Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion?

Virginia Crisp

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

19 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

There are a range of activist and political groups whose major concern is defending online privacy and Internet freedom. An instructive example within this movement is Kim Dotcom, the erstwhile head of defunct sharing site Megaupload, who presents his own interests as aligned with these organizations in a bid to promote both himself and his company. The MPAA claims that Dotcom is a thief who has profited directly from piracy, a charge he contests by claiming that through the raid of his house in January 2012 and the seizure of the Megaupload servers, his privacy has been invaded and his assets -- and those of his subscribers -- stolen. In January 2013, with a high profile theatrical event that included a re-enactment of the raid on his New Zealand mansion, Dotcom launched the successor to Megaupload, Mega. Mega, a cloud sharing platform, has one defining difference to Megaupload because through their User Controlled Encryption (UCE) system no one at Mega (or their audaciously titled parent company, The Privacy Company) can see or access the files that are hosted within their system. This is presented as a tactic to protect the consumer's privacy but it has the associated benefit of distancing Dotcom and his partners from the responsibility for exactly what is hosted on their servers. This paper makes the argument that through the company name, the launch event, the company website, Dotcom's personal website and his personal twitter feed, Dotcom repeatedly references privacy and freedom of speech so as to align his personal concerns with those of a wider political movement. It argues that this is merely a rhetorical strategy that legitimizes his actions, protects him from further legislation and encourages consumers that simply signing up to Mega is a form of political activism.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 2013
EventMedia in Transition 8: public media, private media - MIT, Boston, United States
Duration: 3 May 20135 May 2013

Conference

ConferenceMedia in Transition 8
CountryUnited States
City Boston
Period3/05/135/05/13

Fingerprint

privacy
promotion
website
political group
freedom of opinion
political movement
piracy
event
seizure
twitter
tactics
New Zealand
assets
parents
legislation
Internet
responsibility

Keywords

  • micro-celebrity
  • self-promotion
  • digital piracy
  • the privacy company
  • Kim Dotcom
  • Mega
  • Megaupload

Cite this

Crisp, V. (2013). Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion?. Paper presented at Media in Transition 8, Boston, United States.

Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion? / Crisp, Virginia.

2013. Paper presented at Media in Transition 8, Boston, United States.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

Crisp, V 2013, 'Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion?' Paper presented at Media in Transition 8, Boston, United States, 3/05/13 - 5/05/13, .
Crisp V. Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion?. 2013. Paper presented at Media in Transition 8, Boston, United States.
Crisp, Virginia. / Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion?. Paper presented at Media in Transition 8, Boston, United States.
@conference{caa3ed2e03a34f5d8e907bd3674c4783,
title = "Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion?",
abstract = "There are a range of activist and political groups whose major concern is defending online privacy and Internet freedom. An instructive example within this movement is Kim Dotcom, the erstwhile head of defunct sharing site Megaupload, who presents his own interests as aligned with these organizations in a bid to promote both himself and his company. The MPAA claims that Dotcom is a thief who has profited directly from piracy, a charge he contests by claiming that through the raid of his house in January 2012 and the seizure of the Megaupload servers, his privacy has been invaded and his assets -- and those of his subscribers -- stolen. In January 2013, with a high profile theatrical event that included a re-enactment of the raid on his New Zealand mansion, Dotcom launched the successor to Megaupload, Mega. Mega, a cloud sharing platform, has one defining difference to Megaupload because through their User Controlled Encryption (UCE) system no one at Mega (or their audaciously titled parent company, The Privacy Company) can see or access the files that are hosted within their system. This is presented as a tactic to protect the consumer's privacy but it has the associated benefit of distancing Dotcom and his partners from the responsibility for exactly what is hosted on their servers. This paper makes the argument that through the company name, the launch event, the company website, Dotcom's personal website and his personal twitter feed, Dotcom repeatedly references privacy and freedom of speech so as to align his personal concerns with those of a wider political movement. It argues that this is merely a rhetorical strategy that legitimizes his actions, protects him from further legislation and encourages consumers that simply signing up to Mega is a form of political activism.",
keywords = "micro-celebrity, self-promotion, digital piracy, the privacy company, Kim Dotcom, Mega, Megaupload",
author = "Virginia Crisp",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
note = "Media in Transition 8 : public media, private media ; Conference date: 03-05-2013 Through 05-05-2013",

}

TY - CONF

T1 - Kim Dotcom's Mega: Political activism or self-promotion?

AU - Crisp, Virginia

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - There are a range of activist and political groups whose major concern is defending online privacy and Internet freedom. An instructive example within this movement is Kim Dotcom, the erstwhile head of defunct sharing site Megaupload, who presents his own interests as aligned with these organizations in a bid to promote both himself and his company. The MPAA claims that Dotcom is a thief who has profited directly from piracy, a charge he contests by claiming that through the raid of his house in January 2012 and the seizure of the Megaupload servers, his privacy has been invaded and his assets -- and those of his subscribers -- stolen. In January 2013, with a high profile theatrical event that included a re-enactment of the raid on his New Zealand mansion, Dotcom launched the successor to Megaupload, Mega. Mega, a cloud sharing platform, has one defining difference to Megaupload because through their User Controlled Encryption (UCE) system no one at Mega (or their audaciously titled parent company, The Privacy Company) can see or access the files that are hosted within their system. This is presented as a tactic to protect the consumer's privacy but it has the associated benefit of distancing Dotcom and his partners from the responsibility for exactly what is hosted on their servers. This paper makes the argument that through the company name, the launch event, the company website, Dotcom's personal website and his personal twitter feed, Dotcom repeatedly references privacy and freedom of speech so as to align his personal concerns with those of a wider political movement. It argues that this is merely a rhetorical strategy that legitimizes his actions, protects him from further legislation and encourages consumers that simply signing up to Mega is a form of political activism.

AB - There are a range of activist and political groups whose major concern is defending online privacy and Internet freedom. An instructive example within this movement is Kim Dotcom, the erstwhile head of defunct sharing site Megaupload, who presents his own interests as aligned with these organizations in a bid to promote both himself and his company. The MPAA claims that Dotcom is a thief who has profited directly from piracy, a charge he contests by claiming that through the raid of his house in January 2012 and the seizure of the Megaupload servers, his privacy has been invaded and his assets -- and those of his subscribers -- stolen. In January 2013, with a high profile theatrical event that included a re-enactment of the raid on his New Zealand mansion, Dotcom launched the successor to Megaupload, Mega. Mega, a cloud sharing platform, has one defining difference to Megaupload because through their User Controlled Encryption (UCE) system no one at Mega (or their audaciously titled parent company, The Privacy Company) can see or access the files that are hosted within their system. This is presented as a tactic to protect the consumer's privacy but it has the associated benefit of distancing Dotcom and his partners from the responsibility for exactly what is hosted on their servers. This paper makes the argument that through the company name, the launch event, the company website, Dotcom's personal website and his personal twitter feed, Dotcom repeatedly references privacy and freedom of speech so as to align his personal concerns with those of a wider political movement. It argues that this is merely a rhetorical strategy that legitimizes his actions, protects him from further legislation and encourages consumers that simply signing up to Mega is a form of political activism.

KW - micro-celebrity

KW - self-promotion

KW - digital piracy

KW - the privacy company

KW - Kim Dotcom

KW - Mega

KW - Megaupload

M3 - Paper

ER -