Register Log in

Law & Disorder / Civilization & Discontents

Is Mega using a script to block third-party link-aggregating sites?

The third-party link indexing site says it will be back up shortly, but that's uncertain.

Last night, we wrote about, a third-party crowdsourced link indexing site for Kim Dotcom's new file locker But an hour after we published the article, all but the most recent links led to deleted files. Even seemingly innocuous file names generated a message: “The file you are trying to download is no longer available.”

This morning, mega-search has no links on its site. When you visit it, you're greeted with a pop-up in French saying:


Before displayed this notice, founder and editor Ernesto of TorrentFreak tried posting links on to legal content that he had uploaded to Mega previously: “Our uploads included a few Dan Bull songs, a clip from the Pirate Bay documentary TPB-AFK, a video explaining fair use, and Kim Dotcom’s single 'Mr. President.'” All the links were taken down “within minutes” along with a notice claiming that someone had alleged copyright infringement on each of the links:

We are in receipt of a takedown notice affecting the following public link in your account:!iRQRnLzT



Ars attempted the same experiment a few hours later and found mega-search's new pop-up message and a site devoid of links. Just last night, Dotcom tweeted, “Copyright takedown notices per day: Google 450,000 vs #Mega 50.” Those numbers may no longer be accurate as there were hundreds of links on as of yesterday evening and none this morning. Dotcom and Mega have not returned a request for comment.

Clearly could be construed as a liability for Mega, especially as Dotcom is under bail conditions that prevent him from relaunching Megaupload or a similar service. Dotcom's counsel Ira Rothken told Ars in an interview earlier this month that his client “is innocent, is presumed innocent, and is entitled to innovate and work in technology like any other innocent New Zealander, especially when the US takes away all his assets and delays the extradition proceedings.” Creating a script to kill all files that receive traffic from a site like may be key in proving to authorities later that Dotcom is satisfying the condition of not creating a business similar to Megaupload, which had an "uploader rewards" program for users who uploaded and shared popular files.

But what about the people who want to share legal and fair use files with many other people? Clearly, a number of legal files that were posted on mega-search were removed from Mega automatically. Mega's Terms of Service (TOS) are not explicit about prohibiting posting links with decryption keys on third-party sites. The TOS does explicitly state that Mega is not responsible for lost data, specifically due to buggy services. Mega also warns that if users make URLs with decryption keys public, the owners of those files are responsible for the actions of the people who download the file, although legally shared media should not cause a problem that would result in its takedown.

Perhaps the site justifies the takedown of legal files due to burdensome levels of traffic to its site: the TOS states that users are prohibited to “do anything that would damage, disrupt or place an unreasonable burden on our website or service or anyone else's use of our website or a service including but not limited to denial of service attacks or similar.”

Mega also reserves the right to remove any data “alleged to be infringing” but sets up a rather stringent vetting process for copyright infringement allegations, requiring no fewer than six kinds of information—from “a physical or electronic signature of the copyright owner or a person authorized to act on their behalf” to “a statement by you that you have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.”

Evidently, such a complete allegation of infringement is not always necessary for a takedown. It is unknown whether Mega will update its TOS to address this new roadblock in the brand new company's growth. If it does, it would neither be surprising nor in poor judgment for the creator of a company to protect his new business from more legal troubles. But with such currently vague terms, and without an edit to the terms of service, users might feel a little betrayed.

Expand full story

54 Reader Comments

Post a reply
  1. "But what about the people who want to share legal and fair use files with many other people?"

    I don't see how an indexer site is relevant for them. You can also share a file by posting the link on your web page, in your blog, by putting it on Twitter, etc. In all of those cases, you also have the opportunity to provide some context and information about what the file is and why you are sharing it. And if it's valuable it can be reblogged, etc to be shared by others.

    In the case of the indexer, those listings are no longer under your control, and any context information may or may not be present or up-to-date. The only advantage I see for the sharer in that case is that the indexer site is not under your own name so in principle you could claim it's not your fault for copyright issues, although the file itself will still clearly be yours. The real advantage of the index is for downloaders, not for the sharer, in that you can collect a lot of files without having to bother with whatever the sharer had to express about the files, reading their stupid blog, wasting time on Twitter, etc.
    2046 posts | registered
  2. @ Megan Geuss -

    When you and Ernesto uploaded those legal files - even though the links were removed from Mega-Search were you still able to access the files within your own account -- or were the files removed as well ?
    2202 posts | registered
  3. djotaku wrote:
    What I don't like about the search site is that it seems intent on ruining this for everyone. If I have some files on there that I want to share with my brother or a client or someone, I can give them that file. (Just as I could with a USB stick or DVD or CD) And no one will be the wiser and it's all good. We get to share whatever files we want in a private manner. The way it's always been done since there was copyrighted material. The problem is not when I share a file with my friends, it's when I share it with the world. Scott Adams best encapsulates that with way he cares about Dilbert copyright. You can email it to your friends or print it for your cubicle, but you can't collect them all and put it on a public website.

    If you believe that those files are private and only going between you and your brother - I have some beach front property on the Moon I can sell ya for real cheap.
    2202 posts | registered
  4. So if I want a legitimate file deleted, all I have to do is submit it to an indexing site?
    Sounds wonderful.
    7 posts | registered
  5. mrnomnoms wrote:
    Oh come on, why the hell should mega allow others to ride on their coat tails? what is it with parasites like indexers who some how believe it is their 'human right' to ride on the coat tails of another organisations success only to whine when an organisation turns around sand says 'no, we don't want you to do that with out data' and then block them. Quite frankly if you want to share files then it is up to the uploader to decide how it is shared and who it should be shared with - those idiots who think they can 'make it big' by indexing other content should do something remotely useful instead of being a pack of parasites.

    I was under the impression that uploaders provided this 'parasite' site with the URLs that made up the list.

    Which would make pretty much everything you've written irrelevant.
    5208 posts | registered
  6. fferitt25 wrote:
    @ Megan Geuss -


    I think she said that the files themselves were also removed from the Mega servers with a notice that Mega had been informed of copyright infringement, so they were deleted.

    EDIT: Here she clarifies.
    8057 posts | registered
  7. copernicum wrote:
    Just labeling things as copyright infringing en masse without actually checking them out, exactly as the RIAA and MPAA have done. This is what Kimdotcom was complaining about before and is now what he himself is doing.

    Unfortunately, you are right and should not be downvoted for that. MEGA just lost another user. It's too bad, there doesn't seem to be a truly worthy cloudservice available anywhere.
    24 posts | registered
  8. When I initally read this article I was confused as to what was actually happening.

    Now the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that the MPAA or RIAA may have set up a honeypot. Let me explain. If I were them I would use this opportunity to have a third party create a website that aggregates links with the Mega name. As an added bonus infringing material could easily be found then. Also obviously this could be used as evidence in the smear campaign. It is sad in this day and age when some of the best evidence you have against your opponent is fabricated and placed by proxy. Just my guess as to what is happening here.
    209 posts | registered
  9. Does this article actually have a point other than "blah blah blah mega this mega that" and more of the same about copyright files?

    Who really cares what Mega does or does not do in relation to keeping a search site from finding files? Its their site and they are free to change things to keep anyone from searching out the files stored, sites do this all over the internet every day so why is this any different?
    518 posts | registered
  10. CaptainTightpants wrote:
    Few legitimate users will want anything to do with something from K.D. Pirates will simply move on to somewhere more reliable - somewhere less "ethical" and/or hates America enough to wanna screw one of our most powerful industries (Venezuela anyone?). I just don't see how he's going to make any money from this in the end - certainly not enough to support it long-term.

    Such a narrow mind, and "hates" America? LMAO, are you like a shill or what cause that right there sounds like the exact kind of hyperbole the AA's like to use.
    1826 posts | registered
  11. This is kind of a duh-obvious move for any online file storage site that is interested in preventing piracy: Shut off all files that are being distributed through public aggregation sites. If Mega Kim can keep this up, he'll go from being the great enemy of the media companies to being their greatest hero. This is because his success will prove that simple countermeasures to illegal filesharing are possible, and the countless other download lockers will be required to follow suit. This will, of course, mean their destruction, and Kim Dotcom might just end up as the last guy standing.
    24 posts | registered
  12. Corby wrote:
    Dotcom has now tweeted the following:

    "#Mega policy: NO PROACTIVE COPYRIGHT POLICING OF THE INTERNET. That's not our job. But linking sites abusing the Mega brand will be blocked."

    It will seem that all linking sites that link to MEGA will now be blocked whether or not the files are copyright or not.

    It sounds more like a trademark dispute resulting from this link site using the "Mega" name. He has pretty good reason to not want people to think that site is connected to him. It would be interesting to see if he did the same with a similar link site that was clearly not affiliated with Mega.

    copernicum wrote:
    Deleting legitimate files that people have stored in their accounts because they are linked on a site that he says 'abused his brand', is far worse than any rationale that the media coporations have used for taking down his material. This just confirms him as a greedy hypocrite.

    I don't really see this as worse. It's his site, and he can take down files for any reason he wants. It might not be a good way to keep his customers happy, and it might make me not want to use his site, but that's not a moral issue, its a business decision. When the media corporations send unfair take down notices (for non-infringing material, or fair use), that's a third-party improperly wielding the power of law to interfere in a business relationship that they are not a party to. That's morally wrong.

    Dawnrazor wrote:
    But it's not blocking the sites which would be understandable, it's taking down peoples uploads regardless of their legality.

    I'm not sure how he would effectively block a site that he has no control over. Even if he detected and blocked people directly linking from there, it wouldn't stop cut & paste of the URLs.

    1522 posts | registered
  13. utopia wrote:
    Fetishquest wrote:
    This story is insignificant.

    What went on in Appleland today?

    Was Timmy at work on time? Did he exceed his scheduled break times?

    Maybe Apple added more than the usual allotment of styrofoam peanuts to a customers order?

    Those things are news. They are the stories I come here for.

    No one cares if an asteroid is headed for California or China unless it will disrupt the latest iOS update.

    This story does not deliver. I will not read again.

    Wow. I've read a lot of dumb comments on this site, but this is waaay up there.

    For many, humor is a lost art.
    138 posts | registered
  14. Easy fix don't publicly share links to your files and then no one will know what they are.
    2 posts | registered
  15. What is to stop someone from finding peoples content and just because they are in the mood to troll they decide to post it on a site that will have it removed for just being there?


    You have a small time band and they upload all their music to Mega and link it on their blog.

    You see this and you're in the mood to be a dick so you copy all their links and go submit them to a mega indexing site.

    The overly absurd copyright policy they're enforcing could easily be used against them just how I said. You think someone is going to keep using them if anyone could have their shit removed? This is even worse than the flawed DCMA system we currently have in place...
    455 posts | registered
Post a reply

You must to comment.

You May Also Like

    Need to register for a new account?

    If you don't have an account yet it's free and easy.