In a nutshell, they were sloppy and openly expressed their disregard to copyright holders.
This, however, isn't sound justification for any criminal charges; if they did indeed openly state how they were acting, it would simply prove evidence that they were not acting in good faith, and would lose much of the protection from the "Safe harbor" provisions of the DMCA. This would still not be viable reason to immediately take down the site; as I've seen in the law, this would require that the FBI and Justice Department achieve a ruling in their favor from the courts; this is how civil law works.
In other words, it was the (apparently fabricated) claims of criminal activity (money laundering) that allowed them to get a warrant to attempt to shutter the site themselves; that is how criminal law works. I very much don't like this: given that the Justice Department has effectively no chance of winning the criminal cases, (as I explained in a lengthy section on another article) this poses a huge chance of backfiring, as then the Justice Department is then liable for all the harm brought by the improper actions. This could likely mean that any damages MegaUpload would be liable for through their DMCA violations... Would be made up for by what the Justice Department would owe them.
That'd be just perfect: paying the MPAA and RIAA for all their claims, right out of taxpayer dollars! However indirect this may be, I just don't like the sound of that.
[citation][nom]Johnny Doe[/nom]Can someone explain to me what this accomplishes besides making the government angry and feel like they should impose stricter laws?[/citation]
That is certainly a possibility. Of course, a push by some that more oppressive legislation is required itself could have a backlash... Or the backlash could simply come directly from this. It's an open question at this point, but certainly the point you raise has a lot of merit to consider... To the point that a number of more-active members of anonymous, I saw, took note of this.
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]For those who doubt Anonymous just remember that Anonymous is open to everyone it is not a closed group.[/citation]
That is correct; I personally liken Anonymous to less a "group" as people understand it, and more a "mob." It seems to consist of whoever wishes to decide to take part that particular day. A "mob" also fits its organization, or lack thereof.