domain was seized as part of the criminal case against Megaupload. While many thought this was the end of Dotcom’s ambitious plans, the Megaupload founder announced a few months later that Megabox is not dead yet.

On the contrary, Dotcom told TorrentFreak that some of the world’s top artists have already signed up.

In recent months Dotcom has been working with a team of developers to get Megabox ready for a highly anticipated launch later this year. Today, Megaupload’s founder gave us a look behind the scenes of Megabox and revealed some rather interesting details.

Aside from providing a sneak peek at some of the Megabox features, the video also shows a few frames where it lists “Megabox exclusive artists.” The four artists that are displayed in this section are “The Black Keys,” “Rusko,” “Two Fingers” and “Will.i.am.”

While we can’t be sure that these are indeed artists that have partnered with Dotcom and Megabox, the choice to include these names seems far from random. Will.i.am previously worked on Megaupload’s Mega Song for example, and the other three artists are not really the most logical choice for dummy data.

TorrentFreak asked Kim Dotcom whether the exclusive artists in the video are indeed launch partners, but Dotcom said that he can’t share this information just yet. We’ll have to wait a few more weeks for official confirmation.

So why would artists join Megabox in the first place?

The goal of Megabox is to give the public access to free music and compensate artists through advertising revenue. Megaupload’s founder believes that this “free music” business model has the potential to decrease music piracy while giving artists proper compensation for their work.

This revenue comes from the Megakey application that users have to install. Megakey works like an ad blocker, but instead of blocking ads it replaces a small percentage with Mega’s own ads. Those who prefer not to install the app have the option to buy the music instead.

“Music will be free for users who install the Megakey App. Anyone who does not like the App can just purchase the music,” Dotcom told TorrentFreak previously.

Most of the revenue generated will go directly to the artists with Megabox keeping a small share. This fraction pales in comparison to the amounts held back by the major labels.

“These new solutions will allow content creators to keep 90% of all earnings and generate significant income from the untapped market of free downloads,” Dotcom said.

In the weeks to come Kim Dotcom and his team are hoping to get Megabox ready for a public release, with or without “The Black Keys,” “Rusko,” “Two Fingers” and “Will.i.am” as exclusive artists.

In addition, Megaupload is also expected to return before the end of 2012.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The song featured top artists including P Diddy, Will.i.am, Alicia Keys, Snoop Dogg and Kanye West, endorsing the now-defunct Megaupload. At the time, Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom explained that he had plans to put the “dinosaur record labels” out of business with the release of Megabox.

A month later, however, the Megabox domain was seized as part of the criminal case against Dotcom and other members of the so-called “Mega Conspiracy”. While many thought this was the end of the ambitious plans, Megaupload’s founder recently announced that Megabox is not dead yet.

In fact, the events of the past half year make Dotcom more motivated than ever before.

“I am totally excited about changing the music industry forever and giving the power to the artists,” Dotcom told TorrentFreak today. And he has reason to be excited.

Despite the legal woes, Megabox can still count on the support of many of the world’s top musicians. According to Dotcom, several of them have agreed to try the “free music” model.

“Some of the world’s top artists have lined up to launch with us and I want to make sure that they have the launch that they deserve. And of course the same is true for all the hidden talent out there, the artists who want to use Megabox as a launch pad,” Dotcom says.

The basic idea behind Megabox is simple. Give the public access to free music, and cut out the big labels so artists get properly compensated from the revenue being generated.

This revenue comes from the Megakey application that users have to install. Megakey works like an ad blocker, but instead of blocking ads it replaces a small percentage with Mega’s own ads. Those who prefer not to install the app have the option to buy the music instead.

“Music will be free for users who install the Megakey App. Anyone who does not like the App can just purchase the music,” Dotcom explains.

If successful, Megabox will be bad news for the major record labels, who currently enjoy a large cut of music sales. Depending on the revenue that’s generated, for artists Megabox may be an improvement as they get to keep nearly all of the money that comes in.

“These new solutions will allow content creators to keep 90% of all earnings and generate significant income from the untapped market of free downloads,” Dotcom says.

“I created an innovation that could solve the piracy problem,” he adds

That last part is important. Megaupload’s founder believes that this “free music” business model has the potential to decrease music piracy. It won’t be the solution preferred by the major labels, but artists should be encouraged by the offering.

In the weeks to come Kim Dotcom and his colleagues are hoping to get Megabox ready for a public release once there’s more certainty concerning the ongoing extradition attempt. Definitely something to keep an eye on.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

In a guest post for TorrentFreak, the Megaupload founder described the Megabox project as “..a site that will soon allow artists to sell their creations direct to consumers and allowing artists to keep 90% of earnings.”

“You can expect several Megabox announcements [in 2012] including exclusive deals with artists who are eager to depart from outdated business models,” he added.

When Dotcom and his colleagues were arrested earlier this year, many people believed that the Megabox project would fade away. In fact, some theorized that Megabox was one of the main reasons why the recording labels and by extension the U.S. Government wanted the Megaupload team to fold quickly.

However, Dotcom now reveals that he hasn’t give up on the project. On the contrary.

On his brand new Twitter account Dotcom shared a picture of Megabox with the message that “it is coming.”

In a phone conversation Dotcom confirmed to TorrentFreak that the project is indeed making progress, and he promised to share further details in the days to come.

It’s certainly not dead, as the major music labels might have hoped.

While waiting for more details on Megabox, there’s plenty of other material to keep the masses entertained.

Dotcom is clearly in fighting mode judging from the stream of tweets he’s been sending out. Aside from the pictures of his wife and kids, the Megaupload founder also shared a preview of his upcoming website featuring the keywords “MPAA”, “Scandal” and “Obama.”

In a previous interview with TorrentFreak, Dotcom already hinted at government corruption.

“This Mega takedown was possible because of corruption on the highest political level, serving the interests of the copyright extremists in Hollywood,” he said. “Mega has become a re-election pawn.”

A recent tweet affirms this belief and shows that Dotcom is keeping a close eye on the relationship between Vice President Joe Biden and his former colleague, MPAA boss Chris Dodd. “Watch out lovebirds! I know what you did,” he notes.

While it’s not clear what Dotcom is getting at exactly, it’s no secret that Dodd and Biden are close friends. Also, U.S. attorney Neil MacBride who’s in charge of prosecuting Megaupload served as chief counsel for Biden when he was senator.

Dotcom did inform TorrentFreak that there’s will be some interesting revelations in the coming weeks. So stay tuned for fresh Megabox news, and a whole lot more.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

A few days ago MegaUpload surprised friends and foes by listing rapper/producer Swizz Beatz as CEO. Beatz is not named in the indictment which was made on January the 5th, which may have saved him.

Beatz was one of the stars who endorsed MegaUpload in public, and he reportedly recruited several artists for the Mega Song promotion.

Beatz, whose real name is Kasseem Dean, is married to R&B superstar Alicia Keys, and won his first Grammy Award in 2011 with Jay Z for the song “On To The Next One.” Aside from working at MegaUpload, Beatz is also producing Dr. Dre’s highly anticipated third studio album Detox.

Beatz’s appointment connected MegaUpload to many of the biggest musicians in the business. This could have come in handy as MegaUpload founder Kim Dotcom was working on a plan to crush the major “dinosaur” labels, who he says are not giving musicians what they deserve.

Mega’s competing music venture is/was called Megabox, a site that would soon allow artists to sell their creations directly to consumers. And unlike the traditional record deals where artists get only a fraction of the revenue, with Megabox the musicians would get to keep 90% of earnings.

Needles to say, the raids and arrests today delayed this plan.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Today, TorrentFreak hands its now regular Sunday guest post slot to a man behind one of the Internet’s leading file-sharing sites. Indeed, one of the world’s biggest websites, period.

Breaking a silence of almost 10 years, Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom tells us about his colorful history, the spark that ignited the Mega Song controversy, and offers to buy us all dinner if we can find a Wikipedia page more unflattering than his. Events of the past week seemed a logical place to start…..

“It was exciting producing the Mega Song and putting the video together. I enjoyed working with everyone involved and I can tell you I am hooked,” Kim told TorrentFreak.

“The song, the lyrics and the video took a lot of love and time to make. I learned that I can be creative and be good at it and I am looking forward to doing more creative work in the future,” Kim added.

But when the video was taken down and we were denied something which was rightfully ours it was like someone knifed me in the heart. Firstly, though, let me give you a little bit more background on this story….

From Rogue To Vogue: Megaupload and Kim Dotcom

I am now living in New Zealand and heard local singer Gin Wigmore’s voice on the radio there. I thought she would be perfect for the Mega Song. Some members of the Black Eyed Peas band and I were chilling in the studio and we decided to reach out to Gin and make her an offer to sing the Mega Song. She agreed, came to the studio in Auckland, and nailed the song in 3 takes.

Gin’s voice is special, she could be the next Amy Winehouse. She seemed excited too. At least that’s what she texted me after the recording session. She was hopeful that we got something we could work with. The following day I received a call from her manager telling me we couldn’t use Gin’s voice. Then we received letters from UMG lawyers threatening to sue us if we used her voice.

The content of the letters was really nasty and personal stuff. They were bothering me about things that happened almost 18 years ago when I was a juvenile. At that time I was active in the hacker scene. I got busted in 1997 for computer hacking and received a probation sentence a few years later. I then became a successful entrepreneur in the new economy selling data security solutions to Fortune 1000 companies.

My mistake was that I embraced the media and gave them the stories they wanted. Let’s just put this into the category ‘young and stupid’. I was giving them a glimpse into my exclusive lifestyle. For this openness I was turned into the scapegoat when the German new economy bubble popped in 2000. I was convicted for insider trading (actually saving a company and over 120 jobs) and got a probation sentence because the judge and prosecutor offered a deal to my lawyers.

Their case was a joke. Since when is the person that saves a company, pays the company money in exchange for shares and buys additional shares (for the same price) on the open market an insider trader? I took the deal and moved on with my life instead of spending the next few years in court rooms defending my innocence. You can’t imagine the rape party the German media had with me.

The Wikipedia page about me is the best account of how long-lasting these effects still are today. Find me a Wikipedia profile of a person that is worse than mine and I will buy you dinner. For your information my criminal record has been cleared under Germany’s clean slate legislation. Officially I can say I am without convictions.

I made mistakes when I was young and I paid the price. Steve Jobs was a hacker and Martha Stuart is doing well after her insider trading case. I think over a decade after all of this happened it should NOT be the dominating topic. I am 37 years old now, I am married, I have three adorable children with two more on the way (twin girls – yeah) and I know that I am not a bad person. I have grown and I have learned. Making this into an issue about my past is unfair to everyone else working at Mega.

The media went as far as finding my father, drunk and living in some garden shed, who I haven’t seen since I was 8 years old. He is an alcoholic who used to beat my mother and myself into hospital many times. And the press got him to complain in interviews that he only sees me on TV with my big Mercedes and that I never visit him. I decided to leave Germany after that and to start over in Asia, in Hong Kong to be precise.

Hong Kong, what an awesome place to do business and to host my new phantom persona. I should write a book about doing business in Hong Kong, that’s how good it is. People there leave you alone and they are happy for your success. But that’s a different story.

Fact is, UMG knew that there was going to be a Mega Song well in advance and they didn’t like the idea at all.

Let me be clear, I don’t blame Gin for any of this. Her label messed this up. Instead of getting Gin in front of a global audience in collaboration with A-list artists, she had to be removed from the song. We actually hired Macy Gray as a replacement and she did an amazing job. There is a good chance that Gin will remain just known to New Zealanders, which would be sad because she has an awesome voice. Google for “Gin Wigmore” and hear for yourself. I wish her the best.

So here we are excited to launch our song and video. The people at UMG see it on YouTube and they don’t hesitate to take it down. They took the video down making a copyright claim and abusing the DMCA take down process that was provided to them by YouTube. In an act of comedy they are trying to tell the court that this wasn’t a DMCA take down at all. It was some kind of magical take down that is not covered by any law. Apparently YouTube has given UMG a license to kill. These are the same people who call Mega “rogue” and want more powers so they can take down entire websites. How stupid do they think everyone is? Wake up UMG, you will not get away with this nonsense.

When UMG took down our video the message for everyone to see was this: “The Mega Song: Taken down by UMG for copyright infringement”. They must have known it’s not Gin Wigmore in the song because in the description below the video it clearly stated that Macy Gray performed the vocals together with me and Printz Board, who is by the way the one of the masterminds behind some of Black Eyed Peas’ smash hits.

You would expect that a label representing an artist knows how that artist sounds, no? I think what really happened is that UMG realized how powerful our message was, how potent it would become, and how positively it would affect Mega’s image. From rogue to vogue. They decided to stop us at all costs, that becomes clear when you see the defense strategy of UMG in court. They have nothing and they don’t even care.

UMG knows that we are going to compete with them via our own music venture called Megabox.com, a site that will soon allow artists to sell their creations direct to consumers and allowing artists to keep 90% of earnings.

We have a solution called the Megakey that will allow artists to earn income from users who download music for free. Yes that’s right, we will pay artists even for free downloads. The Megakey business model has been tested with over a million users and it works. You can expect several Megabox announcements next year including exclusive deals with artists who are eager to depart from outdated business models.

You need to understand that some labels are run by arrogant and outdated dinosaurs who have been in business for 1000 years. These guys think an iPad is a facial treatment, the Internet is the devil, and wired phones are still hip. They are in denial about the new realities and opportunities. They don’t understand that the rip-off days are over. Artists are more educated than ever about how they are getting ripped off and how the big labels only look after themselves.

Dinosaur labels don’t have the answers to today’s new realities. UMG chose to willfully sabotage our campaign instead of analyzing the situation and seeing that the answers to all their problems are right in front of them.

In parallel UMG were calling up all the artists who endorsed us telling them that they are endorsing piracy. That they are working with a convicted felon. That they are losing money because of us. They are trying to force the artists to issue statements against their endorsements and agreements. They are burning their own talents. And I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them fold under this enormous pressure.

I have been on the phone with artists since the shit hit the fan last week and it’s a roller coaster. But we are prepared. I made sure that we are legally covered and that every artist signed a broad release agreement with Mega. Most of the artists we worked with have been in this business long enough to know what’s going on. They can’t wait to gain creative freedom and become the masters of their own careers.

When one of the top artists endorsing Mega received a letter from the CEO of the RIAA with some active download links on Megaupload containing that artist’s music it was shocking at first. But in the same letter it was described how those links were found with a Google search. Giving Mega a hard time when we don’t even provide a search feature on Megaupload? It’s bizarre. And at the same time you find the world’s largest piracy index on Google and most other search engines. But hey, these guys are not rogue. They are just rich.

Mega has nothing to fear. Our business is legitimate and protected by the DMCA and similar laws around the world. We work with the best lawyers and play by the rules. We take our legal obligations seriously. Mega’s war chest is full and we have strong supporters backing us. We have been online for 7 years and we are here to stay, so no need to worry about us.

But you should be worried that these guys might be successful with SOPA or PIPA or any other legal tool for Internet dictatorship.

They are buying politicians to go against the people, freedom and innovation. They want to censor the Internet and bring innovation to a standstill by having their rip-off monopoly protected by Washington. They want to intimidate innovators and take all of us back in time.

But I am telling you, these guys should soon be history, just like cheap oil, because they underestimate the power of the people, the power of the Internet and the power of innovation. To stop them you need to get moving. As you read this the payroll politicians of the MPAA and RIAA are trying to take control of your Internet.

Show your government what you think about all of this. Because if you don’t you will regret it.

I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Kim Dotcom (yes that’s my real name).

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The woman, 58-year-old Anne Muir, pleaded guilty after police searched her home in Ayr after a ‘tip-off’ from the BPI and IFPI. The industry bodies had passed details over to the Strathclyde police, who used a search warrant to seize evidence.

The haul, as reported by the BBC, is “7,493 digital music files” and “24,243 karaoke files” which the music industry estimates as having a market value of £54,792.

The Prosecutor in the case, Mirian Watson, told that “intelligence gathered by BPI and IFPI revealed that Anne Muir was a prolific user of a particular file sharing network based in the UK.”

“Illegally flouting copyright laws is tantamount to theft and not only deprives legitimate companies and artists of earnings, but also undermines the music industry as a whole. We will continue to work effectively with law enforcement in this area and to apply our robust prosecution policy,” she added. A statement considered ‘legally unsound’ by some legal scholars.

Defence lawyer Lorenzo Alonzi said:

“It has to be stressed that this offence was not committed for any desire to make money. Mrs Muir was not in any way trying to distribute on a large-scale, she had a very big quantity of these files because she was hoarding – a symptom of a severe obsessive personality disorder that she suffers from.”

In response the UK Pirate Party has issued a statement saying “the data collection methods used by these companies have been shown repeatedly to be unreliable in the USA.”

“This case smacks of allowing the courts to be used as private company enforcers, and that fact should have been challenged by Mrs. Muir’s lawyer. This is yet another example of the way that less well-off people are  disadvantaged in the courts by being denied access to competent legal representation,” the Party added.

They also pointed out that “107(1)(e) is aimed at physical copyright infringement. She should never have been charged under that section, let alone convicted; a different section – 107(2A)(b) – was added in 2003 specifically to deal with file-sharing and similar, online activities.”

107(1)(e) carries a maximum punishment of up to 10 years in prison, while section 107(2a)’s punishment tops out at 2 years; (2a) was brought in specifically to deal with online infringement back in 2003.

Mrs Muir is currently the one person convicted in the UK for online copyright infringement in a standalone case.

The only other cases, were the uploaders in the Oink case, who also plead guilty, and received community service, Polydor V Brown, and the default judgement in the Barwinska case.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Bo Schønemann and René Nygaard of Danish company 7 Sky Media say that they have developed a system which could turn these crazy dreams into reality.

“Our software is designed to play all digital files and locate the copyright holders regardless of where the file came from,” Schønemann told Comon.dk.

“This means that we are the only company in the world that can offer the industry earnings from these vast quantities of [illicit] music, from which they currently do not receive a single penny.”

The company’s product is embedded into both a hardware digital music player and a software based solution. When a user plays their music through either an advertisement is displayed, the revenues from which 7 Sky Media pass to the copyright holders.

While users can pay a small free to obtain completely ad-free players, the free service will route ad money to rightsholders each time a track is played.

René Nygaard says that users of the software system retain their freedom to use whatever player they like (Windows Media Player, iTunes, WinAmp etc) since the 7 Sky Media product works as a plug-in. Integration with social media apps is also promised.

“My partner is from the music business and we will also use 7 Sky to help the ‘small’ musicians, partly by diffusion, so they can monetize their music without a record label,” Nygaard said in a comment. “We’ve spent 3 years so far on agreements and contracts, this is not just an idea we have, but a real product.”

Schønemann said that his company is currently negotiating with companies and investment firms in preparation for both domestic and international launches, adding that they could offer as many as 12 million tracks through their system. We’ve heard these kinds of numbers before and they should be taken with a whole heap of salt.

While 7 Sky are to be applauded for having the strength to have a go at tackling something like this, one can’t help but feel pessimistic. With the majors controlling 85% plus of the market, they really need to be on board to make something like this work on a decent scale. And to be frank, what are the chances of that?

Even the mighty Google are reported to be “sick of dealing with labels”.

But it’s not just label cooperation that’s required here. While there is undoubtedly a desire on behalf of consumers to ‘go legal’ when obtaining music from the Internet, will they buy a custom player to replace their iPods and cellphones, will they voluntarily install plug-ins that amount to adware?

While some will shout ‘no’ emphatically, the system itself could get off the ground with the right backing. Yes, we’re back to getting the labels on board again and yes, that seems massively unlikely. But if Qtrax can get licensed….

Update: Looks like even Spotify are having to restrict their ‘free’ ad-supported service. If they can’t make it pay, who can?

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.