Talk:Kim Dotcom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 141.244.74.200 (talk) at 10:28, 21 September 2015 (→‎company value: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Nationality

Re this edit: Residency and nationality are not necessarily the same thing. At the time of the illegal GCSB surveillance, Kim Dotcom had permanent residence in New Zealand, but was not a NZ citizen.[1] The sourcing says that he holds German and Finnish passports.[2]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Residence and nationality are not the same, and are never the same. Mr Dotcom has NZ residency. He will never be an NZ citizen. His nationality remains German/Finnish or whatever it was when he came to NZ.Royalcourtier (talk) 08:47, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is his actual name now?

There are people who claim that he changed his name from "Kim Schmitz" to "Kim Dotcom". However, neither under German nor under Finnish law is it all so easy to completely change one's family name, especially not to something which seems rather nonsensical. So, where is the proof that "Dotcom" is his actual name now? I think that this is rather a pseudonym that he is using. I would be really surprised if the state of Germany and the state of Finland agreed that it's more than just a pseudonym/screen name. 87.178.49.145 (talk) 22:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When he appeared in court in New Zealand, it was under the name Kim Dotcom. The sourcing says that this is his legal name.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finland it would be realitvely easy to change your NAME once. But the proof would be a certificate or a passport. Even courts and banks will allow business and other names for some purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.244.74.200 (talk) 10:25, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Divorce

Dotcom did not announce "on Twitter that he was separated from his wife Mona and was filing for divorce". Divorce (technically dissolution of marriage) cannot be sought until after two years separation. Separation thus precedes divorce by 2 years, and cannot happen simultaneously.Royalcourtier (talk) 08:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 September 2014

To become the third paragraph under the section: New Zealand's decision to grant residency

Documents released under the Official information Act show that the SIS opposed Dotcom's application because he was under investigation by the FBI but "dropped their objection 90 minutes after being told there was political pressure" to let him into the country.[1] As Dotcom's extradition case moved its way through the New Zealand court system, various commentators began to suggest that the National Government may have granted Dotcom residence as a favour to the US Government and to Hollywood moguls so that he could then be extradited for trial in the United States.[2][3]

Inkredibel (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's going to need some wikilinks. It should say who released and why he's saying he released them. "various commentators" is weasealy and needs examples or refs. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this article protected against meaningful edits that may not be quite perfect, as well as vandalism? I thought wikipedia was a collaborative effort that allowed others to improve on your imperfections. Come on give us a fair go mate. I've added two sentences with three references. What more do you want? Inkredibel (talk) 05:47, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two of my three criticisms boil down to WP:NPOV issues, and that's why the article was protected. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:21, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This source is a blog so it is unsuitable, while this is an opinion piece about a conspiracy theory. What is not in question is that Kim Dotcom had residency in New Zealand, but never had citizenship.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:35, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

company value

He valued his own company at 200mill - this is not a neutral source and no reference is given. GIVEN that he previously was found guilty of boasting about large amounts of money both during phreaking AND with an investment scam - he is not reliable.

I also wonder where did he get the money he has. 300 000 is not an easy amount to suddenly have to invest, where did it come from are his parents rich?