Jailed Megaupload King Is Still The World No. 1 In Modern Warfare 3

Kim Dotcom is the internet playboy who made his zillions by founding the now-defunct Anonymous cause celebre du jour Megaupload, and from the blatant hosting of pirated content there. But he also led a secret life, did you know? He is the deadliest shooter in all of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Really.

Though Modern Warfare 3 was one of 2011's most pirated games -- despite being available for about 45 days of the year -- Mr Dotcom at least acquired a legitimate version of the game, otherwise he would have been unable to play online and rack up more than 150,000 kills, in gaming sessions stretching six hours on end, as shown in this video dated December 31.

I just checked the Xbox 360 leaderboards and MEGARACER, Dotcom's gamertag, still is in first place overall with 180,980 kills all time, good for a score of 9.05 million. Further, he's still No. 1 on the weekly leaderboard with 29,129 kills, despite being arrested on Thursday in the safe room of his New Zealand mansion. His kill-to-death ratio is 2.1 lifetime and, needless to say, he's level 80.

Of course, this man also made his fortune in a patently dishonest way, so, judge the authenticity of this performance for yourself.

The world's most wanted pirate was also the No. 1 multiplayer player for Modern Warfare 3 [Venturebeat]


Comments

    Why couldnt he play online if he had a modded 360 and burned game?

      Modders can't go online as far as I'm aware. Microsoft's systems are at least that good.

        Yeah, they can play online, not jtagged or RGH but with a flashed xbox you can.

    Good luck to him. I hope he's not going to rely on his KDR to get him out of a long prison sentence.

    "Don't mess with me bru, I've got fesh and cheps, and a KDR bigger than your mum."

      not funny.

        I thought it was.

        As a part-time Kiwi and Aussie I feel safe saying that fush and chup jokes are about as hilarious as some one cracking up every time an Australian says "G'day" or "Throw a shrimp on the barbie" or "CRIKEY!"

        They are slightly better than the "LOL Hobbits and Wizards jokes."

        But not that much better.

          I have a friend who recently came from New Zealand. It's hilarious sometimes.

          Ummm rantoclock, u clearly dont know any aussies, im australian and i have never heard "throw a shrimp on the barbie" bsides the fact we say prawn, the only thing u know about aussies is wat u have seen on the tv, ur a dumbass

            I think that's the point. Also, there's no need to get worked up over it.

              *facepalm*

                ....obviously that facepalm was meant for 'blah', not 'Brendan'....

            Your fellow Aussies wish you weren't though, because clearly you are a moron.

          It's not "shrimp on the Barbie" anyway, no-one barbecues an individual shrimp, you either do a whole mess of the little bastards - or you barbecue a prawn!

          Bahahaha. I didn't mean for this to spiral out of control.

          Still, twas meant in all good fun. Believe it or not, but I know a number of people from New Zealand who I quite frequently talk shit to and who in turn, talk shit back.

          At least I didn't suggest that the dude in question was fornicating sheep.

      ... you do know he is German, right?

    Nice to see the article is suggestive of his guilt, one way or the other. Totally unbiased and awaiting his trial. GG

      oh come on, who the hell isn't fully aware that megaupload was all about pirated content? They claim it's for personal file storage, but they delete your files if they are not downloaded enough in a certain time. They wanted people downloading pirated content. the writing is on the wall.

        While it did look like they were openly accepting pirated content into their business model (stupid move), megaupload were one of the best in terms of links. There would be links floating around that were active for years before they got taken down. I used to use it to share music that I made, because it had the least cluttered interface compared to most of those free file locker websites. It was pretty reliable too. Ah well, time to switch to mediafire.

        I'm sorry that you use it for illegal content only.

        But Megaupload was something i used for legitimate file storage. Not so much any more since i find Dropbox more handy.

        Sure there is pirate content on there. Didn't stop people selling, Blank cassettes, CD's,DVD's,Blu-rays. All of which can be used for piracy.

    Not the point, he has not faced court, they are the ones who will decide on his guilt or innocence.

    It's eerily close to the argument as to whether an ISP is responsible for what it's customers download via their service. This Megaupload thing could be setting a dangerous precedent. Put it alongside SOPA and PIPA (Yes, I'm aware they're 'dead', but for how long) and you should all be very worried.

      Is there not a 'paper trail' showing money being given to uploaders of pirated IP? Was tax paid on anything??

        What is more detrimental? Jailing an alleged thief or ANON crying like babies and denying freedom of speech to others - in defense of this loser

          Neither of these responses seems to relate to my original comment. I remain confused, yet vaguely appreciative of your input.

            Now Im confused. I was saying that megaupload allegedly paid for uploads of IP. Thats why they r naughty. How does this translate to isp IP debate where an ISP gets in trouble for people using there service to download IP from anywhere???

    "Of course, this man also made his fortune in a patently dishonest way" truly some remarkable fucking writing there, Owen. Shame on you. If you want to editorialise on the legality of the business models of Megaupload and it's ilk, then write a piece on it.

    But to use a throwaway line like that in a piece not related to the matter is just juvenile tripe.

      +1, the court decides that, not you Owen.

        +2. Patently - Is that an IP quip?

          +3
          and +4 for the gf next to me

      My point exactly.

      What's hilarious is that you call what Megaupload did a "Business model", and use "legality" in the same sentence.

        What their saying is that it might not have been illegal. Last time I checked, safe harbor provisions meant that webhosts, isp's etc couldn't be held accountable for their users actions. As far as anyone can tell, in this case their is accusation they actually solicited pirated material and were engaged in other criminal acts.

        Daniel, a business model is just that, a model of business. You know, the modus operandi. In this case (roughly, only from a casual users perspective - ie my own), allowing almost unfettered access for uploaders and downloaders to the service, but charging a premium for faster access and longer lasting links or whatever it is that they had set up.

        That is a pretty standard business model as I understand it. All of that is perfectly legal, too.

        So do you care to elucidate your quip?

        Quite frankly your a moron.

        Anything is a business model if a business is following a strategy.

        As for legality, the model is perfectly legal. Provided that the user's use it in a legitmate way.

        They charged money for faster speeds, and i believe they paid out to uploaders of popular content. By doing so you ensure that you are likely to have more content than your rival Direct Download Services, as uploaders benefit from using your site. Hence people are more inclined to pay for membership in order to skip the waiting times and download faster

        ----

        The real issue is that apparently there are emails that detail this plan was put into effect in order to take advantage of the uploading of illegal content. Which is the illegal part

        ---

        When it get's to court the issue will most likely be intent, Did Megaupload seek to profit from abuse of copyright infringement or did they simply do so because part of their customer base was naughty

    As far as I’m concerned, megaupload was a site that allowed people to share content – I’m not sure why everyone on the internet is jumping on this guy making him sound like a villain. Sure, the courts should decide whether or not the site could have better piracy measures and punish him accordingly, but I get the feeling that people are just hating on him because he made some much freakin money out of this business. I don’t see that much difference between him and the guy who made Napster.

      NAPSTER... BAAAADDDD!

      The accusations are that Megaupload paid users and actively encouraged pirated uploads. READ.

    Apparently Owen Good has become Judge, Jury and Executioner. Leave the judgements to those qualified, you have no business as a mere "gaming journalist" to say that the man is not innocent or has done anything wrong.

      He's not Judge Judy and Executioner!

        Your right Owen is not the judge. But he has every right to give his opinion on what appears to be a blatent pirating operation.

        How people can defend criminals is beyond me.

          The only defense I see is the defense of 'the presumption of innocence'.

          Welcome to a free democracy, where everyone is innocent until proven guilty. In fact, you said it yourself "what appears to be a blatent pirating operation". Are you happy for people to go to gaol based on 'what appears'? Is that sufficient for you to pull the trigger?

          That's all we are saying. By all means Owen should have an opinion; it's clear we all do. But I don't think throwing it in this article in such a terse and contrite manner is fair.

            Yep and I bet you believe John Ibrahim only runs legitimate businesses , and his house gets shot up purely because of mistaken identity.

            The presumption of innocence is crap. Megaupload is as guilty as sin , and any laws they are attempting to comply with they will be using loopholes and relying on the semantics of those outdated laws.

            Throw the friggen book at them so that content owners who work hard to produce the content we all love can get paid for their efforts. Then work on making sure those content providers dont unjustly rip the ocnsumers off with crap movies/music/games at extremely high pricing. Meet in the middle , both sides are shonks.

          Sigh.
          http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-VrbMuJmtmhbJmm/hot_fuzz_2007_nick_leaves/

            "John Ibrahim..." - perfect example of a strawman, and I'm sure you are better than that. That surname is tainted beyond repair (similar to the Moran mob), but has nothing to do with this discussion.

            "The presumption of innocence is crap". No it isn't, but that's an argument for another day. The Australian DFAT website has a very concise and neat overview of the principles the legal system is built upon - including this very thing.

            "Megaupload is as guilty as sin , and any laws they are attempting to comply with they will be using loopholes and relying on the semantics of those outdated laws." - Absolutely they will - it's those arguments tha lead to closures of loophols and changing of laws. Don't like some or all of them? Take them to the courts and change them, and you can bet that's what megaupload as well as the RIAA/MPAA/whoever will be doing. That's part of why the courts are there.

            But yes, your overall point is spot on. Every part of every western court is miles behind when it comes to IP law, because by and large the laws they represent are still based on sheep, books and other outdated 'property'. This 'new age' of digital media is so far ahead it may never be caught up with in traditional court proceedings.

            "Megaupload is as guilty as sin" - You haven't proved this. There is a very good and real chance that a percentage of its users used it inappopriately, or illegally (which is another legal argument altogether - ie what percentage of users is enough to constitute taking down a site?), and it sure looks as though Mr Dotcom is being held responsible for enabling those actions (again, another question - is being responsible for enabling enough?). But I can't but feel that Megaupload was picked to be made an example of. Otherwise, why stop at Megaupload? Why not go after hotmail, or gmail and dropbox, and any other site that allows for uninhibted cloud storage?

            This issue is far from over, and from black and white. It's what makes it so interesting!

    I think the biggest problem here is people are forgetting the primary reason this guy got arrested - for allegedly being directly involved in/funded by criminal activity. Not for running a site being used for piracy. I'm sure there will be repercussions for that as well, but it's not the main reason he got in trouble.

      I have no problem with what he was allegedly involved in, I just don't want a 'journalist ' passing judgement. Impartiality would be nice.

        I agree with you wholeheartedly. The article came across as unprofessional, as many Kotaku US articles do. We need to wait and see what happens here before people pass judgement. Notice my use of the word 'allegedly'.

        I was more making the comment for the people that seem caught up on debating the ethics behind Megaupload, and forgetting that Megaupload is not the main reason he was arrested.

          I always forget about the syndicated US content, and when I remember, I can easily tell the difference between local content and US content. The disparity between the quality of the articles in incredible.

          /me hugz AU crew

            Agreed. First giveaway is the size of the article. Second is usually tone. Sarcasm, conjecture, unnecessary profanity, etc. Third, if you haven't recognised a K US article by now, is the spelling mistakes.

            /joins in hugz for AU crew, making it a big 'ol group hug.

    Clearly Kim's ample fingers contribute to extraordinary dexterity with thumbsticks.

    At the end of the day Megaupload was a file sharing service, allowing people to upload their content and share it with the masses. In all seriousness it would be outrageous to expect that they can monitor every bit of content uploaded on their servers.

    As far as I'm aware, they always complied with DMCA takedown requests, and reviewed all content reported which is about as much as anyone can expect of them.

    We can't hate on the guy for making Zillions, at the end of the day he took the risk.

    But if he himself was in possession of copyrighted material, in my opinion, a hefty fine should ensue, but not a jail sentence...

      He was accused of attempting to route money around to make it appear to come from legitimate sources (launder).

      Now, that suggests that the money was from a source that wasn't legal. I'd say he's in for more than just simple piracy.

      From memory though they kinda skirted around the DMCA takedown notice.

      If 5 people uploaded the same file, a MD5/checksum was created to go right these are the same file we'll just keep one copy and have 5 links direct to it.

      Then when a DMCA takedown notice comes in and knocks out link #2, Technically a flag should pop up and any links associated with that file should be killed as well. But i believe they left the other links active. So you had to kill all the links.

      Though even if they killed all the links themselves. Someone else just reuploads the file. And even if they ban any file with the same checksum being reuploaded. It is relatively easy to zip the file in question up with a random text document to produce a unique checksum value

    I remember "Kimble" and his web developer agencies and other companies. He's quite the egotist and it's nice to see those in the wild west of Internet infancy are now having their elitist heads pulled in.

    Of course the number 1 on mw3 is overweight

    He needs to stop worrying about his KD now and more about how much KY he needs.

    The big fellas in jail love a bit of supple virgin hacker kiddy botbot.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now