I actually have an unpublished draft post on my blog titled &quot;Is Megaupload as guilty as YouTube?&quot;.<p>The idea of the post was to compare and contrast the internal YouTube emails[1] that came out as part of Viacom vs YouTube with the internal Megaupload emails[2] [2.5].<p>The reason why the post remained unpublished is because after reading the relevant indictments and court rulings I found that there were clear distinctions between the cases.<p>Namely it was that YouTube were grappling with how to deal with the situation and not sure where they stood while Megaupload knew exactly where they were and what they were doing - they were actually assisting users in locating pirated content when support was emailed.<p>Google also implemented ContentID to help identity content, while in contrast Megaupload placed a cap on the number of takedown requests a content owner could file and internal emails show Kim Dotcom being angry at employees for taking down copyright content that wasn&#x27;t explicitly cited in an DMCA request. The employees also discussed how they built their filtering system to take down child pornography but not affect copyrighted content.<p>In the latest appeal court decision in Viacom vs YouTube the judge vacated all counts against YouTube and found that the company had no knowledge of specific infringements of copyrighted works. The judge also found that there was no evidence that YouTube induced its users to upload infringing videos, or &quot;interacted with infringing users to a point where it might be said to have participated in their activity.&quot;<p>MegaUpload did exactly that. Reading the MegaUpload indictment[3] and contrasting it to the appeals court decision[4] in Viacom demonstrates the same with every count or claim (being willful, having knowledge, inducing users, etc.)<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fastcompany.com&#x2F;1588353&#x2F;steal-it-and-other-internal-youtube-emails-viacoms-copyright-suit" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fastcompany.com&#x2F;1588353&#x2F;steal-it-and-other-intern...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;torrentfreak.com&#x2F;megaupload-what-made-it-a-rogue-site-worthy-of-destruction-120120&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;torrentfreak.com&#x2F;megaupload-what-made-it-a-rogue-sit...</a><p>[2.5] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theverge.com&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;1&#x2F;9436735&#x2F;megaupload-prosecution-wraps-up-kim-dotcom" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theverge.com&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;1&#x2F;9436735&#x2F;megaupload-prosecu...</a><p>[3] DOJ vs Megaupload: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;wp-srv&#x2F;business&#x2F;documents&#x2F;megaupload_indictment.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;wp-srv&#x2F;business&#x2F;documents&#x2F;mega...</a><p>[4] Viacom vs YouTube district appeals court decision: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.docketalarm.com&#x2F;cases&#x2F;New_York_Southern_District_Court&#x2F;1--07-cv-02103&#x2F;Viacom_International_Inc_et_al_v_Youtube_Inc_et_al&#x2F;452&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.docketalarm.com&#x2F;cases&#x2F;New_York_Southern_District...</a>