Government: we can freeze Mega assets even if case is dismissed

Unfortunately this has been true for a while. For example, having drug-trafficking charges against you dropped doesn't automatically release all impounded property. There is some right to due process, but its precise extent is unclear: there has to be some kind of hearing at some point, basically, in which the seizure can be challenged. But it's actually possible for the government to seize the assets permanently after such a hearing, without a conviction.<p>Some information here: <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/forfeiture/" rel="nofollow">http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/forfeiture/</a>

It seems to be that America is slowly becoming less free; considering factors such as Obama's domestic assassination program, federal wiretapping and more. As an American, I still acknowledge we live in among the freer societies of the world. I still can't help but wonder why the government is increasingly imposing the way it is, history has always shown that repression of almost any form backfires in the long run.

Hmm. I'm not sure I like it, but the title and comments here are a little misleading. The government has indicted MegaUpload, MegaUpload is arguing that they can't be served notice of those indictments, and the government is saying, "Well, until we can, we're not unfreezing the assets." MegaUpload's position doesn't sound ridiculous - "we're not a US company, why should we be subject to US law?" - except that they were doing business in the US (is that where the seized assets were? It sounds like they at least host some stuff out of Virginia).

Rogue state. Imagine if China had done this to a US company.

Just a thought: Megaupload is a Hong Kong corporation. There's no way the White House didn't have a diplomatic chat with the Chinese before demolishing a Hong Kong business, is there?

One wonders what prevents the government from simply providing notice to Megaupload's counsel, which does after have power of attorney and is thus presumably empowered to take notice as well. I haven't studied the ins and outs of criminal procedure though.

So glad to see my tax dollars working for things like this. Like another user here said "this has never been about justice, the law" or what's right - it's all about lobbying, politics and $$$$<p>The sham organizations that are the RIAA/MPAA are so heavily vested in the government, they'll try anything and everything to create a controlled Internet/sharing system of "content" - which in and of itself is the vaguest definition of all time. All this SOPA/PIPA crap will never pass, we will always find a way for a free Internet.<p>Total waste of time, a government making up bullshit laws along the way for something that will not only have zero effect on content sharing, but will actually increase it after angering tons of people.<p>It's truly ridiculous when resources, energy and tax payer dollars can be spent on more important issues that our country needs help with. All these politicians in this country are a f-ing disgrace.

At this point I don't care if Mega-upload is guilty or not. There has been enough cock-ups by the prosecution to throw this thing out of the courts. I sincerely hope that the US government pays for this incident and a result of that sets a precedent of following proper due process.

Sounds like something a king would do.

This has never been about the law or justice, it is all about politics, lobbying and money.

Had they used bitcoin, would the government had any power to do this?

Correction: you think if you do it won't cost those responsible dearly. My bet is you don't fuck with the Internet.

Wow, the justice system refuses to apply American law to a foreign company operating in a foreign nation, so what you do is go seize his person, and wait until he has an address in Prison, then presto! It's legal to apply American law to him.<p>Imagine if Iran had pulled a stunt like this to some female CEO of a major corporation was in violation of Sharia law for exposing skin. We can't imprison them while they live in the foreign land, so lets bring them here and then we can apply justice.<p>Am I missing something that makes this an ethical thing to do?

The lesson from this and other cases is simple:<p>DON'T START A COMPANY IN THE U.S.<p>DON'T KEEP YOUR ASSETS IN THE U.S.<p>DON'T KEEP YOUR DATA IN U.S.-owned DATA CENTERS<p>(That includes non-US data centers belonging to US companies, like Amazon AWS servers in Ireland.)<p>Otherwise you're exposing your company and your users to the arbitrary, predatory practices of US "law enforcement" system, which happily does the bidding of US content industries.

Welcome to the police state. None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free