US Dept. of Justice, ICE Still Seizing Domains

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Dept. of Justice, ICE Still Seizing Domains

Posted by timothy on Tuesday February 1, 2011 @12:12PM from the gotta-keep-in-practice dept.

Chaonici writes "Operation In Our Sites, a US initiative to crack down on websites related to online copyright infringement, appears to be ongoing. Rojadirecta is a site that links to (but does not host) broadcasts of major sporting events, including soccer matches. It is highly popular in Spain, where it has prevailed twice in court after its legal status was challenged. However, US authorities have now seized the .org domain of the website without notifying the site's owner or its web host, GoDaddy. Rojadirecta can still be accessed through .com, .es, .me, and .in domains, which are not controlled by the US, but rojadirecta.org currently redirects to this well-known image."

20 of 252 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Summary is wrong, as usual. by MaskedSlacker · 2011-02-01 12:15 · Score: 3, Informative

Rojadirecta.org works as of 4:14 pm, two minutes after this story was posted. No ICE image at all.
Rojadirecta.com has the ICE image.
1. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual. by ethan961 · 2011-02-01 12:22 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  No, it really is seized. As of 4:20 PST I get the ICE image. The change is probably still propagating.
What Egypt and the US have in common... by metrometro · 2011-02-01 12:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

... is a complete lack of due process and the right of appeal in regards to Internet censorship. This is appalling. The entire Western legal code is built on the idea that if you cannot be penalized for something without the right to defend yourself in court. I realize that the seizures are of property and not people, but it's not hard to argue, hey, maybe seizing someone's business and wrongly broadcasting that the owner is a criminal* might negatively impact the owner.
* I'm referring to the case of the hip-hop blogger, who was hyping unreleased material on the request of labels and accused of piracy. I don't know the details of the site in question here.
1. Re:What Egypt and the US have in common... by Professr3 · 2011-02-01 13:04 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  If you're going with the book analogy, it's more like copying a book vs. replacing the entire library catalog with an ICE warning card, in the off chance that SOME of the books are incompatible with ICE's views.
2. Re:What Egypt and the US have in common... by pugugly · 2011-02-01 13:11 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I hate to be blunt, but the authorities have long since seized the right to abscond with *actual* property - cars, homes, et al based on the mere accusation of a drug related crime. Unfortunately everyone save the Libertarians (and some Liberals, including the ACLU.) went "Well, that's drug stuff - I'm sure they did *something* to deserve it".
  From Findlaw
  
  "As detailed in a Frontline report from 2000, federal and local practices regarding property seizure in drug cases shifted in 1984, when federal law created forfeiture funds for property seized by the DEA and FBI, and allowed local law enforcement to share proceeds from the sale of property seized."
  You've waited about 25 years too long to suddenly realise "Oh . . . this could apply to *me*?!?" (Good old Saint Reagan - Who'da thunk it? I mean - not counting people actually familiar with his record.). If people don't like this, they're going to have to go back to stopping the actual real property seizures and start pushing back from there.
  Pug
  
  --
  An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
3. Re:What Egypt and the US have in common... by tragedy · 2011-02-01 13:14 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  There is a double standard. I'm not sure why you can't see that the government is the one applying it. They're the ones who _set_ the rules, we expect them to follow them too.
  As for whether or not this is property. It's certainly not conventional property directly. On the other hand, this isn't exactly IP, as you seem to think. This has nothing to do with trade secrets, copyright, or patents. There's an argument to made, perhaps, that it's a trademark issue, since they're putting up their own site (with that one image on it). Of course, I'm against trademark applying to domain names unless the page the domain directs to is itself infringing on a trademark (using someone else's trademark to promote products, or represent them as being from that organization). The money that they paid for a registration of the domain for a set time would seem to be a form of property. In any case theft of service is generally treated as seriously as if the property were real property and is probably a felony on this scale. Aside from being theft of service, it's also a denial of service attack. If you didn't notice, the government just went after a bunch of Anonymous members for a denial of service attack.
  So any argument that this is somehow ok without a warrant and some sort of judicial process is just wrong.
4. Re:What Egypt and the US have in common... by theskipper · 2011-02-01 13:44 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It wasn't always this way but legally, they are property. See the Zuccarini case (a soap opera in itself):
  http://espinosaiplaw.com/wordpress/?p=90
  Domains are becoming very valuable assets so how they're treated legally is important.
5. Re:What Egypt and the US have in common... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-01 17:14 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Additionally, if I recall, this includes money. They freeze your accounts, etc. Which often times can make it hard to defend yourself in court, when you don't have any access to hire a decent lawyer.
  When I learned of this, lawyers on retainer suddenly made sense. I always wondered why you would give money to a lawyer prior to being accused of something, when you could just hire them when the need arose.
DNS replacement by Joe+U · 2011-02-01 12:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

Again, it's past time for a DNS replacement.
Not an alternate DNS root, an actual replacement that maps some kind of human readable names to an IP address.
ICANN and Network Solutions have proven that they are happy to hand over domains without a full trial, it's time to replace them.
1. Re:DNS replacement by Joe+U · 2011-02-01 14:26 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Isn't the point of a temporary restraining order/seizure warrant to stop an action/take something before a full trial has occurred? Under whose laws should a full trial be held? Am I naive in believing that ICANN delegates control of the TLDs?
  The problem with the current system it's an instant death penalty when it comes to seizing a domain. It's tough to recover from that, and we should be operating under innocent until proven guilty.
  As for whose laws, I've always been a fan of where the server is located, or in the case of cloud computing, where the owner is located.
  ICANN delegates to NetSol (and others) for .com and others. ICANN doesn't really register domains directly.
Thank you Streisand Effect by bobdotorg · 2011-02-01 12:40 · Score: 4, Funny

Had never heard of Rojadirect.
Now I have another bookmarked site.

--
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
ATDHE.net by doroshjt · 2011-02-01 12:42 · Score: 4, Informative

Was also seized. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/01/atdhe-sports-streaming-website-seized_n_817224.html
Way to go Justice Dept. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-01 12:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

Countdown until the EU starts bitching about USA control of ICANN servers again? Starting... now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_governance#Globalization_and_governance_controversy
Fucking morons. The diplomatic consequences of this will be far reaching and even if we get to keep our queen despite taking these pawns, the diplomatic backlash over the soon to ensue ICANN debate is going to cost the USA billions of dollars over the next decade. How? In lost profit from trade agreements as a consequence of losing our bargaining position.
Let the record show that no one can claim the reprecussions of this were unforseeable. It took me 10 seconds from reading the summary to understand the big picture consequences.
Hopefully this will be the straw that breaks the camels back and causes a public uproar which will put an end to this pro-Corpyright anti-fair use insanity.
Re:Maybe there is a solution by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-01 13:18 · Score: 3, Interesting

The USA is the last of the Western World when it comes to Free Speech and Human Rights. Granted, the Western World represents less than 25% of the 200 countries on the planet, so even being last of the Western World may not seem all that bad.
But then again, the USA now qualifies as a tyranny thanks to the government repeatedly violating the Constitution and Human Rights of it's citizens: (It is rarely referred to as a tyranny publicly in politics and in the media, but it fits the definition of the word). As for the International scene, the behavior of the US government will make the entire country be considered as a rogue state by even Europe. Europe just needs a bit of time to realize how bad the USA has become and get over the shock, but soon it will.
America, corporate whore. by unity100 · 2011-02-01 13:33 · Score: 3, Interesting

dont excuse the language - i cant find any stronger words to stress the travesty thats going on here :

america is whoring itself out to a particular industry, while killing another. the internet which was associated so closely with '.com' extension, will not be associated with it anymore. in web hosting industry, customers are already moving away from .com .net .org domains. can you imagine what the impact of this will be ? they will also be moving away from american outlets for hosting, dedicated servers, vpses and cloud, because the place which will register their NON american controlled extension, will naturally be offering deals to them during their domain purchase.

way to kill an entire industry that de facto built internet, in order to whore yourself out to a fading out one, america.

troll ? no. appalled to oblivion maybe. i cant any stronger words to stress the travesty of the situation, really. other than 'whoring' or 'morondom'. really.

--
Read radical news here
Re:This never happened under the Bush administrati by PopeRatzo · 2011-02-01 14:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

Yeah, the media was SOOO in G.W.B.'s pocket. [facepalm]
Excuse me, you stupid fucking anonymous coward, but you might want to google the name "Judith Miller" and after that "the run-up to the Iraq War + media".
Then never come back here until you've spent some time thinking about what a dumb clown you are.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
This keeps the US safe by d6 · 2011-02-01 14:51 · Score: 4, Insightful

This keeps the US safe from the terrorists how exactly?

Change the name to 'The Department of Homeland Security and Corporate Enforcement' guys
Re:My favorite websites by c0lo · 2011-02-01 16:24 · Score: 3, Informative

transition to other domains such as .me
Why would you trust Montenegro to stand up for your rights?.
I don't. But before considering OpenNIC or the like, here why .me has a better level of trust:
- historically, nobody heard about .me domains being seized (not that it cannot happen in the future)...
- ... but .org, .net and .com... continue to happen.
Between .me and {.org, .net, .com} - excluding others - who do you trust better?

--
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Re:No, there is due process. by b0r0din · 2011-02-01 18:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

Of course you're welcome to defend yourself in court, against lots of lawyers and monetary interests (because court victories are mostly bought nowadays) and leave yourself at the hands of a 50-yr old jurist who probably can't figure out how to plug in his friggin toaster.
Power is always misused, but in terms of law, well let's just say that the US government is way behind on real justice anymore. The law is written to protect the corporate interests.
Copyright and patent law is broken. It's totally broken. And corporate lobbyists with money and very specific interests want to make sure no politicians challenge their little cabal of self-preservation. And politicians happily accept this money and there's very little you can do about it.
I'm increasingly despondent at the state of our country right now, when stuff like this is actively happening, when our own government wants a kill switch on the Internet. It saddens me that we even need 1st amendment rights, but Jefferson's insistence of their inclusion was apparently the right choice. I know we're talking about specific sites here, but now we're getting into some serious territory here, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, CENSORSHIP. When the government is seizing sites like this, you know some businesses are just going to move offshore to avoid exactly the same problem. It'll happen quicker than you think.
Jursidiction? by Loki_666 · 2011-02-01 18:42 · Score: 3, Funny

What the hell does the Department of Homeland Security have to do with copyright infringement anyway? Or is the department of fatherland homeland security allowed to do whatever it likes?