[soup10]

Megaupload is a lot like limewire. They did the bare minimum, like honoring the occasional take down request, but make no real effort to minimize file-sharing of copyrighted content. This is clearly unethical. (unless you don't believe that sharing copyrighted content is unethical, which seems to be a popular opinion these days).

Compare this with how Apple sells iPods. iPods and pirated music go together very well, but Apple makes a real effort to get people to pay for music.

[talmand]

Doing the bare minimum to properly follow rules set by someone else is not unethical. They were doing the bare minimum as outlined by the rules. If that's not enough then the rules need to change.

If I gave you a list of twenty things you can do and I state that you only need to do five of them, are you unethical for only doing five? Now add to that where I pay you money on the first five items but then you pay me money for every item completed after that. Are you unethical for only doing five?

You can say that their efforts at doing the bare minimum were making them money and I would respond that's more the reason to change the rules. A business exists to make money and will follow the rules as best as needed to keep making money. Whether the rules concern civil laws, criminal laws, and tax laws. You can see this throughout the business world, it's not a new concept.

[pilom]

"Ethics are what you do when no one is watching."

[Im_Mr_Manager]

If I were to start a file sharing service (or a file hosting service, which I don't believe MU was) it would be my number one priority to have systems in place to stop the sharing of copyrighted material. You know why? Because that is clearly my number 1 risk. The simple fact is MU built their business on it.

You're exactly right about the popular opinion seeming to be that sharing copyrighted content is ok.