U.S. Government Seizes BitTorrent Search Engine Domain and More

[Alex Gakuru]

Why complained earlier on expectations that cash strapped ccTLDs especially
in Africa/developing cannot afford parallel servers, databases and time
costs to enforce third parties IP/copyrights/trademark etc interests. It
somehow 'feels' safer NOT to register a .com now?

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> The latest info that I've seen is that Verisign assigned new DNS servers
> at the Registry level, and then locked the domain so that even the Registrar
> can't update it.  So now it looks like it may have been VeriSign who
> "seized" them.  No word on ICANN's role in this situation, if any.
>
>
>
> On Nov 26, 2010, at 8:29 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>  So was it ICANN that actually did the seizing?
>
> On 11/26/2010 7:25 PM, Michael Haffely wrote:
>
> The concerning part about the report from today is that the domain owner
> never received any complaint or due process before the domains were seized.
> It appears that no Cease and Desist, warrant, suit, or other criminal
> complaint was brought up before the domain was taken.  What if (for an
> example) this behavior is taken up by the Patent and Copyright "trolls".
> What happens to an individual/nonprofit/organization when they have their
> domain yanked out from under them?
>
> If ICANN is to seize domains from their rightful owners by demand of a law
> enforcement agency we need to have a clear, *rapid* appeals process to
> prevent abuse by corporations, law enforcement agencies, and governments.
>
>
> -Mike H.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Andrew A. Adams <aaa at meiji.ac.jp> wrote:
>
>> Very similar moves are happening in the UK, with Nominet (UK non-profit
>> with
>> the .uk (and .gb) country-code delegation) engaging with the UK's SOCA
>> (Serious and Organised Crime Agency *) to remove 1200 "sites engaged in
>> selling counterfeit goods" recently and now doing a more explicit deal
>> with
>> the police to take down the DNS registration for sites "alleged to be
>> involved in criminal activity".
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/25/nominet_crime/
>>
>> (*) The SOCA is a rather dodgy organisation, IMHO. When it was set up the
>> then home secrewtary made a big thing of it not being actually police and
>> therefore not bound by the requirements that the police have to respect
>> the
>> human rights of citizens. THat's a recipe for a secret police operating
>> extra-judicially and here we see exactly that kind of approach.
>>
>> I am very worried by these kinds of moves. Zittrain's "The Future of the
>> Internet" and Mueller's "Networks and States" concerns about censorship
>> becoming the norm not the exception online seem to be coming true. While
>> I'm
>> not in favour of criminals having free reign, the trouble is that all the
>> hard won freedoms such as due process, balance of rights, etc. seem to be
>> being thrown out in the digital domain.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp
>> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
>> Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
>> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>


--
regards,

Alex Gakuru
http://www.mwenyeji.com
Hosting, surprise yourself!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20101127/b44cd71a/attachment-0001.html>