Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Domain Registry Pulls Plug on Free Speech
An anonymous reader writes "The staff of a Canadian political candidate bragged today that he had managed to shut down a website critical of his involvement in a fundraising scandal, by having the country's registrar of domains pull the DNS records for the site. Criticism from bloggers and free speech advocates has been negative, and is coming from across the political spectrum."
Michael Geist's page (linked in the summary) contains this link to a mirror of the site that caused the furor: http://www.youthforvolpe.no-libs.com/p
Click here for the whole scoop and some mirrors:
.ca registrar after they emailed them demanding which part of the Registrant Agreement that they were in violation of. It turns out that it had nothing to do with anonymous registration:
UPDATE: I just got an email from the kids at youthforvolpe.ca. They received an email from their
From : CADNS.CA
Sent : June 1, 2006 8:41:26 PM
To : "Youthfor Volpe"
CC : archive@cadns.ca
Subject : RE: Domain registration for youthforvolpe.ca
Article 3.1
Paragraph (h) (i) and (ii)
(h) not engage in any direct or indirect activity which in CIRA's opinion is designed to bring, or may bring, the Registry into disrepute, is designed to interfere, or may interfere, with CIRA's operations or designed to expose, or may expose, CIRA to prosecution or to legal action by the Registrant or a third party including, but not limited to, any of the following kinds of activities:
(i) directly or indirectly, defaming or contributing to the defamation of any other Person,
(ii) unlawfully discriminating or contributing to the unlawful discrimination of any other Person; or
(iii) committing any other actionable wrong against any other Person including, without limitation, any other infringement of the Person's rights;
Yep, the reason given was because the registrar believed that the website somehow defamed Joe Volpe and the registrar believed that it might expose CIRA to a lawsuit.
This had nothing to do with a technicality of anonymous registration.
If you are a crooked politician, your critics are like hydra - cut one down and 1,000 spring up in their place.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Agreed, this is completely untrue, the Globe and Mail likes to act like things are newsworthy, when they are not. See what Michael Geist has to say about this.
"store isn't following the fire code"
Except that isn't the case, if you read the next update. The rule cited by the registrar was one where they feared they'd be sued for defamation, and that can't happen where they'd lose because there was no defamation present, just some good ol'e political parody of which is common in Canada.
It's as if the store had a minor code violation that could be fixed, and then a phony trumped up charge was used to close it instead.
Oh You POS
Volpe's acceptance of these contributions was widely mocked and derided. The website cited in this thread was launched, and got a fair bit of coverage online.
Mr. Volpe subsequently decided to return the donations given by these kids. At about the same time, the website above had its DNS record SUSPD for one of many reasons (the Canadian Internet Registration Authority, CIRA cited a different reason in a press release (failure to provide valid Canadian contact information, as required by CIRA rules for a ".ca" domain) than that apparently given to the domain registrant (disrepute).
The interesting questions I find are (1) how influential were Volpe's minions in getting this site quashed, given that he was a member of the former Liberal government and CIRA operates under the authority of the Canadian Governmental department Industry Canada, and (2) what due process rights does any (".ca") domain owner have, given the speed with which this process executed (especially in light of all the legal expertise which is present on CIRA's board of directors, apparently not even bothering to ask for any court order or proper investigation against this site).
The politician used a rule to have the site shut down. How many other sites with incomplete or anonymous registration info did he request to have shut down? None? Just the one critical of him? That sounds like censorship to me...
There are three parts of censorship. Part one is having an agenda of some sort. Part two is becoming empowered by the state to carry out that agenda through censorship. Part three is to find items and have them removed from circulation on the grounds that they violate that agenda.
It doesn't sound like part two or the second half of part three has been carried out here. He was not authorized by a government body to further this agenda. He did it of his own accord. What was taken down was not done so because it violated the agenda, but simply because it violated something else.
Again, the actions are morally reprehensible on the part of this politician, but does not qualify as censorship by the government of Canada.
The ______ Agenda
If he's correct, the site was taken down because of content not registration details. It was CADNS and not CIRA though.