What will Kim Dotcom do next?

Written By: - Date published: 9:34 am, September 27th, 2014 - 173 comments
Categories: election 2014, internet party, mana-party, Media - Tags: , , ,

National’s attack on Kim Dotcom during this election was as viciously personal as it was effective. Nice to see one Journalist speaking up about it:

Dita De Boni: Kim Dotcom – the unwanted entrepreneur

… The National Party spin doctors have been hard at work, painting him [Dotcom] as an evil German trying to subvert democracy, throwing in a side smear of “secret Nazi”.

The first big charge against him is that he used his wealth to “try to sway the election”. On that front, his mistake was probably being open about what he was up to.

To be clear, this is not at all like the people who pay $10,000 a head for a National Party fundraiser, hoping to entrench their entitlement. Not a bit like Alan Gibbs, who uses his wealth to keep a party with less than 1 per cent of the vote alive, and pumping its warped ideas into the national dialogue.

Not like Colin Craig, who is using his wealth to finance a platform that many find whacky. No, this is finance provided to the left wing, and as such, is inherently evil. …

Excuse me if I don’t judge this man based on the spin put out by people who engage in dirty politics. Maybe Kim Dotcom can’t be trusted, but we know for sure they can’t be.

It has been disappointing to hear people like David Cunliffe buy into the wholesale dissing of Dotcom, as if Crosby/Textor is writing his lines as well.

The fact is that Dotcom helped a group of people who represent the most marginalised in society to get a voice on the national stage – a group promoting things like free tertiary education and eradicating child poverty which are, after all, true left-wing causes. …

Well worth reading the whole article.

So what, if anything will Kim Dotcom do (politically) next? Is his “brand” now “poison” as Dotcom himself put it? Will politicians now avoid association with him?

My bet is that he will cut his losses and stay out of NZ politics from now on. In the unlikely event that he did decide to get involved, and was still of a mind to rock the right wing’s boat, then surely the most effective avenue would be to fund an existing left-wing party (but have no other association with it). Or perhaps an alternative media source – start a new media channel, or newspaper, fund The Daily Blog (seems sensible given Mana links)?

One thing is for sure, support for any kind of left-wing initiative would see Dotcom once again comprehensively vilified by National. Why would he put himself through that again?

173 comments on “What will Kim Dotcom do next? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. karol 1
    27 September 2014 at 9:40 am

    I quite like the suggestion of KDC using his money to fund independent public service media, rather than putting it into political parties. As done by others for Al Jazeera and Intercept.

  2. Morrissey 2
    27 September 2014 at 9:52 am

    It wasn’t only National that viciously attacked Kim Dotcom. The Labour Party was just as culpable.

    • weka 2.1
      27 September 2014 at 10:06 am

      Yes, this from the OP – “It has been disappointing to hear people like David Cunliffe buy into the wholesale dissing of Dotcom, as if Crosby/Textor is writing his lines as well.”

      There were a lot of attacks from parts of the left wing commentariat too.

  3. Judge Holden 3
    27 September 2014 at 10:07 am

    Don’t lionise the guy. He’s a toxic crook and it was a serious mistake for the Mana Party to have anything to do with him. He shouldn’t have been granted residence, and the Nats’ behaviour in breaking their own rules to get him here makes them unfit to govern.

    • George Hendry 3.1
      27 September 2014 at 10:44 am

      Judge Holden @ “He’s a toxic crook…”

      You may believe that – you certainly don’t know it.

      On the basis of evidence he appears to have committed some crimes, which fails to show he is a (permanent) crook or that he has no redeeming features.

      Please feel free to add citations to support your claim. And while you’re at it, citations of evidence that might lead to the same thing being alleged about a certain PM.

      • Colonial Viper 3.1.1
        27 September 2014 at 11:05 am

        It’s fairly obvious that the copyright infringement allegations against Dotcom were constructed by the NZ and US govts as a pretext to send a message and make an international example out of him. Illegally, as it turns out.

        Could someone remind me how many special operations units and command helicopters were used to take down National Party HQ after Eminem launched a lawsuit against them for copyright infringement?

        • KJT 3.1.1.1
          27 September 2014 at 12:08 pm

          It was easy to spin it as a crime to those who are not net savvy, but in reality Dotcoms actions were no different from Facebook, Google, Microsoft and many other companies that store data.

          His crime was being large enough to come up on the radar, but small enough for Hollywood to attack.

          So much of American foreign exports receipts now come from copyright, (they do not make original movies or sellable goods any more), that it is! a matter of their national economic security.

          • Lanthanide 3.1.1.1.1
            27 September 2014 at 1:07 pm

            ” but in reality Dotcoms actions were no different from Facebook, Google, Microsoft and many other companies that store data.”

            Not really.

            Dotcom:
            1. Charged subscriptions to Mega Upload that allowed subscribers much faster downloads and no data caps etc
            2. Rewarded people who uploaded “popular” content with free memberships, and I believe in some cases even money. The most popular content is of course the pirated content.

            The whole thing was designed to distribute pirated content, with an active intent that Facebook, Google, Microsoft and many other companies don’t engage in.

            • Shrubbery 3.1.1.1.1.1
              27 September 2014 at 1:22 pm

              Facebook, Google and Microsoft engage in all manner of illegal activities.

              • ghostwhowalksnz …
                27 September 2014 at 3:55 pm

                Just look at the rap sheets of major NZ companies.

                Most of them have convictions of some sort or other.

                Even Fonterra was convicted over the ‘botulism scare’

                Fletchers doesnt seem to be affected by its numerous convictions

                Breaking laws is what business does, but then there is Wall ST.

                They are in a class of its own as far as wrong doing goes.

                But its all business as usual, except when you are KDC. Its swat team time

            • mpledger 3.1.1.1.1.2
              27 September 2014 at 4:14 pm

              There is a lot of “popular” content that is free – look at all the minecraft spin-offs – mods, texturepacks, game play vids, – all free.

            • MrV 3.1.1.1.1.3
              28 September 2014 at 12:06 am

              1. Charging susbscriptions, – so what? – Apple also charges subscriptions for more iCloud storage. There are plenty of other businesses that use this type of model – none subject to FBI raids.

              2. Ahh, the old cash for popular content myth. You do realise this was limited by file size to prevent the very thing you are alleging?
              Sure there probably were some movies split into 10 .rar files in order to qualify, however I have not seen any evidence that this either a) a widespread part of their userbase b) not taken down when reported by their DMCA compliant processes. Distributing files in this way would also certainly limited the convenience for your average pirate.

              The basic facts of the matter are that Megaupload like any other business was in compliance with DMCA, and had paid legal advice etc.
              To take down the business in the manner it was is simply unacceptable for a country that is supposed to be under the rule of law. If Hollywood/RIAA/MPAA had a problem with it they should have sued MU in civil court.
              Furthermore it amazes me that people use the FBI ‘rap’ sheet as evidence of a judgement in this matter – it is not it is the prosecutors interpretation of the evidence, which is not necessarily correct because it hasn’t been tested in a court nor is it all the evidence available in the case (emails can be taken out of context or catch22’s for example “Indictment cites lack of a site search as evidence supporting criminality, but in other copyright cases having a site search has been described as evidence in support of criminality”.

              Next government spun line please?

            • lprent 3.1.1.1.1.4
              28 September 2014 at 12:15 am

              Reminds me of the original business model for youtube. It is a civil matter.

              • ghostwhowalksnz …
                28 September 2014 at 1:24 pm

                Peter Jackson got ‘ripped off’ by New Line cinema over the Hobbit movies.

                But he had to use his private resources to fight that one, not FBI and NZ Police, Crown Law ( to rinse away all the illegal actions)

        • Granted 3.1.1.2
          27 September 2014 at 7:30 pm

          So to quote George Hendry please provide citations to this claim that the Dotcom claims were constructed as a pretext.

      • Judge Holden 3.1.2
        27 September 2014 at 1:11 pm

        He has a lengthy history as a fraudster and rip-off merchant. Facilitating the theft of IP on a grand scale is only one example. He’s hideous. The true scandal is how the Nats broke their own rules to let him in, simply because of their grovelling worship of the wealthy. That’s what the left should focus on.

        • ghostwhowalksnz 3.1.2.1
          27 September 2014 at 4:05 pm

          Really ? Must have been convicted over that surely?

          Ask your overlord Peter Jackson if he was ‘ripped off’ by New Line Cinema ?

          Oh here it is ” lawsuit of the Rings”
          http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/27/business/media/27movie.html?pagewanted=all

          ” “Lawsuit of the Rings” described a court action by Peter Jackson, director of “The Fellowship of the Ring,” contending that New Line Cinema, a unit of Time Warner, had committed fraud in handling the film’s subsidiary rights.”

          Well well well. Ripped off !

        • One Anonymous Bloke 3.1.2.2
          27 September 2014 at 4:32 pm

          Who to believe? Judge Holden, or Justice Wylie, who is a High Court judge?

          Justice Edwin Wylie said he considered that, generally, Dotcom, his estranged wife, Mona, and his head of security, Wayne Tempero, were ”reliable and credible witnesses”. Ian Steward & Laura Walters on Stuff.

          It’s a tough choice for sure. Holden, or Wylie? The amateur or the professional?

          • ghostwhowalksnz 3.1.2.2.1
            27 September 2014 at 5:37 pm

            The curious part is that John Archibald Banks didnt get in the witness box himself.

            he hid behind his ( ex) wifes skirts and those of Michelle Boag. And now has scoured the US to find another witness.

            Look in the mirror John if you wantto find someone to testify to your version of the events. But that would mean’ nothing to hide’ would have consequences.

            A little birdy has told me at a previous court case involving Banks over some bee pollen venture, the high court judge said there were ‘discrepancies’ between JAB sworn testimony in the witness box and his sworn affidavit.

            Thats judge speak for ‘liar’, and would explain his reluctance to ‘front up’. After all previous testimony can be used against you later on as to your honesty in court.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 3.1.2.2.1.1
              27 September 2014 at 5:51 pm

              That’s judgespeak for cowed: why didn’t the judge order a full inquiry into Mr. Banks’ apparently criminal actions on the spot?

              • ghostwhowalksnz …
                28 September 2014 at 1:26 pm

                Judges dont prosecute and if every one who told fibs in the witness box was charged…… there would be no time for anything else

          • Judge Holden 3.1.2.2.2
            27 September 2014 at 8:17 pm

            Look, it was wildly hilarious what happened to Banks, not to mention karma on a cosmic scale. Don’t get me wrong. However, that doesn’t make Kim Dotcom in anyway a pleasant individual or honest or worthy of any admiration or support whatsoever. He’s a vile conman, and the Mana Party coalescing with him was a terrible error. Remember, though, it was the Nats that gave him to us (for low-rent venal reasons), and they’ve never been held accountable for that.

            • MrV 3.1.2.2.2.1
              28 September 2014 at 12:35 am

              I think vile conman is a stretch. As far as I can see his main crimes were:

              1. Hacking PBX phone system and stolen phone card numbers, – (things he did as a youth)
              2. So-called, Insider trading at the peak of the dotcom bubble and then embezzlement charges when he fled to Thailand with the proceeds.

              Although the evidence for whether ‘insider trading’ is in fact a crime needs much further discussion for the public:

              http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/26/insider-trading-makes-us-richer-better-informed-and-could-prevent-corporate-scandals-legalize-it/

              http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-30/guest-post-case-legalized-insider-trading

              Compare his treatment to the treatment of various financial types in NZ who lost hundreds of millions in financial company collapses and you certainly see a difference.

              • Judge Holden …
                28 September 2014 at 10:05 am

                Running pump and dump schemes and insider trading are both against the law. You forgot to mention KDC’s facilitation and encouragement of massive IP theft, for which he is wanted in the US. Then he had to be shamed into paying people who did work for him, something which is totally abhorrent given his resources. Yep, he’s a vile conman. Hopefully everyone now realises there’s nothing to be gained from having anything to do with him.

                • Minarch …
                  28 September 2014 at 11:45 am

                  “he’s a vile conman”

                  Christ you scare easily dont you……

                  the man is clearly @ worst a but immature, hes not the reincarnation of Hitler the MSM would have you believe

                  why don’t you take some personal responsibility JH and do the research into him yourself rather than taking the Medias word for it ?

                • ghostwhowalksnz …
                  28 September 2014 at 1:32 pm

                  Any IP lawyer will tell you, your IP ‘will be stolen’ if its a great idea and you are only a little guy.
                  You tube woudnt have existed without massive IP theft, but of course they are no longer a little guy and can pay up ( on their terms).
                  Otherwise they remove it if asked, which is what Megaupload did.

                  Judge tell us you are so pure, never exceeded the speed limit, even by a bit, never crossed the road directly rather then walking to pedestrian crossing at lights

                • MrV …
                  28 September 2014 at 3:27 pm

                  The context was the trading in one company during the peak of the dotcom boom, (the boom which was fundamentally caused by low fed-induced interest rates.)
                  Now yes he probably did engage in some insider trading either real or perceived. However most people assume insider trading is inherently bad, however the issue is deeper than that. Read the links above for insight. Note with current ‘insider trading’ they always get the small guys, Martha Stewart, KDC etc, yet the really large insider trading (ie people who knew about the ‘shitty deals’ Goldman Sachs was putting together (IBGYBG) which cost the taxypayer 100’s of billions, nobody ever went to jail.

                  What do you mean given his resources? His assets were frozen.
                  You are a legal simpleton if you think KDC could have directly taken cash from his new enterprise (esp. in the early stages) to pay off old suppliers from his seized enterprises.
                  The world doesn’t work that way (as Clive Palmer is finding out btw).

                  Yes I have sympathy with those service providers who remained unpaid for such a long time, however that is the reality of business’s that go bust/shutdown. Creditors go unpaid everyday. Perhaps they shouldn’t extend so much credit next time, espescially if it makes thier own business position difficult?

                  As for the employment issues, none of that would have come up if it wasn’t for the raid and asset seizure. The lesson learned (for better or worse) is to simply fire everyone next time rather than try to keep them employed.

        • Huginn 3.1.2.3
          27 September 2014 at 11:47 pm

          No.

          The true scandal is that the New Zealand Companies Office has been used by international organised crime to launder billions and billions of dollars.

          If you want to know where the Hanover money disappeared to, that’s an obvious place to start looking.

          Steven Joyce doesn’t seem to have had a problem with this and neither did Judith Collins.

          That’s hideous.

      • George Hendry 3.1.3
        27 September 2014 at 4:32 pm

        For verification please refer to many points made below.

        “Shepherd’s Crook” (old meaning) = stick with hook at end used for saving stuck sheep

        “Shepherd’s Crook” (new meaning) = stick with crook at end used for sticking it to sheep not yet stuck

        Hence the saying ‘By hook or by crook’

        “Toxic Crook” = person having committed crimes and with a criminal record for some of them

        “Clean Crook” = person or organisation having committed many crimes and with a criminal record for none of them (refer also Too Big To Fail).

        • Brigid 3.1.3.1
          27 September 2014 at 7:03 pm

          No, the shepherd’s crook is not and never was used to save stuck sheep. The hook on the end is a means of catching ewes and lambs around the neck or legs.

          • George Hendry 3.1.3.1.1
            28 September 2014 at 12:35 am

            Thanks Brigid – I see Google agrees, and farewell my old romantic notion of the kind shepherd.

      • Once was Pete 3.1.4
        27 September 2014 at 8:56 pm

        No citations required. His criminality and his convictions are a matter of public record.

  4. weka 4
    27 September 2014 at 10:10 am

    “One thing is for sure, support for any kind of left-wing initiative would see Dotcom once again comprehensively vilified by National. Why would he put himself through that again?”

    My reading is a bit different. I doubt that being villified by National would be the issue, given all he has been through prior to this. Losing might be, and losing in a way that cost his allies dearly might too.

    Myself, I hope he sticks with the IP but takes a background role, or the IP takes a longer view and builds up trust within the public for him. I agree with others, that getting involved in public service broadcasting would be good too, although the issue is still there of perceptions of him trying to buy influence. They just need to take a step back and figure out how to counter that or work around it.

    • Colonial Viper 4.1
      27 September 2014 at 11:08 am

      That’s a sobre and strategic assessment.

    • Chooky 4.2
      27 September 2014 at 1:32 pm

      how about set up an independent radio staion which gives the Left a fair hearing?….(and an IQ jump in intellectual discourse…and he is fun and ebullent and a bit of an entertainer himself!)

      ….I would like to see the mean mealy- mouthed untalented Nact shills like Sean Plunket and Paul Henry et.al. take a huge nose dive in public ratings( particularly youth)

      …what the Left Parties lacked in this Election was a fair deal about their policies and politicians from the msm

  5. Colonial Viper 5
    27 September 2014 at 10:12 am

    De Boni nails it in her heading – Dotcom is an entrepreneur at heart. Which means that a failed project which loses a stack of money, has quite a different meaning for him, than it would for most of us. There’s no way that he’s going to use the same approach that he has in the last 12 months with Internet-Mana – I would expect something very different from him next: something in the mass media field? Grass roots political organisation? A think tank?

    When news of Dotcom’s supposed $3M spend into I-M became public (who knows what the real number was) I suggested that much of it should be put aside to build long term infrastructure and assets for the party. Fingers crossed that was actually done in some way shape or form.

    My view is that many of the 1.1M non voters out there could be best reached by, and best served by “Internet-Mana”. And personally connecting with another 50,000 voters using flax roots methods over the next 3 years is a very do-able target and create a 3% to 4% party/political movement.

    • Brigid 5.1
      27 September 2014 at 10:34 pm

      Yes connect with the non voters by providing practical help.
      We need to start campaigning for the next election now. We need to provide practical assistance for our prospective voters. Ask all the rich socialists to bank roll the following:
      A trust bank that will lend at 1% for houses and offer loans to people who would otherwise go to loan sharks. Set up an ISP that provides an internet service that offers encryption and affordable data rates. Cheap health care services that will include psychological and dental health services – free for children. Reasonably priced legal services. Assistance with dealing with all government departments, notably WINZ and ACC. All other things that can be provided practically and that which is desirable and affordable. The Hezbollah in Jordan and Hamas in Gaza gained support and popularity because they provided their people with exactly this. We can’t expect the people to believe we are going to improve their lives when we are in government if we haven’t proved we can before we ask for their vote. I don’t care which party does it. It just has to be done

    • Chooky 5.2
      28 September 2014 at 12:34 am

      +100 CV…they may not vote but they listen to the radio and f..king Sean Plunket or watch that retard Paul Henry

      …lets take the fight to the right wing shills…so these non-voters become educated in why voting for the Left is good for them ….and how they have been duped by the right wing to be apathetic and confused …teach them at the flaxroots, critical thinking… with Dotcom intelligence and fun

  6. Disraeli Gladstone 6
    27 September 2014 at 10:28 am

    “Finally, “he’s a crook!” True, he’s done hard time for hacking as a young man. But it seems from what I have read – I’ve never met him – that he found a business niche by providing a service that others exploited, fell afoul of Hollywood, which then leant on the US Government to have him banged up. He’s a “crook” because the National Party spin doctors, at Hollywood’s behest, have deemed it to be so.”

    It’s weird that everyone seems to forget that his youthful hacking convictions weren’t his last. If they were, I perhaps wouldn’t be so wary of him.

    But they weren’t. He was also convicted of embezzlement and inside trading at the far less youthful age of 29. He ran away and had to be brought back to Germany. He also committed other white collar crimes in Hong Kong. Again, I make the point that if he didn’t hate John Key, we would all recognise that he comes from the very type of capitalism and individualism that people dislike for everybody else who isn’t called Kim Dotcom.

    That’s before we get the making jokes at violence against women, obscene displays of wealth and a general unsavoury behaviour of a rich man with egotism.

    The fact that Kim Dotcom’s egotism backfired so spectacularly is the only silver lining of the entire 2014 election.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 6.1
      27 September 2014 at 4:08 pm

      NZ Herald had to pay damages to KDC after running a story when he first arrived saying he was a ‘hacker’

      Slate wipe clean apparently. Gone is defence of ‘truth’

  7. ianmac 7
    27 September 2014 at 10:29 am

    Seems strange to me that the Dotcom money was/is being hammered when Colin’s millions on his party is barely mentioned and Gibb’s millions for ACT does not get a mention. Better ask David Farrar to explain this. Perhaps.

    • Yoyo 7.1
      27 September 2014 at 10:36 am

      The difference is that they don’t have convictions and a colourful past and aren’t working to avoid extradition.

      • weka 7.1.1
        27 September 2014 at 11:07 am

        nah the difference is the right are allowed money and the left aren’t.

        • Yoyo 7.1.1.1
          27 September 2014 at 12:49 pm

          Is that why the left never seem to have any unless it’s come from the state – either teaching, lecturing or welfaring? Makes sense now – thanks!

          • ropata 7.1.1.1.1
            27 September 2014 at 1:19 pm

            unlike the right who make money from stealing the retirement savings of thousands of people (mark hotchin) / putting up power prices randomly / taking dirty cash from casinos or money-laundering banks ?

          • weka 7.1.1.1.2
            27 September 2014 at 2:30 pm

            “Is that why the left never seem to have any unless it’s come from the state – either teaching, lecturing or welfaring? Makes sense now – thanks!”

            thanks to you too! for making it perfectly clear you are a RWNJ trole, here to waste people’s time. Now you can fuck right off.

          • ghostwhowalksnz 7.1.1.1.3
            28 September 2014 at 1:33 pm

            Gareth Morgan ?

    • KJT 7.2
      27 September 2014 at 12:12 pm

      Not to mention the millions donated to National, and spent, from often dodgy businessmen and those who profit from policies such as asset sales.
      Including donations to Island schools, and other make National look good, bribes.. Bet those were never on the list of election spending.
      And. Who paid the National deadwood to go?

      • yeshe 7.2.1
        27 September 2014 at 12:17 pm

        KJT — exactly, who did pay them ? This must come out eventually … (and we can guarantee this was not KDC money ! :grin:)

  8. ianmac 8
    27 September 2014 at 10:30 am

    Oh and Dita’s column yet again was so refreshing and so true. Wonder if her contract will be renewed?

    • weka 8.1
      27 September 2014 at 11:08 am

      yeah, she’s definitely on the list of journos trying to be part of the solution not part of the problem.

  9. Yoyo 9
    27 September 2014 at 10:33 am

    Lol – a high probability is he will get extradited surely? I don’t think it’s worth spending too much time speculating until after his extradition case in Feb.

    I think the best thing for him to do is make the best of what may be the little time he has left to spend with his kids before any potential extradition.

    • Bill 9.1
      27 September 2014 at 1:20 pm

      You’re aware of the case involving the British kid who put up a website by the name of TV Shack? It redirected people to places where they could download content. He made his money from advertising on his site. Obviously, some of what he redirected to was copyright material.

      The US enforcement agencies (can’t remember which ones) turned up at his house in the UK (he was living with his parents) and tried pulling the same shit that’s being pulled on Dotcom.

      Here’s the thing, the US sought his extradition even though he had never been to the US and hadn’t broken any UK laws. The argument was that because the domain name – the .org. .com or whatever – was regarded as US territory, his crime had taken place in the US.

      Thankfully and rightly, the UK government refused the extradition request.

      Meanwhile, Dotcom, as I understand it, had copyrighted materials routinely removed from megaupload and had no more control over shit than the UK kid I mention above. Sure, Dotcom made more money and his revenue wasn’t solely the result of advertising clicks.

      But do you really want the US applying its laws to NZ? Because that’s a large part of the Dotcom case…the allegation is that he committed a crime on US soil on the basis of him having utilised the .com domain.

      • weka 9.1.1
        27 September 2014 at 2:32 pm

        why let a little thing like inherent justice or sovereignty get in the way.

      • Yoyo 9.1.2
        27 September 2014 at 3:22 pm

        I’m not commenting on whether his extradition is right or wrong, just that given the very limited grounds for refusing an extradition request legally, there’s a high probability he’ll go.

        • Molly 9.1.2.1
          27 September 2014 at 4:19 pm

          Why are there limited grounds?

          Is this not a civil case – and not a criminal case? Surely extradition is only for criminal cases?

          • yeshe 9.1.2.1.1
            27 September 2014 at 4:27 pm

            have a look at #24 molly … more details for you. yes, it was a civil case until fbi included money laundering to make it criminal. dodgy boys they are key and fbi together !!

        • lprent 9.1.2.2
          27 September 2014 at 4:29 pm

          …but given the very limited grounds for refusing an extradition request legally,

          Huh? How thick and ignorant are you? There is a pretty big one. The various crimes that he is charged with do not have any near equivalent in NZ. That makes it a very hard task for the FBI to make an extradition case in NZ for him to be extradited to the US, where those charges are also unprecedented as well.

          I guess you read your law from the turds of your hopes rather than using the internet to find the actual text? Try lifting your lazy fingers and using google.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.2.2.1
            27 September 2014 at 4:37 pm

            A QC of my acquaintance thinks that not even Wormald’s perjury will save Dotcom from extradition.

            I do wonder about section 8 though.

            • lprent 9.1.2.2.1.1
              27 September 2014 at 4:48 pm

              I have no idea what the first sentence was about.

              Section 8 of the Extradition Act 1999? What time lapse and/or local charge?

              I was thinking of section 4. As far as I can see everything that Justice in the US is trying to charge him with stems from what would be a civil case in NZ. Not a criminal one.

            • lprent 9.1.2.2.1.2
              27 September 2014 at 6:32 pm

              Ah the police guy and the GCSB. That should be pretty irrelevant except of course to the court, that officer and the GCSB

              They haven’t gotten down to any of the serious issues yet. All they have established is that the crown can proceed with trying to make a case.

            • Yoyo 9.1.2.2.1.3
              27 September 2014 at 8:05 pm

              Yep. I wonder if we know the same QC? Or if there is more than one QC who thinks same. Not that I’ll be naming them here of course 😉

          • Yoyo 9.1.2.2.2
            27 September 2014 at 8:01 pm

            Wow – just wow!

  10. George Hendry 10
    27 September 2014 at 10:35 am

    Thanks Anthony.

    Kim and the events surrounding him have given us all much to think about. More effectively than anyone else over the last nearly two years he has brought about much more awareness of the international context in which our current government operates. Of course this was going to threaten some interested parties, thanks to whom even Kim himself now knows much more about how far they will go.

    Evidence that ‘his brand was poisoned’; ‘the electorate rejected IMP because of him’ (even though he may say things like this himself to excuse the public for giving IMP such a low vote) are actually untrue statements is so strong that it almost reaches the level of proof.

    If his stated aim of bringing down Mr Key had merely been reported, it would be possible to claim that the low IMP vote was in response to it. However the vote was not in response to it alone but also to the continuous media attack, evidence of which would comfortably exceed the standard required for proof (Tracey, you are welcome to comment from your legal perspective).

    Based on such proof, while he may have lost the battle (at this election), by alerting the public to the nature and extent of antidemocratic sentiment and determination in our clean green land he has certainly not lost the war. We needed to know what those lumps under the rug were and I thank him for peeling it back. They sure do stink, and for an explanation of why the messenger has been so repeatedly shot in this case one only needs to imagine the task of trying to wake someone who has been up late and believes it’s someone else’s fault.

  11. tsmithfield 11
    27 September 2014 at 10:37 am

    I find it difficult to understand how lefties can be so attracted to this guy. Especially given the recent TV3 doco that included accounts from previous employees about how they had been mistreated by Dotcom. Anyone else with similar wealth would undoubtably be portrayed as an evil “rich prick” by the left.

    • weka 11.1
      27 September 2014 at 11:12 am

      My problem with the TV3 report was it didn’t actually layout what the issues were. Yes it showed the employees and some of their concerns, but there was no basis on which to judge from the outside. I have no idea to what extent KDC screwed them.

      KDC isn’t a leftie. What’s important to me is not just what he has done wrong, but whether he learns and changes.

      • Colonial Viper 11.1.1
        27 September 2014 at 8:10 pm

        Thing about Dotcom is that he is a very smart guy, and definitely one who learns and changes.

      • MrV 11.1.2
        28 September 2014 at 3:28 am

        The employment one is interesting because alot of this came up from Cameron Slaters dirt digging.

        As far as one can tell if the raid never happened all his employees would have remained happily employed.

        Post raid and with assets frozen it is very clear there were cash flow issues and KDC made arrangements to avoid firing people and maintain them on lower salary. At any time these people were free to find new jobs if that was unsatsfactory.
        What is the lesson KDC has learned here? Well I can’t see it as anything other than Kiwis are whinging complainers. Next time better off to fire people.

        What I want to know is what possessed some of these employees to whinge specifically Whaleoil. Without a dirty politics 2.0 we will never know what the true relationship is. I would be surprised if there wasn’t some kickback on the part of the employees.

    • Molly 11.2
      27 September 2014 at 4:23 pm

      It was a TV3 “news” item. Giving it the title of documentary implies a robust research and editing process.

      He responded quite reasonably the next day in print.

  12. r0b 12
    27 September 2014 at 11:09 am

    Just to be clear, I’m not endorsing Dotcom or ignoring his faults. I don’t recall ever writing about him before, except in the context of the debate over what Key knew and when he knew it. I never hyped his personal “moment of truth” and I stated at the time that Dotcom’s letter looked like a bust.

    But there’s no denying the impact that Dotcom has had on NZ politics, and I think it’s valid to speculate on what the guy might do next.

    • Colonial Viper 12.1
      27 September 2014 at 11:34 am

      An important post, this one. One interesting aspect is how the Internet Party and Mana Movement membership now views Dotcom…as well as Hone and Laila…those factors will determine much going forward.

    • Huginn 12.2
      28 September 2014 at 1:09 am

      Agree with you R0b

      KDC may be extradited, but what if he isn’t? He isn’t going to be able to go many places

      We have to accept that he may be a part of the political landscape for a long time to come.

      I was impressed with Annette Sykes’ response to KDC’s apology. She was magnanimous and gracious

    • Huginn 12.3
      28 September 2014 at 1:09 am

      Agree with you R0b

      KDC may be extradited, but what if he isn’t? He isn’t going to be able to go many places

      We have to accept that he may be a part of the political landscape for a long time to come.

      I was impressed with Annette Sykes’ response to KDC’s apology. She was magnanimous and gracious

  13. North 13
    27 September 2014 at 11:20 am

    There’s a real strangeness going on. Key wins, in a style not generally expected moreover, and there’s no dirty politics – never was – no questions to be answered. All is well. Now let’s feast !

    Paul Thomas is cheap, hectoring in a passive-aggressive way, and characteristically ‘Herald’.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11332270

    I for one am very glad to have heard from Glen Greenwald and Edward Snowden.

    It is Thomas and other variously sniffy, pearl-clutching, witch-hunting Herald ‘operatives’ who are complicit in “Democracy Under Attack”. Not Kim Dotcom.

    George Hendry @ 10 makes worthy, thoughtful comment.

  14. pollywog 14
    27 September 2014 at 11:24 am

    Hopefully go on a diet.

  15. Adrian 15
    27 September 2014 at 11:25 am

    Why did the US target Dotcom? Google…yahoo/dept of justice/trillion dollars/nzherald..no conspiracy theory. The DOJ tried to bankrupt Yahoo because it wouldn’t let them have access to all of yours and mine stored emails etc. Dotcom would not let them have the encryption codes to cloud storage. Hollywood was just a vehicle.
    Now they are hunting down Apple over new I-phone encryption.

    • yeshe 15.1
      27 September 2014 at 11:40 am

      +1000 adrian

      and most folk thought KDC was just taking a cheap advertising op for his new encrypted video service at the Moment of Truth in the town hall.

      It was so much more. It was a veritable knock out punch in the nose for NSA et al who would have been plotting and planning anything and everything to prevent Snowden’s appearance.

      What they got was proof that KDC remains ahead of them all. He delivered an encrypted video service featuring Snowden live from Russia, even with the full might of the USA (and Key) fighting against him.

      And KDC said so. It was a technological triumph and must have been so embarrassing to all who failed to prevent it.

      But it was written off as a cheap advert because shooting the messenger was the daily media feast.

      I hope KDC stays and will allow us to benefit from his genius at innovation.

      • Chooky 15.1.1
        27 September 2014 at 1:23 pm

        +100 yeshe..”I hope KDC stays and will allow us to benefit from his genius at innovation.”

        ….i hope he also sets up a radio station for the Left….which desperately needs a voice for youth and everyone else in the msm

      • George Hendry 15.1.2
        27 September 2014 at 4:50 pm

        Agree entirely.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 15.2
      28 September 2014 at 1:43 pm

      Expect that to be changed quietly in the future.

  16. Tiger Mountain 16
    27 September 2014 at 11:50 am

    If Kim Dotcom is spending anymore dosh he could do worse than help fund a thinktank as explored by Sue Bradford recently. The 99% of you that have not read her thesis that Karol posted some time ago should consider doing so.
    http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/10292/7435

    Such a thinktank would be best attached via trust or some structure to something that actually brings in revenue. A digital printery slash media centre with cafe and meeting space or something maybe.

    • Colonial Viper 16.1
      27 September 2014 at 8:20 pm

      Also good thinking…left wing infrastructure needs robust independent funding sources…and I don’t mean the whimsical year to year largesse of rich donors.

  17. red blooded 17
    27 September 2014 at 11:51 am

    I’ve always thought Mana made a mistake hooking up with KDC. I do think there’s a space for some version of the Internet Party – there are real political and social issues that need a voice and a dedicated perspective. They don’t necessarily fit with the concerns of Mana, though. I also believe that a political party should be created from the bottom up, not the top down.

    As for KDC, maybe he really has changed his political perspective based on his experiences in NZ, but let’s remember that he chose to align himself with John Banks before his recent troubles. I see him as an opportunist, using others’ political commitment to try to further his own ends.

    Yes, some media commentary was negative. Well, guess what? That was true for Cunliffe, Colin Craig, the buffoons from ACT… pretty much everyone but Key and (weirdly) Winston. And come to think of it, Key (finally) did come under some media scrutiny and pressure thank to Dirty Politics. Somehow he managed to keep on grinning/grimacing, repeating the ‘Left Wing Smear” mantra and a depressing number of our country people didn’t want to look under the surface.

    It’ll be interesting to see if KDC demonstrates an ongoing shift in perspective. I think anything he funded would be under a lot of scrutiny and attack, though. The one I’m more interested on is Laila Harre.

    • yeshe 17.1
      27 September 2014 at 11:58 am

      just a small note, his donation to Banks was as prospective mayor of Auckland, not as an MP. And also, good to recall that Banks’ ‘recent troubles’ occurred, in part, precisely because of that donation.

  18. Psycho Milt 18
    27 September 2014 at 12:02 pm

    Excuse me if I don’t judge this man based on the spin put out by people who engage in dirty politics. Maybe Kim Dotcom can’t be trusted, but we know for sure they can’t be.

    Best summing up I’ve seen so far.

  19. KJT 19
    27 September 2014 at 12:25 pm

    Kim Dotcom, being German, with their history of the Gestapo and Stasi, would have thought that people will be upset and angry at the extant of Government surveillance, propaganda and controlling the message.

    Unfortunately New Zealanders have little previous experience of a repressive State.
    I had my own in the 80’s. In New Zealand to.

    Those of us that are concerned already know that the Government controls the message and uses spy agencies for their own ends.
    The rest either don’t care, or don’t want to think about it. (Daddy knows best).

    The right wing know that they can publish their names without fear of reprisal. That is why they gleefully talk about anonymous bloggers.

    It is already a sign of a repressive State, that we have to be concerned about anonymity and secrecy, for fear of reprisals.

    I believe people, even ex criminals, can have a change of heart and become decent people. There are many examples.
    My best apprentice was an ex housebreaker.

    • Yoyo 19.1
      27 September 2014 at 12:48 pm

      Yeah, it’s not like getting all your emails stolen is reprisal. It’s not like having people threaten your family is reprisal.

      • weka 19.1.1
        27 September 2014 at 12:54 pm

        Slater didn’t get his emails stolen because he speaks his political mind. They were stolen because he’s an arsehole who stepped over a line.

        Many of us won’t use our RL names because of people like Slater. He has a long history of harrassing people for simply expressing opinions. And he serves a state that is increasingly trying to control the population via surveillance.

        • ghostwhowalksnz 19.1.1.1
          27 September 2014 at 5:29 pm

          More than harassing them for an opinion

          Turfed them down the stairs as one of Gerry Brownlees henchmen

        • Granted 19.1.1.2
          27 September 2014 at 7:41 pm

          So if someone has an opinion that you are an arsehole, (thats not my opinion by the way) is that person entitled to steal your emails? Who is the arbiter of such decisions about who is an arsehole?

          Who is the arbitor of when someone has stepped over the line?

          • weka 19.1.1.2.1
            27 September 2014 at 8:12 pm

            There was a general consensus that Slater had stepped over the line. Fortunately a hacker and an investigatives journalist agreed and were in the right place at the right time.

            If the people in power who have been granted authority won’t step up and do something someone else will.

          • ghostwhowalksnz 19.1.1.2.2
            28 September 2014 at 1:21 pm

            Easy answer to that , Slater went to court, and lost, the Judge saying public interest for some items.

            of course you do remember Slater was publishing someone elses emails way back, was lifting labours membership database, giving intimate details of Len Browns affair.
            happy about all that ?

    • weka 19.2
      27 September 2014 at 12:49 pm

      The criminal accusation is an interesting one. When it is made the person rarely specifies whether they mean KDC’s convictions from when he was a young man, or whether they mean his current fight with the US. If it’s the former, then yeah, he’s served his time and has moved on. We live in a country that allows people to do that. If it’s the stuff about the US, then they’re condemning him as a criminal before he’s even been given a fair trial.

      Hypocrisy and self-serving arguments. I wouldn’t mind so much except they can’t put a rationale argument together and so use lowlife tricks better suited to the dirty right.

      • Yoyo 19.2.1
        27 September 2014 at 12:52 pm

        I’d believe you, but imagine if John Key had a suspended prison sentence for embezzlement and insider trading (which he hasn’t) even as, say an 18 year old – surely you’d be all over it. Or are you saying you wouldn’t hold that against him (if it in fact were true).

        • weka 19.2.1.1
          27 September 2014 at 12:55 pm

          No I wouldn’t hold that against him if he had changed.

        • Psycho Milt 19.2.1.2
          27 September 2014 at 1:18 pm

          The NZ stock market is a bastion of insider trading, so the idea of Key actually getting done for it at any age is ludicrous. He was even caught red-handed insider trading with Tranzrail shares, so I certainly hope his supporters wouldn’t go calling Dotcom a criminal for having done it in a jurisdiction that actually arrests people for it.

          • weka 19.2.1.2.1
            27 September 2014 at 2:36 pm

            Which is another reason why the whole criminal KDC tried to buy an election speil is bullshit. The only reason he is controversial is because he’s not playing the rich white man’s game properly. If he’d stayed within the rules, then no problemo (but of course then he would still be funding the like of Banks and cronies).

          • Yoyo 19.2.1.2.2
            27 September 2014 at 3:25 pm

            Did you just say something defamatory?

            • lprent 19.2.1.2.2.1
              27 September 2014 at 4:24 pm

              Nope. I have read the information about the timing and that would be my opinion as well. John Key’s only defense is a “chinese wall” that he didn’t order the trade but his trust/broker just happened to do it at exactly the right time. I really think that that “chinese walls” are a crock of shit and only done to provide a veneer of plausible deniability. What you read was an opinion.

              Defamation would be if Psycho Milt had said something like “there was political interference that prevented the full investigation from happening” which would have asserted a fact. That would have required that PM had some proof of a specific allegation.

              I realise that this is probably a bit too fine a distinction for a Yoyo. But why should I be concerned about a fool having problems..

              • Yoyo …
                27 September 2014 at 8:18 pm

                It didn’t state that it was an opinion did it? It stated it as fact as far as I can see.

                Insulting me does not add to your argument. Personally, I think it drags this blog into the muck and shows a lack of decorum and a degree of childishness. Why not just stick to arguing the point? After all, if I’m as stupid as you imply, surely you don’t need to sink to that level. Surely, if you are intelligent, you could easily formulate an argument against someone you feel is stupid without even batting an eyelid (let alone needing to resort to such unpleasantness and vitriol). This would enable you to retain your dignity and shoot my point to smithereens.

                You just seem to me so unhappy and life is too short. Either formulate an argument that disputes my point (which personally I suspect you are not capable – whereas many others on this blog can come up with points that are better than my own), or realise that perhaps you are not always right – as evidenced by your desire to attack on a personal level.

                As they say, you have to respect someone to care about their opinion. So while you could care less about my opinion, it works both ways.

                Peace love and happiness to you my friend.

              • Psycho Milt …
                27 September 2014 at 10:19 pm

                Did you just say something defamatory?

                That’s for the site owners to judge. For my part, I’d be happy to let a court decide whether the news that

                “Mr Key was in fact commenting publicly on Tranz Rail, meeting with bidders for the rail track and vigorously pursuing the release of commercially relevant information all while being an undisclosed shareholder in the firm”

                and that he engaged in trading of said shares at the time, allows me to legitimately hold the opinion that he was “caught red-handed insider trading in Tranzrail shares.”

                • yeshe …
                  27 September 2014 at 11:45 pm

                  PM — aldgate and whitechapel are all the evidence needed, aren’t they ? and I have to wonder how many power company shares are in there ?

      • Bill 19.2.2
        27 September 2014 at 1:27 pm

        What NZ law is Dotcom accused of breaking? Is it NZ copyright infringement? If so, then why is he not being charged and tried within NZ?

        As I said above, the US is essentially attempting to expand its legal jurisdiction to encompass every country in the world that uses the domains of .org, .com etc (I can’t remember the full list) on the basis that those domains are US territory.

        It’s fucked, and they should be being told in no uncertain terms to go get fucked.

        If Dotcom has broken NZ law, then charge him with whatever the violation might be and have a trial in NZ.

        • Poission 19.2.2.1
          27 September 2014 at 1:40 pm

          The US had to use the so called rico laws to allow the extradition of DC, a copyright violation would not be an extraditable offense.

          The same law would also provide criminal offenses for most US banks and their agents who have set up offshore tax avoidance schemes that have been found to be effectively laundromats.

          Citicorp being a good example, which is currently under federal grand jury investigation.

          In an ironic twist the district attorney of Virginia law firm was the architect of the citicorp Caribbean tax structure.

          • Bill 19.2.2.1.1
            27 September 2014 at 1:53 pm

            That as it may be, it’s the NZ government that has to allow extradition, not the US government.

            Now, 30 years or whatever in jail for the bullshit he’s accused of? I think not – not by any measure of ‘natural justice’ or whatever appropriate term there may be.

            • yeshe 19.2.2.1.1.1
              27 September 2014 at 3:21 pm

              exactly Bill. He has no charges against him in NZ; the USA ones have been falsely puffed up to alleged money-laundering (under Rico) because copyright violations, even if proven, are not not extraditable under NZ laws. And yes … natural justice may yet intervene.

              Whatever one’s personal view of him, KDC has been denied much evidence he is entitled to, and it is proven he has been aggressed upon under NZ law, to better serve US Dept of Justice at Key’s pleasure.

              We would be wise to be aware of the discrepancies appearing in the various High Court hearings. Remain vigilant; it has far reaching effects for us all.

          • Yoyo 19.2.2.1.2
            27 September 2014 at 8:19 pm

            An intelligent point without vitriol – so refreshing!

        • yeshe 19.2.2.2
          27 September 2014 at 3:32 pm

          Bill .. see #24

  20. yeshe 20
    27 September 2014 at 12:58 pm

    yoyo: ” insider trading (which he hasn’t)” .. but omg, Key should have. But I digress ..

    how much or how little do you know of what KDC’s record actually is ?

  21. Steve 21
    27 September 2014 at 1:27 pm

    While pondering the German’s criminal past, divert your attention to our PM’s present.
    How close is he to being in breach of s105A Crimes Act (corrupt use of official information, max 7 years)? Read again on Watergate – the actions of Nixon and John Milhous Key are barely distinguishable.

    Well said, Dita de Boni. One of a dwindling few doing her job in the fourth estate. With a competent and courageous press this quisling and crook would have been gone by lunchtime. Centre and Left MUST keep campaigning for a full Royal Commission into govt corruption.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 21.1
      27 September 2014 at 4:18 pm

      Key started his illegal activity just as he was trying to get the National party nomination ( paid for ) for Helensville.

      he made a false declaration on his enrollment form saying he lived at for the last month, a property in Peak Rd Waimaukau, when he was at all times living in Orakei Rd Remuera.
      This was to ingratiate himself with voters pretending he was a ‘local’

      Look it up, enrollment forms require a statuary declaration.

      The real funny bit was Slaters father was skimming the donations that Key made to the national Party.
      Boag found out when she took over as President, and raised merry hell. Slater was forced to pay it back !!

  22. Poission 22
    27 September 2014 at 1:43 pm

    What country is the most prevalent hacker or the peculiar case of the hand in the honeypot.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-23/a-decoy-computer-was-set-up-online-see-which-countries-attacked-it-the-most.html

  23. Andrew Welsh 23
    27 September 2014 at 2:07 pm

    “What will DotCom do next”? I imagine it is whatever work programmes San Quentin runs. I am hopeful it is manufacturing licence plates.

  24. yeshe 24
    27 September 2014 at 3:31 pm

    This is an accurate and educational timeline for KDC and NZ Govt, assembled by Toby Manhire for The Listener. It needs an update for the last couple of months, but it demands a cold hard look at what he is fighting against:

    http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary/the-internaut/kim-dotcom-megaupload-new-zealand-timeline/

    plus, to mid 2013 only, this summarises the huge costs and various cases arising from the complete screw-ups by NZ Govt against KDC. (Read it and weep.)

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10904690

    • ghostwhowalksnz 24.1
      27 September 2014 at 4:11 pm

      Yeh , it doesnt do your case any good if the government has been found to have committed illegal acts…many times.

      But the courts just say… sue them in a civil action ???

  25. JanMeyer 25
    27 September 2014 at 6:21 pm

    I think just as right wingers should read Hager’s book, those sympathetic to KDC shoud read the full FBI indictment. Presents a compelling prima facie case of criminal wrongdoing. Doesn’t mean he’s guilty of course. That’s for the courts to decide (in the US, not here).

    • lprent 25.1
      27 September 2014 at 6:43 pm

      I have read it. It is definitely shady business*.

      However I don’t think it is or would be a criminal offense in NZ law. That is the very definition of what is an extraditable offense under our extradition law. Section 4 of the Extradition Act

      * Similar shady business to the type of currency speculation that was going on in NZ dollars in the mid 80’s or the various things that made up many of the winebox allegations that were unable to be persecuted or some of the more interesting things that could be done with a trust and personal income in the 90s and 00s or the inadequate insurance behind building inspectorate firms in the late 90s and early 00s. There are literally millions of these kinds of incidents worldwide during my lifetime. They aren’t criminal matters. They are *after* the laws get changed. But the laws cannot be changed easily to be retroactive.

      • JanMeyer 25.1.1
        27 September 2014 at 6:50 pm

        Yes noted. The NZ courts will deal with that but the threshold for extradition is not overly high. We shall see.

  26. infused 26
    27 September 2014 at 8:05 pm

    Hopefully fuck off and leave New Zealand.

    • Minarch 26.1
      28 September 2014 at 12:19 pm

      admit it Infused

      your jealous of KDC arent you , because he owns 4 Mercedes and you can only afford 1 and its last years model too

      you should give up, you’ll never be as wealthy as Kim even if he does get locked up, your property portfolio just isnt that healthy..

    • ghostwhowalksnz 26.2
      28 September 2014 at 1:55 pm

      “The British govt plans to criminalize the manipulation of more benchmarks to revive confidence in the integrity of London as a financial centre.”

      I guess the British government wont be looking to extradite former London based currency trader executive John Phillip Key.

  27. philj 27
    27 September 2014 at 8:24 pm

    At last , a Mainstream journalist who has an intelligent,independent mind. There is hope. Good on you Dita.

  28. Barfly 28
    27 September 2014 at 10:39 pm

    re Kim Dotcom

    No idea what he’ll do but I wish him well….when nature hiccupped and Christchurch got squashed flat …How much did Alan Gibbs , Colin Craig, John Key etc. dig out of their wallets to help…nothing, nada, zip, zilch. Kim Dotcom the “immigrant German” tossed in a million dollars. So why don’t you hate filled right wingers take a long hard look in the mirror.

  29. MrV 29
    28 September 2014 at 3:42 am

    Would be fair to say I don’t necessarily espouse the views of many on this blog, and I think the left/right paradigm isn’t that accurate, but here is what I think the Internet Party should do.

    -Move to the ‘centre’ as it were.
    What if the alliance with Mana was toxic? Far too left wing with a whole bunch of people who are even more politically toxic than KDC (IMHO)

    I firmly believe there is a constituency for a party that is interested in privacy, personal liberty and truth telling.
    This party can still provide for bold social initiatives: focus on child poverty, decent housing policies, education etc without being dubbed ‘left wing’. This party would also focus on the elimination of corporate welfare and also middle class welfare. Other policies would include asserting an independant foreign policy, while at the same time boosting our military expenditure (so as to not be so reliant on said overseas interests). This party would also be for maintaining public ownership of natural monopolies (like power generation), whilst in appropriate cases spending public money to overcome private monopolies (like international internet cables) and foster market based competition where none currently exists.

    There will be people on the left/right that would like some but not all of these policies but that is the point.
    (I use the foreign policy one as an example, I can’t see how you can be independant if you won’t spend more to protect that independance with a military etc)

    Feedback welcome …

    • One Anonymous Bloke 29.1
      28 September 2014 at 10:22 am

      You just described the Labour Party, give or take their insistence on UN-backed FP.

      Still, you seem to be infected with the delusion that “left-wing” is an insult of some sort.

      And yeah, caring about child poverty is the opposite of right wing policy; the last six years might have given you a clue. Perhaps you were asleep.

      • MrV 29.1.1
        28 September 2014 at 2:25 pm

        Lots of laughs. Please don’t shoot the messenger. 24% of the vote indicates that what currently sells as ‘left-wing’ Labour party policy in NZ is politically toxic.
        Furthemore unless the left pulls itself together the Key govt will outflank it in this term on those child poverty type issues.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 29.1.1.1
          28 September 2014 at 2:38 pm

          So, before the election, KDC is toxic, after the election it must have been all about policy. Do you honestly think no-one will notice your shifting conceits?

          Had there been a policy contest during the election you’d have a leg to stand on. there wasn’t. You don’t.

          • MrV 29.1.1.1.1
            28 September 2014 at 3:01 pm

            KDC admitted that he felt he was toxic, but the thought of Harawira, Minto, Sykes et al. to the rest of the electorate, (as I stated was) “even more politically toxic than KDC (IMHO)”.

            “Had there been a policy contest during the election”
            Talk about wishful thinking. In order to have one of those the Labour party (+ other left opposition) had to be organised and cohesive enough to generate it. However after all the infighting and division that was never going to happen was it? They couldn’t even explain to the electorate their own policy.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 29.1.1.1.1.1
              28 September 2014 at 3:28 pm

              So, the electorate rejected the policies Labour didn’t communicate to them?

              Do you honestly think no-one will notice your shifting conceits?

              • MrV …
                28 September 2014 at 3:47 pm

                By definition not being voted for is a rejection of the Party and it’s policies, whether they were communcated via a “policy contest” up to your standards or not.

                Are you going to persist with the delusion that the ideas above are:
                “You just described the Labour Party, give or take their insistence on UN-backed FP.”

                Take a look around the world there is a large and growing constituency for a party that is not the establishment which is what National+Labour have been for a long time. Why do you think beofre the Internet Party even had a leader and announced policy it was subject to a campaign against it.
                Hint establishment is very aware of the political trends, look at the parties on the rise in UK, Germany, France, Italy etc.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  28 September 2014 at 3:56 pm

                  😆

                  2:25pm: …what currently sells as ‘left-wing’ Labour party policy in NZ is politically toxic.

                  3:28pm: They couldn’t even explain to the electorate their own policy.

                  You can’t reject that which hasn’t been explained. Oh, no, wait, you’re a follower, you’ll reject whatever Dear Leader tells you to.

                  • MrV …
                    28 September 2014 at 9:02 pm

                    Well it just happened, although it seems you would rather debate semantics than actually address issues of what constituents are likely to vote for.

                    Meanwhile the LP is engaged in it’s 3rd navel gazing leadership exercise in as many years. Good luck with that because I can’t see anything changing in the next 3yrs without getting rid of the bunker mentality.

  30. ghostwhowalksnz 30
    28 September 2014 at 5:13 pm

    This is example of how US laws making you a criminal for stealing their copyright dont apply back at them when they steal your patent.

    Accidentally or otherwise, the laws on intellectual property allow corporations to do unto others what can’t be done to them. If for instance, you violate the rights of a record company or a movie studio by forwarding copyrighted material that they own, without payment, they can have you arrested, and you can end up with a criminal conviction on your CV. Yet if a corporation steals your patent? As they do. Under US law, the corporate can be fined and the CEO might get a lot of dirty looks, but business carries on regardless, and with no criminal blemish on the corporate image. Copyright infringement and patent infringement are treated differently by the courts – even though arguably, the “stealing” of intellectual property is involved in both cases.

    http://werewolf.co.nz/2013/06/talking-dotcom/