ICE grabs more domains

[Claude Almansi]

2011/5/29 Andrew A. Adams <aaa at meiji.ac.jp>:
> Joly MacFie wrote:
>
>> ICE just grabbed some more domains, announced 49 of 125 seized thus far hav=
>> e filed with the courts to get them back.
>>
>>
>> http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1105/110525washingtondc.htm
>>
>> "American business is threatened by those who produce counterfeit trademark=
>> ed goods and pirate copyrighted materials," said ICE Director John Morton. =
>> "From counterfeit pharmaceuticals and electronics to pirated movies, music,=
>>  and software, IP thieves undermine the U.S. economy and jeopardize public =
>> safety. That is why the Operation In Our Sites initiative will continue thr=
>> ough 2011 and beyond. Our efforts through this operation successfully disru=
>> pt the ability of criminals to purvey counterfeit goods and copyrighted mat=
>> erials illegally over the Internet."
>>
>> In June 2010, ICE HSI and the IPR Center began "Operation In Our Sites." Si=
>> nce the launch of this operation, ICE HSI and the IPR Center have seized a =
>> total of 125 domain names and redirected those domain names to a seizure ba=
>> nner. Seventy-six of the 125 domain names seized have now been forfeited to=
>>  the United States government. Through the forfeiture process, individuals =
>> who have an interest in the seized domain names are provided a period of ti=
>> me after the "Notice of Seizure" to file a petition with a federal court an=
>> d additional time after the "Notice of Forfeiture" to contest the forfeitur=
>> e. If no petitions or claims are filed, the domain names become property of=
>>  the U.S. government.
>
> Interesting phrasing there. They call the domain names property and claim
> that its title has passed to the US Government. I thought it was now settled
> law that domain names were not "property" but simply a contractual
> arrangement between the registrant and, via registar and registry, ICANN for
> the root servers and the relevant servers below that to provide routing
> information?
>
> If these names have become property of the US government, are they now held
> in perpetuity by the US government unless it assigns them elsewhere (such as
> to the trademark holder on whose behalf they have seized them)?
>

Moreover, according to
<http://torrent-finder.info/torrent-finder-domain-seizure.php>, the
registrer of the torrent-finder.com domain does not seem to have got
any notice of seizure when ICE seized it last August.


As to "PSA released last month now has nearly 100,000 views" in the
subtitle of ICE's
<http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1105/110525washingtondc.htm> press
released, in <http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en&v=cx8obpx4844>: ICE
did not  only disable comments, but ratings too.

ICE did not caption this PSA either (and they did not even allow YT's
automatic captioning), though the US govt's  "Electronic and
Information Technology Accessibility Standards (Section 508)"
<http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/standards.htm> say:

"...§ 1194.24   Video and multimedia products.
(...)
(c) All training and informational video and multimedia productions
which support the agency’s mission, regardless of format, that contain
speech or other audio information necessary for the comprehension of
the content, shall be open or closed captioned. ..."

So I did in <http://www.universalsubtitles.org/videos/eFWL4Bdp3J09/>,
which also produces a transcript (1):

"(Street noises)
Hawker: Free movies, I got free movies!
Woman: What do you mean?
Hawker: the same movies you see in the theater, I've got them on DVD
and they're free.
Woman: Free?
Hawker: Free - furreee. I'll be honest: they are illegally downloaded,
but they are free.
Man: Yeah, OK I'll take them.
Woman: Can I take two?
Hawker: Sure, you can take two, but there is a catch: if you take
these movies, this nice woman right here loses her job.
Man: I don't know her.
Woman: No, you don't...
Hawker: Yeah: these are illegally downloaded movies. Because of that,
people like her are losing their jobs.
Man: ...making this so literal. I mean is this really
Hawker: Yeah.
Man: Is this the consequence of all this stuff? I'm going to take them.
Hawker: You are? - Man: Yeah. Hawker:  Why? Because you have no soul?
Woman: If I take this, she loses her job?
Hawker: That's right. It's real.
Man: I'm gonna just take three. Just three.
Hawker: You are wrong with everything. What's more important? The
movie, or this human being?
Woman: no, I'm not taking them
Hawker: You see? You're a nice person - She's a nice person, she just
didn't know. And now you know. Look, whether you get it of the street
or of the internet, digital piracy and product counterfeiting are not
victimless crimes. The financial repercussions are huge.
Hawker (on beat music): Show the world that piracy doesn't work. Do it!
(music fades to street noises; written message: PIRACY DOESN'T WORK.
Lean more about how to fight IP theft and submit a tip by visiting
www.ice.gov/ipcenter )"

(there is also a mute victim character who holds something that looks
like a dusting mop to folks who don't work in video - actually a pro
mike with a furry wind protection)

Now, re "illegally downloaded movies", I don't know exactly about
other countries, but in Swiss and Italian laws at least, :
offering/selling/uploading an illegal copy is illegal, but
downloading/buying one  is not illegal, because folks can't be
expected to be able to tell if the copy is legal or not. So "illegally
downloaded movies" does not make legal sense.

Best

Claude

(1) I also reused the captions in <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vofoulQUdU>