DHS Seized Domains Based On Bad Evidence

An anonymous reader writes "Back over Thanksgiving, the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement unit (ICE) made a lot of news by seizing over 80 domain names. While many of these involved sites that sold counterfeit products, five of the domains involved copyright issues. Four of them involved hiphop-related blogs — including ones that hiphop stars like Kanye West and others used to promote their own works, and the last one was a meta search engine that simply aggregated other search engines. Weeks went by without the owners of those sites even being told why their domains were seized, but the affidavit for the seizure of those five sites has recently come out, and it's full of all sorts of problems. Not only was it put together by a recent college graduate, who claimed that merely linking to news and blog posts about file sharing constituted evidence of copyright infringement, it listed as evidence of infringement songs that labels specifically sent these blogs to promote. Also, what becomes clear is that the MPAA was instrumental in 'guiding' ICE's rookie agent in going after these sites, as that appeared to be the only outside expertise relied on in determining if these sites should be seized."

Comments

Healthcare

[vlm]

Can't wait until the same heros are in charge of my healthcare. Oh wait, they already are...

Re:Healthcare

[Frosty Piss]

Can't wait until the same heros are in charge of my healthcare. Oh wait, they already are...

Homeland Security and ICE are in charge of your healthcare? Really?

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

Heres a bullet...its good for you.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait until there's a law that requires all Internet activity be made after logging into your ISP via some sort of government issued biometric scanner. As they say with driving; it's a privilege, not a right. As for all the problems that would cause? Suck it up cupcake! That's your problem, not theirs.

Re:Healthcare

[Spad]

Why else would the TSA be carrying out all those testicular cancer screenings at airports?

Re:Healthcare

[Monkeedude1212]

AND they're in charge of Capital Punishment (where allowed) and other judiciary jobs... (And now I'm reminded of that German citizen who was arrested in Germany and sent to an Afghanistan prison, merely by having the same name as the actual target of the operation).

Sometimes "Oops" just doesn't cut it.

Perhaps Due Process needs to be revised to include more than what it currently does. And there needs to be a way to enforce it on the people in charge...

Re:Healthcare

[tnk1]

And Health and Human Services is going to be any better?

The poster's point was one that people always seem to ignore. The same people who are disgusted with how one side of the government acts seem to want another part of the government to become more and more a part of our lives. It's as if we were talking about two different governments, Homeland Security and the TSA and Defense, who are evil and malicious, while being incompetent and bureaucratic. Then there is the other government which is there to fix our health care and economy which must be run by benevolent geniuses who would never, ever, be like those nasty, brutish law enforcement/defense types.

Re:Healthcare

[commodore64_love]

"due process" originally meant a judge would review a search or arrest warrant, but the politicians have conveniently written the judges out of the loop. Now they (the cops/feds) can write their own warrants and enter your house or shutdown your website at will.

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

That's rather funny in terms of how it is written. It just isn't true the different agencies do have different personalities. There are huge differences between them. CDC is snobby and elitist but very accurate and open. FBI is technologically incompetent but hires great people. NSA has wicked cool toys but no sense or morality. Bureau of Labor Statistics aims for quality and predictability but is rather scared of congress. CIA is beset with internal infighting.

Re:Healthcare

[jriding]

WAY off topic but.
Actually they are not in charge of health care. It is called regulations. The same kind that they used to have on the banks, before they removed them and it all went to hell. The same kind that used to be on CC and how much they could charge you interest, before they removed that then everyone got to see rates from 20% to 30%.
It is and only will be health insurance regulations. but you just keep on believing that its a take over and its all going to come out bad for you.
Start using your brain and stop living in a world of wordsmiths.

Re:Healthcare

[RightSaidFred99]

They only modded you Offtopic because they don't have a "-1 How Dare You" mod available. Any good SlashDweeb knows the US has worse healthcare than Nigeria, and that we're all literally dying in the streets from hunger due to having to pay for multi-million dollar health insurance. Also, Obama is a supremely effective ex-community organizer/junior senator and anyone who dislikes his policy is actually a raging "tea bagger" and racist.

Re:Healthcare

[Schemat1c]

Can't wait until the same heros are in charge of my healthcare. Oh wait, they already are...

Damn, these teabaggers are worse than roaches, just can't seem to get rid of them...

Re:Healthcare

[Jeremy Erwin]

If you're arrested by the ICE, then yes, they will be in charge of your healthcare. My guess is that's comparable to veterinary services on factory farms.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't get through to them. Even better are the "pro-lifers" who want government out of health care.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

The "they" that removed credit card interest rate limits was the supreme court.

Re:Healthcare

[camperslo]

Or prostate cancer screenings...

Re:Healthcare

[migla]

Are you saying that because some part of government is figuratively speaking stomping its boot on your chest, an other part, with different people, tasked with tending to your wounds, shouldn't even exist?

Even if that has merit, getting rid of the fascist bullies first would make sense to me.

Re:Healthcare

[Daniel Dvorkin]

The US government is a very large organization. It does a lot of different things. Some things it does well, other things it does badly. Some of the people who work for it do their jobs well, others do their jobs badly. Some types of people take some kinds of jobs, others take other types of jobs. There is no one "the government" doing everything the same way. Welcome to the real world.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

It just isn't true. The different agencies do have different personalities.

"Let's eat grandma!"

"Let's eat, grandma!"

Punctuation saves lives.

Re:Healthcare

[Dishevel]

Yeah. The CDC has no political spin in their statements about evil, nasty, gonna destroy the world, flus that are almost as deadly as the normal one.
Let me say this just one time. Listen well and learn. Hang onto this knowledge and think of it every time you hear anything about the government.

The Government is here to get more power. More power from the Evil Corporations that prey on the poor and from the Evil unions that run up the cost of everything, from the people who can't choose what their children should be watching on TV and from evil wall street bastards making money off the our suffering. They are here to gain power. Gain Control. They take freedom piece by piece. Always for a good cause. Think of the Children, Poor, Workers, Middle Class, Third World Countries, Environment, Minorities, Women, Gays, Nerds, Mentaly Ill, whatever. They take freedom. When was the last time you saw a law passed that increased your freedom. NEVER. Will not happen. The Democrats are not your friends the Republicans are not either. Neither the liberals nor the conservatives give one fuck about you and your problems. Only about what they can point to in order for your dumb ass to give up more of your freedoms.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

> Yeah. The CDC has no political spin in their statements about evil, nasty, gonna destroy the world, flus that are almost as deadly as the normal one.

The word "pandemic" has a precise scientific meaning that appears to have been lost on you.

The flu (yes, that flu), has been known to kill lots of people on occasion. We're lucky that the mortality rate of the last few has been low, because it wasn't always that way. Worse, it was known to kill young & healthy people, it just didn't kill very many of them.

There were good, scientific reasons to be alarmed and to get people vaccinated and such, but I don't remember widespread panic. But maybe you watch more hysterical news services than I do.

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

-- When was the last time you saw a law passed that increased your freedom.

Most of the free trade regulation increased my freedom. The banking deregulation increased my freedom. The common carrier laws increase my freedom.

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

In 1918 we had a flu go through the world. About a 1/5th of the world's population caught it and 50 million people died in a matter of months. In the USA it cut 12 years off the life expectancy that year, and 1/4 of the population got it.

That's what a flu can do that gets out of hand.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

I never understand that, people talk about the U.S. government as if it is this monolithic entity of pure intent and clear direction.

That isn't the government, it is not some implacable entity. It is a collection of various agencies and persons doing a variety of tasks for various reasons. By saying the government is evil, you include the department of Transportation (hint: maintaining the roads and signage), the post office, the FDA, FAA, CDC, and so on. Tell me how each is evil and/or powerhungry, please.

Quit with the knee-jerk reactions and learn about what you're defaming.

Re:Healthcare

[MyFirstNameIsPaul]

What 'free trade' regulations? Free trade requires only one sentence: "We will not use import tariffs or subsidies," and that's it. When was that law passed? When was the banking deregulation - the 90s? Common carrier laws, the 80s? So 2 laws, or sets of laws, in the last 20 years increased freedom.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

Masks in Asia were used heavily in U.S. media during one of the recent go rounds. These stories were accompanied by all the usual bullshit: mask shortages, mask effectiveness concerns, word from the street how-it-feels-to-have-to-wear-a-mask-to-survive interviews. This was then turned to innovative businesses capitalizing on masks, designer masks, institutionalized uptake of preventative measures (schools).

It is easy to conflate the actions of the CDC with the perception formed through exposure to mass media about the details of implementations. It becomes harder to separate the issues when entire industries find their interest in capitalizing on info coming out of the CDC the same as inside commodities traders.

We are several cycles deep in this right now and it is only getting worse. At this point we need better distributed metrics that trigger pandemic responses. The idea that disaster response to mutant strains of flu can be charted based on past characteristics is deeply flawed. The pandemic switch needs to be controlled by what is verifiable by metric observation, and it must be accepted that the 'first response' to a true pandemic will follow the first demonstration of a strain's qualifying attributes - ie: casualties.

A stateful communication system basically that doesn't transit in rumors of precrime. Precrime ideology in public health will destroy a society.

At least this is what I usually hear tossed around by anti-CDC people that haven't already gone over to the "TeH r tryn 2 k1llz meh!,' faction.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm fairly certain I don't have to go to see my Member of Parliament for a prescription. You tighten that foil helmet though, and remember to stock up on ammo.

Re:Healthcare

[dgatwood]

And even if it were true, there are ways for the government to provide universal health care that do not involve the government controlling that care. For example, the government provided power for millions in the Tennessee Valley, but does not run TVA. They just paid the bill for getting the organization started. There's nothing preventing the government from similarly creating a nonprofit corporation for health care and leaving management in the hands of their board.

Re:Healthcare

[ravenshrike]

The law allowing gun carry in national parks.

Re:Healthcare

[camperslo]

The "they" that removed credit card interest rate limits was the supreme court.

Not exactly. What they did in 1978 was to make it permissible for the laws of the state where the lender was chartered to apply instead of those of the state the customer resides in.

Where they are:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/more/map.html

General info:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/eight/

Beware of credit of the last resort
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Card_(The_New_Twilight_Zone)

Re:Healthcare

[notbob]

Yeah because if they hadn't taken away the rights in the first place we wouldn't have needed new laws!

Constitution gave you the right to carry long before any of that bs, just ignorant politicians forgot to read it.

Re:Healthcare

[AfroTrance]

But generalising is so much easier!

Re:Healthcare

[slick7]

The MPAA has no business dictating state policy. When your right to vote has no meaning, look to the MPAA to lookout for your interests.

Re:Healthcare

[Scrameustache]

Sometimes "Oops" just doesn't cut it.

You just have to resort to "9-11".
Or "think of the children", whichever seems more appropriate.

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

Free trade requires only one sentence: "We will not use import tariffs or subsidies," and that's it.

No it doesn't. There are hundreds of mechanisms having to deal with bills of lading, inspection, taxation. Who is going to contacting whom. How duties will be collected.

And I wasn't asked for a complete list. I could throw in airline deregulation. Especially prior to 2001 airlines had become much freer over the previous 25 years.

Re:Healthcare

[mysidia]

The private sector is not much better, we have RI** and the MP** who both share the worst characteristics of three of those federal agencies, and have their own negative characteristics such as greed to add to the equation.

Re:Healthcare

[tnk1]

I wonder if it is just a different as you would imagine it to be. Certainly, other departments will have different cultures, and some of those may well be much more amenable to benevolence and competence, but simply by being in "the government" they can and do share certain characteristics with every other department.

Let's take the most obvious item: politics. No group in the government can avoid it, even if they are supposed to be "independent" in principle. It's not inconceivable that a reasonable health care system could come out of the political system, but it will remain a political football evermore. Its budget will depend on the government's budget. The pro-lifers and the pro-choicers will each have their own agendas. There will be some sort of call for some sort of restriction that will create enormous bureaucracy. Then some reformer will decry the enormous bureaucracy, and slash the budget, or worse, because it will likely be untouchable in the budget, will do something like create absurd new "efficiency" regulations that destroy the quality of the system without removing it.

If they somehow do manage to make it an independent entity in more than just name, everyone is just going to assume the government will bail it out if it looks like it will fail.

And in the end, isn't that the point? People don't seem to care about getting the *best* of anything from the government. They just want it guaranteed to them so they feel better about it. Only after they allow it to come into existence do people seem to realize that its not particularly well run or that it has fatal flaws. In that way, its basically just like the army or TSA. Everyone demands that we have it, but once we do, we wonder how it is possible that it could possibly be used or run in such a manner as to produce the undesired effects that they see in the news.

And of course, one way or the other, no matter how bad the program gets, no matter how bloated or in need of reform, it will never, ever go away, or even be allowed to change by the iron triangles formed by the constituencies that come to rely on it. Just like the military and security budgets.

So yeah, maybe there is some generalization in the "one size fits all argument", but there is a lot to be said for it. Government health care may be the best way to go, but you would think with everyone seeing climate change becoming a political football, and the issues with the management of the war, there would be a bit more consideration of how the government units are similar just as much as they are different.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, these teabaggers are worse than roaches, just can't seem to get rid of them...

Stop getting drunk and inviting gay dudes over to your place before you pass out.

Viola! You're no longer being teabagged.

Re:Healthcare

[blind monkey 3]

But generalising is so much easier!
corporatising is easier still and much more profitable.... for some.

Re:Healthcare

[sumdumass]

The interesting thing is that we shouldn't need laws to increase freedoms.

Under the original US system, freedom was something you were born with and it could only be taken or given away.

It's sad when a rhetorical statement concerning laws granting freedoms to already free people garners such debate on how much freedom was given.

Re:Healthcare

[localman]

So you're saying that if I can find a corporation that has abused power and done evil, then all corporations must be equally abusing power and doing evil? Or if I can find one criminal in the US then we're all similarly criminals? What you're saying doesn't make sense even on a basic logical level, before even looking at the real world examples which would further take the wind out of this line of thinking.

Please let's stop oversimplifying with "it's all bad". It's not. There may be some bad in nearly everything, but it's worth recognizing and fighting those parts while promoting and nurturing the good in those same entities -- be they people or organizations.

Cheers.

Re:Healthcare

[Culture20]

NSA has wicked cool toys but no sense or morality.

Um, what? NSA isn't some group of assassins.

Re:Healthcare

[JockTroll]

You said it like it were a Bad Thing.

Re:Healthcare

[Culture20]

By saying the government is evil, you include the department of Transportation (hint: maintaining the roads and signage), the post office, the FDA, FAA, CDC, and so on. Tell me how each is evil and/or powerhungry, please.

DoT: Did you know they don't consider every human life invaluable? It's true! They have actuaries that tell them how much to spend on road safety, and how many lives lost is "good enough"
Post Office: Only one organization drives its employees violently/suicidaly insane more than the military. Strangely, "Going Army Vet" isn't the term for shooting up the workplace.
FDA: Really? You don't know this one?
FAA: More incompetent than evil. If they were doing their jobs, TSA wouldn't exist.
CDC: They put HIV in your slim jims (cross departmental work with FDA).
and so on: All of the other agencies do the same as the CDC, but with your mountain dew.

Re:Healthcare

[MyFirstNameIsPaul]

Okay, 3 laws. If there are no tariffs, then there is no concern for how they are collected. Port fees are private already and inspections rarely occur even today. Payment terms are defined by INCOTERMS, a private agreement, and have been around for hundreds, if not thousands of years. I maintain that my one sentence is all that is necessary for free trade.

Re:Healthcare

[ContentCharacter]

So THAT's how they're going to fix Social Security... it was just a life expectancy problem.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

In spite of all of the bullshit, the NSA has a stronger corporate sense of morality than any other part of the federal government I've worked against. However, that doesn't sell newspapers, so it's intentionally ignored. I suggest reading more about the history of the NSA.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

For someone who has drunk a lot of kool-aid you sure seem to be suspicious of Slim Jims and Mountain Dew.

Re:Healthcare

[Aryden]

You should probably read up on warrants, their use and how they are obtained. The only warrants in the United States that do not require a magistrate (judge) to approve are arrest warrants that *can be* granted by congress via a house motion when proved that a federal crime was committed and that the person(s) named in the warrant committed the crime. Said warrants still require sword affidavits and show probable cause. Even the patriot act required warrants to be issued by a judge or house motion.

The only time warrants are not required (re: search warrants) are when:

• consent for search is given by the person in control of the property
• evidence of a crime is "in plain view"
• after arrest, the accused's vehicle and person may be searched if said accused was occupying a vehicle at the time of arrest

and that's pretty much it. Most states have pretty strict laws regarding lack of consent not validating probable cause as well.

Re:Healthcare

[oreaq]

The RIAA and MPAA wouldn't exist without the government stealing money end equipment on behalf of them.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

Why else would the TSA be carrying out all those testicular cancer screenings at airports?

They goddamned should screen. After all, my testicular cancer only started after I chose to use their X-ray groper on my last flight.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

The law allowing gun carry in national parks.

They owed us that one. The first things to be cut from the budget, after healthcare, are libraries and parks. Now that they've fired nearly all the rangers, who the hell is supposed to protect me when I'm camping in a county, state or national park.

OTOH, they've also thereby made the parks safe for growing pot, so it may be a wash.

Re:Healthcare

[wish bot]

Mate, why don't you just visit a country that has a functioning public health system. It shouldn't be hard, as pretty much every other 1st and 2nd world country has one.

Corporate America has been ripping off your health system for so long that you don't want it any other way. It's like a damn abusive relationship scenario or something.

Re:Healthcare

[Chrisq]

Can't wait until the same heros are in charge of my healthcare. Oh wait, they already are...

Homeland Security and ICE are in charge of your healthcare? Really?

Yes its nice that they let him post on Slashdot from gitmo.

Re:Healthcare

[salesgeek]

Don't worry, the IRS is in charge so everything will work out just fine.

Re:Healthcare

[Thing 1]

My girlfriend at the time had an even shorter version of NAFTA: "Go!"

Re:Healthcare

[Bartles]

Or if you want to fly on an airplane.

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

Insightful; good catch. He said the opposite of what he intended to say. "It just isn't true the different agencies do have different personalities." What he said was that it isn't true that the different agencies have different personalities, when he meant that the post he was referring to wasn't true, but instead different agencies have different personalities.

Illiterate or aliterate? Or maybe he just needed more coffee? The written word is far more precise than the spoken word. There's a radio ad for a sex toy shop here in Springfield, with the jingle going "Priscilla's, where fun and fantasy meet". Or are they saying "we're fun and fantasy meat"?

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

Evil unions that run up the cost of everything

I take offense at that flamebait. You'd rather have cheap shit produced by workers who work 12 hour shifts in sweatshops for minimum wage with no overtime pay, no vacations, no sick time, no holidays than pay the true cost of your goods? Workers who hate their jobs and take no pride in their work making that cheap shit? Because that's what you had before unions. Do you like having weekends off? Thank the union movement.

If you are anti-union, you are keeping poor people poor, and IMO you're either evil or stupid. Or perhaps brainwashed by Fox and the other corporate media.

It saddens me that people swallow this garbage.

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

Bullshit. The free trad laws increased the corporations' freedom, at the expense of MY freedom. Banking deregulation increased bankers' freedom at the cost of my freedom (and my cash).

I will agree with you on common carrier laws.

Re:Healthcare

[Dishevel]

You are a little bit of an idiot. One that can also see nothing wrong with unions. I threw out all kinds of misconceptions there. Corporations, Unions, Heath Care, the poor, wall street. All you saw was unions and went off on some little girl tizzy trying school me on the true value of "Union Workers". Fuck you.

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

DoT: Did you know they don't consider every human life invaluable? It's true! They have actuaries that tell them how much to spend on road safety, and how many lives lost is "good enough"

They have to keep within their budget. Congress shoulc give them more money, and the TSA and DHS none at all; there shouldn't be any such thing as a TSA or a DHS. Transportation safety should be up to the FAA and DoT, homeland security should be the domain of the military and intelligence agencies.

Post Office: Only one organization drives its employees violently/suicidaly insane more than the military.

I have a close friend who's worked for the PO for thirty years. They piss him off, yes, but I'll bet your employer pisses you off as well. "Going postal" came from ONE highly publicized incident.

FDA: Really? You don't know this one?

They're the ones who try to keep your food from being poisoned, and your drugs pure and effective. Are you ignorant, or just trolling?

FAA: More incompetent than evil. If they were doing their jobs, TSA wouldn't exist.

The FAA's competence or lack thereof has nothing to do with the TSA's existance. It was the FBI that fell down on the job, not the FAA.

CDC: They put HIV in your slim jims (cross departmental work with FDA).

Ok, you answered my question. Get back under your bridge.

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

OK I want to bring a ship full of containers into a US port and offload them.

1) What do I need to know about them?
2) How do I verify that the people who pick them up are the rightful owners
3) What kinds of insurance do I need if something goes wrong?
4) Are there weight maximums to avoid damaging US equipment
5) Do the contains need to meet environmental standards

Things you don't think about often seem simple.

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

-- The free trad laws increased the corporations' freedom, at the expense of MY freedom

How? Lets take an area that is still restricted tobacco. How are you more free under current tobacco laws than if tobacco could be imported like a shirt?

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

No they aren't. They just follow policy without being concerned about effects or legality. Assassins by the nature of their work get to know the people and cultures we are attacking. They make moral judgements.

Apocalypse Now is about the moral struggles of an assassin.

How many people had I already killed? There were those six that I knew about for sure. Close enough to blow their last breath in my face. But this time, it was an American and an officer. That wasn't supposed to make any difference to me, but it did. Shit... charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500. I took the mission. What the hell else was I gonna do?

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

I don't know if you are reading so can you provide examples, evidence, links...?

Re:Healthcare

[MikeBabcock]

I've often wondered why wrongful state convictions don't result in penalties to the prosecution. If you value freedom, you must penalize those who would illegally take it away.

Re:Healthcare

[sac13]

Actually they are not in charge of health care. It is called regulations.

So telling people how something must be done is different than being in charge? Interesting...

The same kind that they used to have on the banks, before they removed them and it all went to hell.

They never removed the regulations from banks. They might have changed them, but the government was still in charge... and, since they insist on being involved, they're also responsible. The insinuation that what happened is due to the free market is blatantly false. The banks haven't operated in a free market for over a century.

The FED had all the power and resources it needed to stop the Great Depression from even starting by propping up the Bank of the United States. But, it didn't and the bank failed triggering the run on banks that crashed the entire system. The government had the power to stop it, but didn't. Instead, the free market was made the scapegoat, and the government pushed for even more power to "prevent" another crisis from ever happening.

Government "regulation" has a major history of failing, followed by spin blaming the free market even though the markets being addressed are never unregulated to begin with, and then the government argues for more power even though it's proven it can't use it particularly well. And, people take the bait, believing that "regulation" will save them... even when the regulations were already in place, but the government was too inept to actually use them properly.

Of course, that doesn't stop the knee jerkers from claiming that "deregulation" caused problems and regulations will save us all...

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

There will be some sort of call for some sort of restriction that will create enormous bureaucracy.

It can't be any worse than insurance companies' bureaucracies, which are completely unchecked by ANYONE. I have no choice in health care; I have to use the insurance company my employer provides. Insurance is the #1 reason US health care is the world's most expensive.

Every other industrialized nation has government-run health care, and by every metric there is ours is piss-poor.

In that way, its basically just like the army or TSA. Everyone demands that we have it

Bullshit, I don't. TSA is completely unnecessary.

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

I threw out all kinds of misconceptions there. Corporations, Unions, Heath Care, the poor, wall street.

I zeroed in on one thing, the rest I was unconcerned with, morron. Get back under your bridge, boy, your anti-union trolls are tiresome.

And fuck you too, idiot, and the horse you rode in on.

Re:Healthcare

[Culture20]

Ok, you answered my question. Get back under your bridge.

The difference between a joke and a troll is the interpretation of the reader.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

As they say with driving; it's a privilege, not a right.

And that argument should be stuffed back down their throats on the end of a huge dick. Driving has come to be a necessity instead of a right for most people. Hence it should be a right, one which it is hard to take away, like voting.

They keep shouting it's a privilege just because it makes it easier to take it away. Just like the buttfucking company commander I had in boot camp -- he used to give us smoking "privileges" in the morning, just so he'd have something to take away before evening.

As it is, the "driving privilege" has become an ungreased dildo, to be applied wherever extra punishment is desired.

Someone gets behind on child care payments? Sure pull his license to make sure he can't get a job that pays well enough to pay the money due.

Teenager below eighteen starts pulling Cs? Fine, yank his license, just as if it has any provable effect on his studies. Great, now he has another hour or two a day to resent your unjust ass, instead of studying.

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

Well, give me a "woosh" then. Your parody was too close to what some people actually believe.

Re:Healthcare

[MyFirstNameIsPaul]

1) Whatever you require to know about them.
2) Whatever method you desire, but those most concerned usually employ a bank by using a letter of credit
3) Only the types of insurance you desire to purchase
4) The only weight maximums in the U.S. are defined by maximum axle weights on bridges or limits set by rail companies. These are domestic issues that your customer will inform you of the requirements (these are not trade issues, per se)
5) Environmental standards are domestic regulations and your customer should inform you of the requirements (also not trade issues)

I think about them most every day, but that's because I own an importing and international sales and marketing company.

Re:Healthcare

[mcgrew]

PS - it looks like I'm not the only one deserving of a "woosh", look at the comment's moderation. Unless your karma's excellent and you know you're funny, humor can be dangerous here.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

Not exactly. What they did in 1978 was to make it permissible for the laws of the state where the lender was chartered to apply instead of those of the state the customer resides in.

IIRC, despite the statement in your first reference, it was the state where their billing office was located. Hence the immediate moves of those offices to whichever of the Dakotas had the highest current cap.

Re:Healthcare

[jbolden]

No way do I want that system. What's to stop someone from being in all sorts of illegal merchandise, Counterfeit products, drugs, illegal pesticides.

Re:Healthcare

[MichaelKristopeit318]

you really believe he believes they are already in charge?

"until" implies they are NOT YET in charge..

you're an idiot.

cower some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:Healthcare

[MyFirstNameIsPaul]

Nothing, just like the system that we have today, and have always had.

Re:Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

The FAA can be argued as valuable because of Airworthiness directives if nothing else.

What they are trying to do

[Anonymous Coward]

Their job is to protect us. Let's not make it anymore difficult.

Re:What they are trying to do

[Anonymous Coward]

A recent graduate relies on a self-serving entity for decisions instead of experienced leadership. Sounds to me as if someone with a degree and no common sense called the shots. This is NOT someone I would ever want to protect me. They may have a difficult job, but they also authorized this mess. You can't order the split-pea soup and expect to receive the 24 ounce Porterhouse.

Re:What they are trying to do

[Anonymous Coward]

We are making their jobs difficult by insisting that they don't harm the innocent while trying to gather evidence against the guilty?

I'd say we are keeping them accountable.

Re:What they are trying to do

[MonsterTrimble]

Their job is to protect us. Let's not make it anymore difficult.

What the hell is the ICE protecting me from? Bootleg copies of Kanye West?

Re:What they are trying to do

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you listened to that stuff? You should be grateful.

Re:What they are trying to do

[MonsterTrimble]

Well played Sir. Well Played.

Re:What they are trying to do

[Shikaku]

Obligatory outlink which is funny but relates to the topic at hand:

http://bash.org/?329292

Re:What they are trying to do

[sjames]

I wonder if ICE likes fish sticks?

Re:What they are trying to do

[frank_adrian314159]

Bootleg copies of Kanye West?

Yeah. I know they should protect us from all copies, but the bootleg imports were all they had jurisdiction over.

Consequence for being an idiot?

[craftycoder]

Promotion!

Rookie agent?

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone have hired him and someone authorized the seizure.

Cops lie

[Anonymous Coward]

Cops lie. News AT 11. Cry me a river.

Re:Cops lie

[nstlgc]

Are you somehow looking to imply that we should start to ignore this?

Re:Cops lie

[Abstrackt]

Cops lie. News AT 11. Cry me a river.

That kind of attitude doesn't do us any good. If someone I'm supposed to trust with my well-being is no longer looking out for my well-being I expect them to be reprimanded, not excused by cynical defeatism.

Expose the graduate

[Khyber]

I want to know the identity of this rookie college moron.

I also want to know which college trained him, so I can make sure to tell everybody to avoid that garbage establishment.

Next, since this was based upon false evidence, I want to see him, and those responsible for handling him, sued into oblivion.

This shit is getting to a breaking point.

Re:Expose the graduate

[Anonymous Coward]

you're so cute with your quaint ideas about accountability and responsibility.
those are only for little people, not government.

Re:Expose the graduate

[ArsenneLupin]

I want to know the identity of this rookie college moron.

I also want to know which college trained him, so I can make sure to tell everybody to avoid that garbage establishment.

Next, since this was based upon false evidence, I want to see him, and those responsible for handling him, sued into oblivion.

... and I want to see a photo of this rookie.

This shit is getting to a breaking point.

No, please have an enema before seeing me, I don't like my banana brown.

Re:Expose the graduate

[TheRaven64]

Your anger is directed in the wrong direction. You should be looking at the judge who signed the court order. The various police forces are expected to make mistakes on occasion, that's why they have to go to a judge to get a court order before this kind of action. The judge failed to do his job, and so should be disbarred and possibly subject to other penalties.

Re:Expose the graduate

[jbolden]

There definitely should be an investigation.

Re:Expose the graduate

[Anonymous Coward]

give him a break!
just like parking inspectors, I'm sure they have a quota of seized domains per month.
it's probably also directly linked to his raise and bonus.

Re:Expose the graduate

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, he may be an English major.

[ducking]

Re:Expose the graduate

[debrain]

The judge failed to do his job, and so should be disbarred and possibly subject to other penalties.

Some trivia:

A Judge is "removed". A lawyer is "disbarred".

Judge is to job as lawyer is to status (relationship: "has a").

Re:Expose the graduate

[Nerdfest]

Aren't there criminal charges for providing false evidence?

Re:Expose the graduate

[Anonymous Coward]

This sounds a lot like "I want to know the identity of these rookies who carried out Kristallnacht. I want to see them sued into oblivion. This shit is getting to the breaking point." You are so naive, child.

Re:Expose the graduate

[mysidia]

I want to know the identity of this rookie college moron.

Sorry, as a fed law enforcement officer, he has special privacy protections, against having identity info published. You do understand... there are too many risks, related to what criminals could do if they got ahold of police officers' private real-life identity details.

I also want to know which college trained him, so I can make sure to tell everybody to avoid that garbage establishment.

Slander against his college?

Next, since this was based upon false evidence, I want to see him, and those responsible for handling him, sued into oblivion.

He is not personally liable for such errors he makes on the job, due to limited liability. Government officers can't be sued personally for decisions they make in their government capacity; there are only very limited circumstances in which he would actually be personally subject to suit under the current system.

This shit is getting to a breaking point.

I agree. However, it's not his fault; its the fault of bureaucrats, his superiors, and others who allowed the system to exist in its current form, where one newbie could so easily be allowed to innocently cause such a huge breach of the public trust..

Re:Expose the graduate

[Anonymous Coward]

Aren't there criminal charges for providing false evidence?

That only applies to poor people, not cops, lawyers, judges, politicians, or corporations.

Re:Expose the graduate

[Scrameustache]

The various police forces are expected to make mistakes on occasion

Letting the guy making the complaint define for you what is the law is more than a mistake, it's a philosophical aberration.

Re:Expose the graduate

[dbIII]

He or she will be as unaccountable as the idiot that decided to punish an airline and everyone who had the misfortune of being on the same flight as Cat Stevens by redirecting their flight for "security reasons". They are unaccountable spooks that can even decide to have a policy of groping people without having to ask the government if they can break laws that apply everywhere apart from airports. Government is damned if they attempt to control them and damned if they don't, so they just hope not much gets in the press about what the spooks do.

Re:Expose the graduate

[Stargoat]

I'm just wondering when DHS actually cared about evidence. I've never seen anything from that unpatriotic anti-American organization that would make me think it even approaches Constitutional (or moral).

Re:Expose the graduate

[Anonymous Coward]

Im sure it was signed in Texas, just make it their own country already, with the stupid laws and law suites for all technological mayhem stemming from this twisted state with an overall lack of legal knowledge of the technical world, its no wonder it all goes there. I have an Idea if all the states in the "United States" stood United and we had the same laws as a state next door maybe we would be a more efficient country?? Just a thought

Re:Expose the graduate

[Khyber]

"You do understand... there are too many risks, related to what criminals could do if they got ahold of police officers' private real-life identity details."

I understand the right to face my goddamned accuser(s) and that includes people looking at evidence and saying "This is illegal." Do you NOT understand that? Your protections are BULLSHIT. You are putting people's life and livelihood on the line, you better put your fucking name and face to the WHOLE THING.

"Slander against his college?"

*ANY* respectable college would have sussed the integrity of this person, found it to be lacking, and immediately have rejected him. This is a *HUGE* failing on that establishment's part and I'd be DAMNED to allow anybody to risk their money by attending such a crap establishment of education. It's not slander when it's EASILY PROVABLE.

"He is not personally liable for such errors he makes on the job, due to limited liability. Government officers can't be sued personally for decisions they make in their government capacity; there are only very limited circumstances in which he would actually be personally subject to suit under the current system. "

Falsification of evidence. Try again.

"However, it's not his fault"

Not, it's entirely his fault for not having the integrity to do some real research instead of relying upon some 'handlers.'

I can tell you're a Fed, your knowledge is absolutely lacking, as well as the common sense.

Re:Expose the graduate

[Lawrence_Bird]

The larger issue is why was DHS involved instead of the local sherrif? If I have a business dispute and am allowed by the court to sieze property in a warehouse I get the local sherrif to enforce the order and pay him his fee. Once again corporatism at the federal level results in misuse of government enforcement powers.

Re:Expose the graduate

[mysidia]

I understand the right to face my goddamned accuser(s) and that includes people looking at evidence and saying "This is illegal."

As an employee fed, non-elected official, the public has no 'right to see his face'. Which in fact can compromise undercover work agents sometimes perform and put their lives at risk.

If you are charged with a crime, and you go to trial, then you have a right to face your accusers in court. There is no right of an accused to personally face their accuser outside the courtroom; even attempting to do so anyways might be a criminal act, in some cases.

Also, the identity of witnesses may be concealed or masked from the accused in some rare cases, at the discretion of the court.

*ANY* respectable college would have sussed the integrity of this person, found it to be lacking, and immediately have rejected him.

That is rather presumptuous. There is perhaps just about as much evidence that the integrity of this person in college was lacking as he had to would have judge the activities illegal.

Falsification of evidence. Try again.

Reliance on inaccurate information, misinformation, and misunderstanding is not falsification of evidence.

Not, it's entirely his fault for not having the integrity to do some real research instead of relying upon some 'handlers.'

The fault still lies with his superiors for granting him discretion he was not qualified to have. The supervisor owns the results of what their charges do, and I would say the supervisor should perhaps be fired.

Re:Expose the graduate

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely, the judge really fucked the dog on this one.

Chances are the RIAA/MPAA has the bastard on a payroll. You know the saying: "Follow the money."

Re:Expose the graduate

[stuckinphp]

brb making popcorn..

Re:Expose the graduate

[martin0641]

The question is, do you feel that we have a sufficient amount of judges who are qualified to understand and rule intelligently on technical matters? They study legal precedence, and most issues they cover have been the same for thousands of year, including theft, murder, and those types of law. Technical matters on the other hand, are vastly more complicated - and judges by and large are not qualified to rule over them. I believe we need judges certified to preside over technical cases, because a 70 year old man who can't even use Google should not be vested with the power and authority to rule over things he does not understand. He can also not trust the law enforcement agencies to steer him in the right direction, because they are also clueless. He should not be able to turn of MY access because someone else made a baseless claim and he is unable to understand why it is baseless. I feel similarly about politicians making legislation that covers the Internet. They are the blind leading the keenly aware, and they are so uninformed that they can't even imagine the scope of their ignorance on these issues.

Larger Scale Than One Agent

[eldavojohn]

From the NYTimes article:

The agent also said the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America, the trade groups for the major film studios and record labels, had confirmed that the music and movies on the sites had not been released with the authorization of their copyright holders.

Yeah, after some poking around I found PROTECTING U.S. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OVERSEAS: THE JOINT STRATEGIC PLAN AND BEYOND presented to a House of Representatives committee. In it they talk about the sting and the lengthy history of their actions:

We worked with many different agencies - including CBP, DOJ’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) and the Government of Mexico’s Treasury and Customs – and industry, including the Recording Industry Association of American (RIAA), to target importers and distributors of counterfeit goods. This operation was specifically timed to coincide with U.S. and Mexican consumers’ increased purchasing during the winter holiday season.

Then later:

Representatives from the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and RIAA assisted participating customs authorities with focused training, targeting and analyses of certain interdicted parcels. This operation was specifically timed by the IPR Center to coincide with the movie industry’s summer releases, when the biggest blockbusters are illegally recorded, reproduced on DVDs, shipped around the world and sold on street corners and in other markets.

There's plenty of interesting tidbits in this lengthy document about how everybody's getting involved -- even China:

ICE previously worked with China in September 2003 when ICE initiated Operation Spring, a joint IPR investigation by ICE agents and Chinese authorities that resulted in the extradition and conviction of DVD pirate Randolph Guthrie, who was sentenced to 48 months incarceration and ordered to repay $878,793 in restitution to the MPAA.

And the American sports associations:

Earlier this year, the IPR Center partnered with the NFL, NBA, NHL, NCAA, industry and local law enforcement to conduct operations targeting counterfeit sports merchandise sold during the Super Bowl, NBA All-Star Game, Stanley Cup championship, and NCAA Final Four and Frozen Four tournaments. These operations resulted in seizures of over 14,000 counterfeit items valued at more than $760,000.

Personally I hope DHS and ICE get their asses handed to them over the music blogs. Turn that into freedom of speech and take those bastards to the cleaners. They aren't going to learn their lesson if this is just a court case that exonerates the defendant and I hope the defendants have enough cash to to fight back, or seek help from the EFF.

The frequency of these MPAA/RIAA related stings is really ramping up. I hope ICE and IPR aren't turning out to be directional attack dogs for corporations. The numbers on these things seem a tad bit inflated but haven't they always been?

Re:Larger Scale Than One Agent

[Anonymous Coward]

These operations resulted in seizures of over 14,000 counterfeit items valued at more than $760,000.

Well, at least they those weren't downloaded songs - that could have resulted in $875,000,000 in damages to the music industry! (14000 items x $62,500 from Capitol v. Thomas)

Re:Larger Scale Than One Agent

[Anonymous Coward]

How the hell can US justify $800k damages to the internationally extradited head of a DVD piracy ring, and $1.5M to someone for downloading a few MP3s?

Re:Larger Scale Than One Agent

[Anonymous Coward]

The China one is complete BS imho, the store Randy bought the DVD's from is still there in the same location selling the same pirated dvd's for local consumption.

Its apparently only highly illegal (sic) if you ship them over to the states.

Randy got a little over 10 months in jail here, and was released. At the height of his operation he was shipping 7000 dollars a day of merchandise.
The shipping companies were the ones raking it in though. They active sought the business.
The show bust was really that, a show. Months of work? Pah, he had his address and details on the website, wasn't hiding in any way shape or form. Anyway... at least his bloody jacuzzi got moved once he was in jail, that was taking up precious parking spaces in the block..

Re:Larger Scale Than One Agent

[careykohl]

Well, lets see, from the affidavit...

RapGodFathers.com and RMX4U.com both had forum sections labeled "Bootlegs" and "Appz" with admin written descriptions stating they were for the posting of links to illegally shared content. So they were encouraging copy right violations.

Torrent-Finder.com appears to be entirely clear of any wrong doing based on what is in the affidavit. Every piece of "evidence" came from some other website and Torrent-Finder presented it as news without any editorial comment being noted.

Dajaz1.com and Onsmash.com are both run by idiots apparently. They (and the artists that leaked to them) forgot that when the RIAA handed those huge ass checks to the rappers the RIAA got the copyrights. Doesn't matter that Kayne West told them they could leak his stuff... he doesn't own the distribution rights to it any more.

I doubt DHS and ICE are going to get their asses handed to them for busting 2 sites that skirted the rules so closely they fell over the edge, and 2 sites that found out the hard way that artists who sign with RIAA members don't own their distribution rights anymore.

The Torrent-Finder.com situation seems to be the only one that has no basis.

Can you sue the FBI for damages?

[wonkavader]

Can I prevail on someone with a legal background to tell us whether you can sue the FBI for damages when they hurt your business due to negligence in their investigation (as in going off half-cocked)?

Re:Can you sue the FBI for damages?

[commodore64_love]

>>>you can sue the FBI for damages?

Sure. Lots of people sue the United States. Sometimes it even goes to the Supreme Court but not often, since the justices are part of the government and often defend their colleagues by simply not hearing cases.

Re:Can you sue the FBI for damages?

[beakerMeep]

Sometimes it even goes to the Supreme Court but not often, since the justices are part of the government and often defend their colleagues by simply not hearing cases.

That's about as spurious a claim as the DHS agent made. I suspect you'll get some hits with that kinda trolling though.

Re:Can you sue the FBI for damages?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you try, you get arrested on rape charges, labeled an enemy combatant, and thrown into gitmo, never to be seen again.

Ah, the good old days, when this would have elicited a "huh"? from the confused masses. Now, it's just "oh shit, I better post this anonymously, or I'm done for." (rolls eyes)

Re:Can you sue the FBI for damages?

[notbob]

Nope, not at least successfully. You're welcome to give your money to the courts in a failed effort to try but at the end of the day the FBI violates citizens rights on a daily basis and destroys legitimate business on a daily basis.

Having lived through some FBI "mistakes" even with legal counsel at your side it's very very difficult to fight them due to their status as a government entity. Just because the charter or law they're operating under may exclude certain actions there's always a loop hole. Like when they can't prevent you doing business but seize your phone system and customer records it's kind of difficult to continue operations and nobody will care how bad it destroys your business while they "investigate". You have no real protections from the law in the United States, all you can do is pray to avoid their attention and that is all.

Awesome job

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only was it put together by a recent college graduate, who claimed that merely linking to news and blog posts about file sharing constituted evidence of copyright infringement,

Where can I get a job like that?

Re:Awesome job

[click2005]

Usually to make those kinds of decisions I think you have to be on the supreme court.

Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[wonkavader]

Sorry. I mistyped. DHS, not FBI.

Bad Evidence? Seriously?

[intellitech]

Is that really the best excuse they could come up with?

Andrew T. Reynolds

[eldavojohn]

What are you blind? It's all over the affidavit document. Andrew T. Reynolds swears that it's all true. First line of the document.

Re:Andrew T. Reynolds

[Anonymous Coward]

That's so CUTE! You expect him to RFTA!

Re:Andrew T. Reynolds

[Khyber]

No, I want the EDITORS AND SUBMITTERS TO DO THEIR FUCKING JOB AND PUT THE RELEVANT MATERIAL IN THE GODDAMNED SUMMARY.

Is that really, really, really too much to ask for? Seriously? Is it too fucking much to ask that someone follow some basic rules of journalism?

Oh, wait, this is slashdot.

Re:Andrew T. Reynolds

[Skapare]

Oh wow ... he signed it as "Special Agent". I wondered where all the special people went. I wonder if he knows the "Special" agent that bungled the telco seizure from last year in Dallas that Slashdot just recently duped on us.

Re:Andrew T. Reynolds

[Anonymous Coward]

The MPAA/RIAA is working on a model of suing random people to make examples of them, to discourage everyone else. Can we do the same in retaliation? Can Andrew T. Reynolds have the living crap sued out of him for swearing such claims, so much that it discourages other graduate students from going into this line of work because they could end up hugely personally liable?

Re:Andrew T. Reynolds

[Anonymous Coward]

And while you're at it, direct your anger at someone who posted this 4 days after it came out, and still forgot to include the torrentfreak story from Friday, which included how TorrentFreak was used as proof of malfeasance. Says EVERYTHING you need to know about just how true it is...

http://torrentfreak.com/us-government-made-painful-mistakes-in-torrent-finder-seizure-101217/

Re:Andrew T. Reynolds

[Anonymous Coward]

Set a thief to catch a thief.
Set a tool to catch a tool.

Re:Andrew T. Reynolds

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA!

checks and balances?

[societyofrobots]

It appears they forgot the whole 'checks and balances' thing when enacting a powerful censorship law. I'm not even sure what the 'Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement' has to do with copyright enforcement.

But hey, already found a scapegoat, a 'fresh college graduate' who'll be labeled as over-zealous while those actually in charge zip by.

Re:checks and balances?

[Anonymous Coward]

It appears they forgot the whole 'checks and balances' thing when enacting a powerful censorship law.

Nothing was forgotten. The lobbyists wrote checks to the politicians, and the politicians' bank balances increased.

Re:checks and balances?

[Skewray]

If you don't think the judge was correct in rubberstamping the seizures, then make your opinion known at http://www.therobingroom.com/Judge.aspx?ID=1491

Re:checks and balances?

[frank_adrian314159]

I'm not even sure what the 'Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement' has to do with copyright enforcement.

If the items breaking copyright come from outside the US, the ICE in its "Customs Enforcement" role has a job to keep it out. Now, whether or not there was proper evidence (or even a bit of checking) before this raid occurred is certainly an issue, but the ICE does have the right (and perhaps the responsibility) to do this.

Re:checks and balances?

[Rigrig]

It appears they 'forgot' the whole checks and balances thing when enacting a powerful censorship law.

FTFY

Re:checks and balances?

[societyofrobots]

Although what you said is true, the DHS was not created to have net censorship for copyright enforcement powers.

Re:checks and balances?

[Kjella]

Don't worry, it's only the eternal cycle of integration and modularization. DHS is part of the "kitchen sink" phase, where everything should be gathered under one roof to get coordinated. Then they'll figure out that what the groups actually do have very little to do with each other so they'll either become detached units within the DHS or create spin-off departments. It's like "The Lion King" for business and governments, the cycle is always in change but in the end it's not going anywhere.

Re:checks and balances?

[Anonymous Coward]

'fresh college graduate'

Speaks highly of our vaunted American college system, doesn't it?

It reminds me of something I recently read about how law outfits come up with those torturous "interrogatories" that they send to the opposition in even the most trivial cases -- they assign the job to the most junior lawyer in the office. "Here, think up a lot of questions we can ask to drag out any kind of possibly useful information."

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[Anonymous Coward]

We're currently at war with drugs, terror, pedos, downloaders & freedom and as most people know, wars are considered an act of god so tough luck.

MPAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Must Pilfer All Assets! They are showing themselves to be a criminal organisation. Pointing some dumbass newb to fly off the handle in the wrong direction and getting away with it (for weeks) and knowing beforehand that what they were doing is illegal (and plain dumb, and plain wrong), means that they counselled a felony, and they did it against 80 different web sites and hundreds of people were adversely affected, and tens of thousands were moderately affected (perhaps more). These fishing trips have to come to a halt. They also need someone at the DA's office who passed legal stuff 101 (not like the Johnny-who-fell-off-the-turnip-truck they have now). Perhaps after this, Johnny will be a bit brighter (perhaps not), but since there are fresh wet-behind-the-ears DA's coming along all the time, the DMCA can coach them into making dumbasses out of themselves all the time, and we are left with the M.ust P.ilfer A.ll A.ssets going around and falsely accusing people (basically shaking them down) all the time, back it up with lawyers who flunked basic legal stuff 101, and no nice way to stop it.

What is ICE doing?

[www.sorehands.com]

ICE's job includes enforcing laws regarding the immigration and hiring of aliens.

Lets see, Nicky Diaz, former housekeeper to Meg Whitman, admits on national television that she forged documents and is in this country illegally.

Many employers hire illegal aliens.

Millions of illegal aliens in the country.

States, have enacted their own laws because ICE is not doing its job.

But.....ICE can shut down sites that it thinks might be violating copyright law.

Yes, ICE can't do their job, but they can be given more responsibility.

Re:What is ICE doing?

[blueg3]

ICE has different groups with different responsibilities. The one you're talking about is Immigration (formerly INS). The one that this probably falls under is Customs (formerly U.S. Customs). They're different groups under a single organization.

Re:What is ICE doing?

[Anonymous Coward]

And also isn't the DHS supposed to be chasing those pesky terrorist? Then maybe those links to BitTorrent sites were places where you could download a functional nuke. You know the Germans had a police force like this once. It was called the Gestapo. The USSR once had a police force like this once. It was called the KGB.

For course if the DHS was chasing the REAL terrorist then they would be chasing themselves. I do not live in fear of someone that worships Allah. I live in terror from those in Washington.

Welcome to Nazi Amerika.

Re:What is ICE doing?

[sac13]

Yes, ICE can't do their job, but they can be given more responsibility.

It's called government...

Re:What is ICE doing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, ICE can't do their job,

Why do you say this? Have you read the USA PARROT ACT -- the section that says any attempt to cost corporations money they don't want to give up shall be deemed to be an act of domestic terrorism?

DHS is overstepping bounds? Who would have thunk!

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought DHS (that means KGB in Russian) was suppose to protect us from terroristic threats. Sorry, not seeing how seizing domain names is thrawting Achmed.

Meanwhile there are a gazillion rouge

[Anonymous Coward]

anti-virus malware sites infecting people with malware and trying to scam them, but no one cares about those, since the RIAA doesn't care about those.

Re:Meanwhile there are a gazillion rouge

[Anonymous Coward]

Rouge, bleu, verte, they come in all kinds of French colors. Are you specifically bothered by red ones?

Re:Meanwhile there are a gazillion rouge

[Anonymous Coward]

On behalf of everyone, can we focus on the "rouge" vs "rogue" thing for a few weeks? Just a little bit?

Re:Meanwhile there are a gazillion rouge

[Anonymous Coward]

Je suis un taureau, you insensitive clod!!

maybe next time?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can we assume that the next federal judge ruling on domain seizure requests will be a little more skeptical??

Re:maybe next time?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Can we assume that the next federal judge ruling on domain seizure requests will be a little more skeptical??

No. Welcome to America.

Damn President McCain

[Kohath]

They told me if I voted for President McCain that we'd see these kind of abuses from Homeland Security. And they were right!

More:
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/111785/
http://www.google.com/search?q=instapundit+they+told+me

Re:Damn President McCain

[pclminion]

Can we, for once god dammit, talk about the issue instead of complaining about whatever poor schmuck with very little personal control over the daily happenings of our government, is currently sitting in the Oval Office? Seriously dude, I do not give a shit.

Re:Damn President McCain

[Kohath]

Tell it to all the Bush haters. They were the ones who were (are ?) saying that concentrating power in government is a great idea, we just need "the right" person to be in charge of making all the decisions.

Some of us want smaller, less powerful government. If government can't do much, then it doesn't really matter who is in charge.

Re:Damn President McCain

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of us want smaller, less powerful government. If government can't do much, then it doesn't really matter who is in charge.

Yep. Then the corporations screw us no matter who we elect, and they do it DIRECTLY that way. Brilliant plan!

Re:Damn President McCain

[TheRaven64]

As Douglas Adams explained, the purpose of the president is to distract attention away from those who really run the galaxy.

Re:Damn President McCain

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of us want smaller, less powerful government. If government can't do much, then it doesn't really matter who is in charge.

Someone will always been in power, and power will always be abused. I'll take my chances against a democratically elected government bound by laws (imperfect as it may be on both counts), over the un-elected and un-accountable alternatives that always rush into any vacuum created when government retreats. Especially when those un-elected and unaccountable alternatives are the main culprits in corrupting the government in the first place.

Re:Damn President McCain

[Kohath]

Yep. Then the corporations screw us no matter who we elect, and they do it DIRECTLY that way. Brilliant plan!

Just don't buy from them or associate with them. Say no. They have no recourse and no way to force you to do anything.

Try saying no to the government a few times and see how long you stay out of prison.

Everyone understands the difference. Even you. But you're dishonest.

I hope FOX digs in here

[jbolden]

I really hope the Republicans make a civil rights issue out of this. Using Homeland security for copyright enforcement? Forget about the fact that they were incompetent, even if they had gotten this right it was way way out of line.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[Haedrian]

Filesharing leads to communism
Communism leads to extremism
Extremism leads to terrorism

Support your local Homeland Security today!

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[Daniel Dvorkin]

I really hope the Republicans make a civil rights issue out of this.

LOL! You're a funny guy.

Wait. You were serious?

Oh, dear.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[jbolden]

Sure. Republicans frequently make civil rights issues when Dem presidents screw up.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Yeah, but the law'n'order card trumps their desire to make Obama look bad.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[jbolden]

Did you notice that whole TSA thing a little while back?

Not with this president, they really hate him.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[Anonymous Coward]

I really hope the Republicans make a civil rights issue out of this.

Yeah, I expect Fox to jump RIGHT on a story about corporations using the government to stomp on people. They'll run it right after the story calling for Shrub to stand trial for war crimes, before the bit about HELL FREEZING OVER.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[yelvington]

I really hope the Republicans make a civil rights issue out of this.

You must be new on this planet. Welcome to the circus!

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[Phoobarnvaz]

Nothing will become of it...especially from any republican. The reason...these corporations have enough money and lobbyists to make sure nothing but their way will be the way it is. Welcome to the United States of Facsism...where corporations and their money are the government.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[Anonymous Coward]

I really hope the Republicans make a civil rights issue out of this.

And I hope for a white pony with a big, pink bow. And a blue ribbon woven in and out of her mane.

Bet I get my wish first.

I can hardly wait for my new pony.

I'm going to call her Puff.

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[sac13]

Nothing will become of it...especially from any politician. The reason...these corporations have enough money and lobbyists to make sure nothing but their way will be the way it is. Welcome to the United States of Facsism...where corporations and their money are the government.

FTFY...

And, since this is about media corporations, the democrats are even more likely to be behind this since that's a big source of their dollars... Don't let their rhetoric confuse you about their actual behavior... If they're elected, they've most likely been bought...

Re:I hope FOX digs in here

[Phoobarnvaz]

FTFY...

And, since this is about media corporations, the democrats are even more likely to be behind this since that's a big source of their dollars... Don't let their rhetoric confuse you about their actual behavior... If they're elected, they've most likely been bought...

I wasn't clear...especially what I should have said that any politician has to be a legend in his own mind who's willing to take money from whoever is giving it out...no matter what they claim otherwise.

Not to worry!

[SuperKendall]

They'll move him out of DNS management and over into drafting Network Neutrality regulation. What can go wrong?

Why are they so stupid?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

What I want to know is why are the people behind these sorts of things so freaking stupid?

Ever since the MAFIAA started taking actions against pirates the stories of innocents being scooped up in the process have been rampant. Is the MAFIAA so ensconced in power that they really just don't give a shit? Do they believe that such errors pose no threat to their own legitimacy? Or perhaps anyone knowledgeable enough to discern the difference between the clear-cut pirates and the bystanders just isn't sympathetic enough to the MAFIAA to work with them? Or maybe there are people within the ranks of the MAFIAA that disagree with the entire operation and deliberately set things up give their overlords a black eye?

I dunno what it is, but you'd think that after 10+ years of this kinda of shit they would have figured out how to do it right.

Re:Why are they so stupid?

[PeterBrett]

Is the MAFIAA so ensconced in power that they really just don't give a shit?

Yes.

Do they believe that such errors pose no threat to their own legitimacy?

Yes.

Or perhaps anyone knowledgeable enough to discern the difference between the clear-cut pirates and the bystanders just isn't sympathetic enough to the MAFIAA to work with them?

Also yes.

Or maybe there are people within the ranks of the MAFIAA that disagree with the entire operation and deliberately set things up give their overlords a black eye?

Apparently lack of principles is a requirement for promotion over there, so I doubt it.

I dunno what it is, but you'd think that after 10+ years of this kinda of shit they would have figured out how to do it right.

Haha, that's a good one, pull the other one!

Re:Why are they so stupid?

[Haedrian]

Simple. They don't care.

If you're innocent, pay the thousands in court costs and missing time off, and fight it in court. Otherwise just pay the money and nobody is going to get hurt.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/SLAPP - related.

Re:Why are they so stupid?

[AHuxley]

New laws, a new generation, a name to be made, all the jargon filled in, paper work done and the system spins up.
If they can get away with this, they can expand, get more funding, get more arrests/body count/domain count? and grow.
If they dont, they have a 'young' person to offer up.
Try again next raid with new laws or better paper work.
They are testing the press and US public. Support terrorism, porn, DMCA hardware, now seized domains - all seems to be a long list of fair game.
What was once a long term watch, log, report, build a case up to the top seems to be reduced to a simple chilling find anything then raid.

They won't be happy until they own you

[trollertron3000]

I for one welcome our stupid shit leaders with their heads in their asses. We're all fucked man, I'm trying of fighting this fight. Just give me my padded room please with my boob tube and genitalia stimulation device. I'm done. Stick a fork in me.

Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[eldavojohn]

Seriously, it's right there on the affidavit. On top of that you can let the court know in a (circa 1993) web form what you think or contact Nagle's Deputy Courtroom Clerk yourself. Case number 10-2822M for your reference since the affidavit seems to be unable to be viewed by some.

You're an American citizen and you have the right to know who these people are that are making these decisions whether it be a judge or special agent. And they shouldn't have any fear of putting their name on these documents if they think it's right. I agree with you though that maybe it's not within their capacity to serve this position should they get something so painfully wrong.

I want countersuits and I want liabilities awarded to the defendants that rival the bullshit astronomical numbers that the court sends out to NASA for computation when the MPAA/RIAA wins. I hate that if the MPAA/RIAA wins it's eighty billion dollars but if the individual is exonerated it's a benjamin tops for having their webserver down. That is bullshit.

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[TheRaven64]

You're an American citizen

I've no idea why you'd think that, but the British spellings in my posts might be a hint that I'm not...

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[JDAustin]

If your British, then your royally screwed....

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[caluml]

If his British, then his royally screwed.... what? Yep, you're definitely speaking from a position of superiority.

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[ya really]

You're an American citizen I've no idea why you'd think that, but the British spellings in my posts might be a hint that I'm not...

Your anger is directed in the wrong direction. You should be looking at the judge who signed the court order. The various police forces are expected to make mistakes on occasion, that's why they have to go to a judge to get a court order before this kind of action. The judge failed to do his job, and so should be disbarred and possibly subject to other penalties.

I dont see anything in your post here that would indicate that your English dialect is different from the American one (e.g. colour/metre/theatre/defence/civilisation/foetus/etc). Assuming someone would notice your posts elsewhere and come to this conclusion that you're not American is somewhat of a stretch.

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[Anonymous Coward]

I want countersuits ... I want liabilities awarded

Our rulers don't give a shit what you want, or what the obsolete laws of the old republic might have been. We live in a police state. Get used to it.

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[hercubus]

You're commenting psuedo-authoritatively on an American case on an American website - why ever would anyone think you're not British? I mean American?!?
I fail to detect any obvious clues from this thread that you're British. Perhaps your true colours are centred on some other postings?
Okay, you're spelling and grammers are swell, that's a clue your not American, but come on, you could have also been Jamaican or Canadian.
Canada FTW!

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[Anonymous Coward]

Sphincter says what?

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[Stargoat]

I'm not sure we're American citizens any more. I know this is not the country I grew up in.

I sometimes look around and wonder. Sometimes it feels like I'm the last American left.

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[Anonymous Coward]

*braaap*

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[grimJester]

Every time someone complains that everything is assumed to be American on Slashdot, you get a link to this. So, in short, you are american whether you like it or not.

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[Anonymous Coward]

...in short, you are american whether you like it or not.

Insults will get you nowhere. Even if this is SlashDot.

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[mcgrew]

This doesn't even seem to be the same planet I grew up on!

Re:Margaret A. Nagle, U.S. Magistrate Judge

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, there aren't any words in your post that are different between US English and UK English. Reading through it several times, there is really nothing to indicate that you're British. Now, he still probably should not assume that every commentator on Slashdot is American, but claiming there are "British" spellings in your post that he's ignoring is slightly disingenuous.

Re:DHS is overstepping bounds? Who would have thun

[Anonymous Coward]

No one knows if Achmed is working for us or not. Something about outsourcing intelligence... They figure if they cut the rap-blog lifeline anyone "rollin' wit' us" will go into noticeable withdrawals and we can actually figure out who is who.

Back up in your ass with the Resurrection, homie.

also blame the higher ups who over saw this

[Joe The Dragon]

also blame the higher ups who oversaw this but it seems in mass cases a few also go down useing very weak evidence now what with that rookie listed www.google.com

Anyone surprised?

[lattyware]

Wait, so you mean that when a punishment was issued without a legal trial, purely at some arbitary person's arbitary decision, things went wrong?!

We should clearly design some system where one has to be tried before one can be punished.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

We should clearly design some system where one has to be tried before one can be punished.

Well, we tried -- the poor old thing used to be called The Constitution. But then Gorge Bush came along and wiped his ass with all extant copies.

Now it exists only in the dim memories of us old farts.

This is what happens when...

[Adrian Lopez]

This is what happens when allegedly infringing websites are shut down without so much as a trial, and precisely the reason why laws like COICA are so dangerous. In court you at least have the chance to prove that your actions are not infringing, but in this case the owners of the shut down domains aren't given the chance to establish their innocence in court. If DHS says you're guilty, you're guilty.

Imagine if the same standard were applied to other alleged offenses. Posted something allegedly obscene? Down goes your website, no trial necessary. Posted innocent pictures of your kids that others think are indecent? Down goes your website, no trial necessary. Said some nasty things about minorities? Down goes your website, no trial necessary -- and so on, ad nauseam.

Re:This is what happens when...

[Jason Levine]

Imagine if this same standard existed in the real world. "You're under arrest. Officer Jim here says he saw you driving 90 in a 30 mph, school speed zone while drinking beer, snorting cocaine and listening to pirated MP3s. We're taking you right to jail so you can begin serving your 10 year sentence. A trial? Didja hear that Jim? Guy thinks he's getting a trial!!! *bursts out laughing* Listen pal, Jim here says you did that stuff and that's good enough for me and the entire legal system. If I hear one more word out of you, I'm adding 'resisting arrest' to the charges which tacks on another 4 years."

Net neutrality

[bonch]

Yep. Sure can't wait for "net neutrality." The government is totally neutral in all things. Government regulation of the internet sounds like a fabulous idea. What could possibly go wrong?

Why the F**k is ICE involved in this?

[shoehornjob]

Ok yes I know Immigrations and Customs enforcement. This is a job for the FBI and/or state police etc. From the ICE website "Immigration and Customs Enforcement is the principal investigative arm of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)". How the hell did this get to be a national security issue? Yes I understand they are the second largest investigative organization in the US government but before 9/11 they were primarily concerned with illegal immigrants. They don't need to be involved in the investigation (spying) of US citizens and their suspected criminal activities. That's the FBI's job.

Re:Why the F**k is ICE involved in this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Any cross border network is viewed as a tool that may be used by devious terrorist types.

You see, we have stuff, and they hate us and our stuff. If it was one or the other - they liked us, but not our stuff, or they liked our stuff but not us - we could figure out a way to not kill each other.

But these terrorists not only don't like us, but they don't want our stuff. That means they are going to try to kill us all and destroy all our stuff so they don't have to deal with us or our stuff. Unfortunately for U.S. security, lots of our stuff comes from outside our own borders.

This is where things get complicated: Having to skin themselves and be made into a counterfeit handbag to get into the country is no obstacle to one of these ruthless Jihad-ista-ists (someone should make a better wurd for that). Anyhow, think of the innocents that will be devastated when they learn that not only did they not get a great deal on an absolutely FAB brand-name hand-bag, but it is also MADE OUT OF AL-QUEDA!!!

This is why ICE and the customs mission in general are vital to the future of our country.

Re:Why the F**k is ICE involved in this?

[Anonymous Coward]

The counterfeit manufacturing sites are a customs problem. The sites are overseas and must ship the items into the the US thus coming through customs. If customs finds the goods to be counterfeit they can seize them as illegal. So the sites themselves are falling under the customs department for just this reason.

Re:Why the F**k is ICE involved in this?

[Loualbano2]

"but before 9/11 they were primarily concerned with illegal immigrants"

There was no ICE before 9/11. There was no ICE before March of 2003.

INS is what you are thinking of, they were split up and all three parts were put under DHS along with taking on some new responsibilities.

Old INS != ICE.

Recent college graduate

[AHuxley]

Reminds me of the movie "In The Loop" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQrqMkCuHqA
with a very young 23 yo. baby-faced aide.
Strange how with all the cash, computer experts, total network dominance ect. the US gov still needed to fall back on the MPAA for help?
Then the rubber stamp comment, "most of the reasoning behind seizing the blogs is left out" - welcome to a digital East Germany.

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[sexybomber]

No, you can't sue the DHS, or the government in general, because of a most pernicious doctrine called "sovereign immunity." Since the government created the courts and endows them with legitimacy, you can't use its own courts against it, except in very limited circumstances. (It's like dividing by zero, sort of.)

However, if an agent of the government uses his/her position to commit a crime, you can sue the agent him/herself, but not their employer. (Of course, that's no guarantee that the suit won't get tossed, only that you can, in fact, proceed with it.) Also, if they use the apparatus of the government for purposes of racial discrimination, they can also be sued. But generally, no, you can't sue.

WIkipedia explains it in more detail: linky

Due process and an independent judiciary

[DarkOx]

Well this is exactly why the founding fathers tried to create due process and an independent judiciary, for dealing with domestic private properties and private persons. These actions clearly should have gone through the courts or at the very least an established agency review process were the owners could present evidence and testify if desired on their own behalf.

When executive fiat is used to act on individuals and private property there are always going to be these kinds of abuses.

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[shadowofwind]

My wife successfully sued a part of the DHS for failing to process her background check within the time period required by law. There was no discrimination or anything else like that, just a paperwork backlog. I agree that in the present circumstance a lawsuit would be unlikely to be successful, but I think "You can't sue the DHS....except in very limited circumstances" might be misleading as a generalization.

Huh???

[www.sorehands.com]

Customs' duty is still to inspect and/block illegal/controlled items arriving into the USA through its borders.

How is a domain name or files located on a server pointed to a domain name crossing the border?

Re:Huh???

[blueg3]

Beats me, but this still is far more likely to fall under customs than immigration, which are still separate groups.

Your tax $, hard at work.

[steelersteve13]

Sadly, this probably would have happened and will happen under a repub admin.

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[jeffrey.endres]

Interesting, I would have thought the ONE country that would allow the people to sue the government would be the US. You know land of the free and all that... Suing the government happens here in Australia and the UK all the time. In fact there is a great movie about it, The Castle.

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[pongo000]

However, if an agent of the government uses his/her position to commit a crime, you can sue the agent him/herself, but not their employer.

Even then, there are broad exclusions that protect certain federal employee classifications from lawsuits provided the harm was not caused by the employee's gross negligence. For instance, air traffic controllers (FAA employees) cannot be sued for their actions (for instance, here's an article about an air traffic controller that confused two aircraft and ended up killing 34 people...no gross negligence, no lawsuit). Many other government positions fall under similar exemptions.

ICANN

[sunderland56]

Isn't the real root problem here ICANN?

Attorneys, police, and judges are always going to try and do questionable things. The international root of the internet should not be so beholden to the US government, Move it to Switzerland, and put in place clear rules about what does and what does not constitute valid cause for removing a domain.

Or follow Peter Sunde's suggestion, and move it all to p2p.

3...2....1....Lawsuit

[FragHARD]

I feel a lawsuit coming on ...... but of course who ever wins against the MAN ???

NOT

[Anonymous Coward]

NOT a surprise.

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[Anonymous Coward]

Air traffic control is real-time. Different story from premeditated errors.

Our tax dollars reducing their cost of business?

[mykos]

MPAA was instrumental in 'guiding' ICE's rookie agent in going after these sites, as that appeared to be the only outside expertise relied on in determining if these sites should be seized

A private police force with public funding...quite a racket they've got going there.

They might really hate anybody who's NOT

[crovira]

just like them (a died in the wool, brain-dead Republican,) but the TSA was created by Bush so they'll give it a pass. (After all, private jets or charters from small private airports aren't subject to searches.)

Re:They might really hate anybody who's NOT

[jbolden]

They didn't give it a pass, they created a major scandal for 2 weeks and there were hearings. However 80% of the public agreed with the TSA so it didn't get very far. But that is a perfect counter example of the Republicans pushing for looser security regulations due to what they perceived as a civil rights violation.

Without Doubt ...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Department of Homeland Security should be shutdown and and its Archetypes Janet Planet and her lapdog Pistole should be euthanized.

Fitting end to humans who should have never been born.

-308

And in another article...

[Anonymous Coward]

And in another article people will be fully confident on the US doing what's good for the internet. The fact that thery can SIZE domain that easily is already a reason to not trust them at all.

That's Big Sis for you

[MoeDumb]

Cloddish, lead footed, in over her head and just plain stoopid.

How is this even possible?

[JustNiz]

So how is it that a commercial group like the MPAA/RIAA can buy the Dept of Homeland Security and turn them into its bitch?

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you can't sue the DHS, or the government in general,

OTOH, the guy the FBI falsely accused of being the Atlanta bomber walked away with a decent chunk of change for his suit against the FBI, IIRC.

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[commodore64_love]

>>>you can't use its own courts against it

Nonsense. Lots of people sue the United States government, which is why you'll see Bob Smith v. United States or Massachusetts v. United States in the Supreme Court's rolls. Sometimes states even sue each other, such as Delaware v. New Jersey.

The legal basis for the seizure

[davide marney]

The agent lists the basis for the forfeiture on page 66 of the affidavit. U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2323 allows the U.S. government to seize "Any property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part to commit or facilitate the commission of [the following offenses]:" 506 of title 17, or section 2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90 section 2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320.

I found the affidavit to be pretty sound, and the evidence was fairly damming. I don't think this will ultimately stop the pirates, however, as a close study of the affidavit will give you all the ideas you need to run a pirate site that obeys the letter of the law, but not the spirit.

Re:Our tax dollars reducing their cost of business

[Drakkenmensch]

A private police force with public funding...quite a racket they've got going there.

Staffed by students, so they're keeping operating costs at a minimum, too.

Re:Whoops: DHS, not FBI. Same question.

[dcollins]

With (as per link) all kinds of exceptions -- Tort Claims Act, Tucker Act, discrimination, suit by U.S. vs. state, suit by state vs. another state, "stripping doctrine", abrogation doctrine, certain contracts with government, etc.

Example news from today -- "Judge orders feds to pay $2.5M in wiretapping case": http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_warrantless_wiretapping