Normal people use what they know how to use. They don't know there's better stuff. Even if they did, you'd have a hard time explaining to them why they should change.
It's ethically not correct if you profit (freeride) from a service which is payed for by black/pirate money. If 'normal' people are thus ignorant to not notice this, I really don't care if they loose their files.
So, if I understand your logic, Fedex, which often ends up transporting illegal drugs in around the US, profits from illegal packages, they should have their entire company shutdown and all packages impounded? I'm sure there is plenty of other example which illustrates what I mean (banks).
You could say that Fedex is unethical for not checking every packages content etc... But should the peoples packages be forfeited to the government just like that?
The argument is that MU willfully knew that there were infringing files on their system yet they didn't take them down properly (simply removing links etc..) Other than that I've never seen anyone suggest that they promoted it actively as a way to share unlicensed copyrighted materials. It could be reasonably assume by a user that the site was a generic way to share any file.
FedEx was created, and is run, with the intent of facilitating completely legal activity. They're not going to examine your packages for legality, but there is an intent and presumption of innocence & legality. That a few people abuse the system for illicit purposes in no way warrants shutting down 99.99% legal activity. It's not like the founders started with "hey, let's make a dope distribution network...wow, we can make some money moving legit content too!".
MegaUpload was created, and is run, with the intent of facilitating known illegal activity. Offshore servers just to avoid jurisdictional issues, public behavior (right down to their license plates) from top-level executives radiating illegal intent, and obvious public knowledge that the main use is outright IP piracy. That a few people use the system for legitimate purposes in no way justifies leaving the system up. It's not like the founders started with "hey, let's make an unlimited-file-size sharing service for businesses...wow, we can make some money moving illegal content too!"
Hezbollah doesn't get a pass just because they provide social services.
It's about proportions. Fedex = mostly legit packages = less reasonable to shut it all down. Megaupload = mostly infringing content = more reasonable to shut it down, especially since the other counts against Kimmy are rather serious white-collar crime charges.
This whole argument is ridiculous, now that I'm typing anyway. The government doesn't have any obligations against the customers of a company that does illegal things. When the IRS impounds all the property of a cake bakery, they have no obligation whatsoever against the couple who have a wedding the next day and now all of a sudden don't have a cake. Megaupload users can ask Megaupload to give them their data back (which they obviously can't), or sue them for damages. 'Sueing the FBI' is tough talking from a bunch of armchair lawyers, but has no relation to the real world in any way.
