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

Sat Nov 27 14:40:01 CET 2010

I am just wondering, do these domains appear seized to you at this time?
Torrent-finder is working fine here (in Portugal).

BR,
Nuno Garcia

On 27 November 2010 13:25, Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg at epic.org> wrote:

> According to the New York York Times, it was the Dept of
> Homeland Security (the same agency that brought us
> airport body scanners) that seized the BitTorrent site and others.
> This seems odd since it is the US Dept of Justice that would
> typically investigate copyright matters.
>
> Note also that this action took place prior to Senate action
> on COICA.
>
> Marc Rotenberg
> EPIC
>
> -----------------------------
>
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/technology/27torrent.html
>
> U.S. Shuts Down Web Sites in Piracy Crackdown
> By BEN SISARIO
> Published: November 26, 2010
>
> In what appears to be the latest phase of a far-reaching federal
> crackdown on online piracy of music and movies, the Web addresses of
> a number of sites that facilitate illegal file-sharing were seized
> this week by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a division of the
> Department of Homeland Security.
>
> By Friday morning, visiting the addresses of a handful of sites that
> either hosted unauthorized copies of films and music or allowed
> users to search for them elsewhere on the Internet produced a notice
> that said, in part: “This domain name has been seized by ICE —
> Homeland Security Investigations, pursuant to a seizure warrant
> issued by a United States District Court.”
>
>  * * *
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2010, at 1:57 AM, Alex Gakuru wrote:
>
> > Does this mean *all* search engines with links will be shut down
> > anytime, including 'Big G'?
> >
> > On 11/27/10, Alex Gakuru <gakuru at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 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!
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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/fed355ce/attachment-0001.html>