Slashdot Mirror


US Gov't Seizes 130+ More Domains In Crackdown

An anonymous reader writes "The DoJ and ICE have once again taken up the banner of anti-piracy and anti-counterfeiting by seizing over 130 domains allegedly involved in those activities. TorrentFreak points out that this newest digital raid happened just before 'Cyber Monday,' a time when consumers are encouraged to do a bunch of online shopping. From the article: 'Compared to previous seizure rounds, there are also some notable differences to report. This time the action appears to be limited to sites that directly charge visitors for their services. Most of the domains are linked to the selling of counterfeit clothing (e.g. 17nflshop.com), and at least one (autocd.com) sold pirated auto software. Last year several sites were taken down because they allowed their users to access free music and movie downloads, and these were followed by several streaming services a few months later. No similar sites have been reported in the current round.'"

46 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Difference between US and China by CmdrPony · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my opinion this is much worse than Chinese firewall. At least China keeps it to themselves and within their own laws. US just seizes what it wants, even if the sites would be lawful in other countries.

    1. Re:Difference between US and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bullshit is this much worse. The US does it because people are selling things they shouldn't be selling. China does it to crush free speech. There isn't even a comparison here - China is FAR worse.

    2. Re:Difference between US and China by CmdrPony · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's a matter of opinion. US and Chinese cultures are different. Many Chinese people agree that government should restrict some hate speech. Hell, even US does - just try yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater. It's a slippery slope, and can't be justified just because US people think it's ok in this case.

    3. Re:Difference between US and China by beltsbear · · Score: 2

      Like apple power chargers that cost one third of what Apple sells them for. Yea, they should not be selling those!

    4. Re:Difference between US and China by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful
      China does it to keep the party in power. The US does it to keep the copyright/trademark industries in power. Here is how vast the difference is:

      sed -e 's/communist party/intellectual property industries/g'

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    5. Re:Difference between US and China by poity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Many Chinese people agree that government should restrict some hate speech.

      ..and you can find just as many supporters of that in the US, but if popular support doesn't legitimize it here then why should it in China? If we accept your premise that free speech falls under the rule of public sentiment, then this legitimizes these domain seizures even more, since it is the public votes the legislators who enact these ip protection laws.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    6. Re:Difference between US and China by CmdrPony · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm just saying that every country should keep it to themselves. If US government wants to block those domains, feel free to make your own firewall. But as it is now, US is deciding for the whole world. Regardless if other countries want it or not.

    7. Re:Difference between US and China by arkenian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm just saying that every country should keep it to themselves. If US government wants to block those domains, feel free to make your own firewall. But as it is now, US is deciding for the whole world. Regardless if other countries want it or not.

      So once upon a time, I would've agreed. But these days? If you don't want to be subject to a country's laws, then don't register your domain in their country. Every country in the world has its own domain registry, pretty much. Yes, its true, if you have a .CH domain or something, people are likely to think your stuff is fake and not buy it. But why shouldn't the US prevent you from selling stuff to US persons in a US domain, which means that you're, by definition, doing business with a US company. Its always been the law that if you use US assetts to commit something considered a crime in the US, those assets get seized/frozen. If this was going after the 'free' sites, that'd be one thing, but this is pretty much within the narrower interpretations, and i think its perfectly fine.

    8. Re:Difference between US and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      But why shouldn't the US prevent you from selling stuff to US persons in a US domain, which means that you're, by definition, doing business with a US company.

      Because .com and .net are not simply US domains just used by companies doing business in the US.

    9. Re:Difference between US and China by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      Because they are a different country with different culture and values.

      This bubble in which some people live in never ceases to amaze me. The sheer foolishness of belief that their values are by far the best for everyone, and shared by everyone is beyond stupid and turning on your TV to watch the news debunks it time and time again. Yet they believe...

    10. Re:Difference between US and China by poetmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "shouldn't be selling"? Says who?

      the most important part of your completely bullshit claim, is where is the court hearing? Where is the proof?

      innocent until proven guilty is a key cornerstone of our law, even as generally dismantled as it exists.

      So until this goes to court, there's no proof they've done anything wrong or shouldn't have done, etc. It is a first amendment violation of prior restraint, however.

    11. Re:Difference between US and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      .com and .net ARE simply US domains. Even when a non-US entity holds the lease, it is a US domain.

      Any non-US entities that run websites legal in other parts of the world can register domains operated by those parts of the world.

    12. Re:Difference between US and China by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But why shouldn't the US prevent you from selling stuff to US persons in a US domain, which means that you're, by definition, doing business with a US company. Its always been the law that if you use US assetts to commit something considered a crime in the US, those assets get seized/frozen.

      Hey American--There are other people on the internet. And sometimes, we don't even care if you're on the internet or not.

      In fact the rest of the internet can quite happily function if the US decides to seal itself up behind a firewall like the Chinese. But we can't function if the US decides to unilaterally interfere with our business on the internet in its own interest. If that happens, then current US custodianship of the internet/DNS will be de-legitimised and ended before too long.

      This doesn't have to happen, but it will if the US continues to regard its own domestic laws as superior to those others countries even within the jurisdiction of those countries. The the US cannot recognise basic principles of jurisdiction, then the international system of internet controls cannot continue be based there.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    13. Re:Difference between US and China by The+MESMERIC · · Score: 3, Informative

      .ch is switzerland.

      .cn is china.

    14. Re:Difference between US and China by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 2

      It's not like the US is taking down foreign sites. They are taking down sites hosted in the US, which are therefore covered under US anti-piracy laws.

      It sucks (I believe everything digital should be free) but it's how the government works these days. No regard for due process - just slam the door wherever they see fit.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    15. Re:Difference between US and China by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Informative

      .com and .net ARE simply US domains.

      No, they're not. The .us domain IS the US domain. The .com/.net/.org/.edu are international domains.

      Or are you suggesting that a multinational corporation should have to register a different domain in every country where they operate? If I want to go go IBM's main web site, which country should I pick?

      If they WERE simply US domains, they would require a US address to register them.

    16. Re:Difference between US and China by Dan541 · · Score: 2

      Who are you to declare what someone should or shouldn't sell?

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    17. Re:Difference between US and China by Rich0 · · Score: 2

      The thing that concerns me most here is that the domains are being siezed without a trial.

      If there were a trial and a jury awarded the domains to the RIAA or whatever, I could at least see the due process in that. However, these are being handled as administrative matters where people are being deprived of property without a trial. My feeling is that a jury should be required to issue a verdict before ANY kind of government seizure. I can see seizing evidence with a warrant temporarily, but temporarily has to mean for a SHORT period of time - not for years. In fact, when things like computers are seized they should just duplicate the drives and return the originals within a week.

    18. Re:Difference between US and China by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      True, but international domains are subject to international law.

      Which exact international law was used to justify taking down of those domains? Last I checked, they were all taken down by order of U.S. courts citing U.S. laws.

    19. Re:Difference between US and China by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not like the US is taking down foreign sites. They are taking down sites hosted in the US, which are therefore covered under US anti-piracy laws.

      The sites are not hosted in U.S. - they just happened to have a .com domain name, which is defined as "international", but DNS hosting for which is located in U.S. A lot of people are rightly wary of the notion that U.S. has the sole jurisdiction over something that is supposed to be an international shared resource.

  2. Less US control by Garybaldy · · Score: 2

    This is why other governments are less interested in the US controlling most of the net. Before they were willing to let us have most of the control due to our hands off approach. With the seizing of domains some not even in the us who have broken no laws in their own country.

    1. Re:Less US control by CmdrPony · · Score: 5, Funny

      ICANN is still US-based, and they ultimately have power over it. It would be best for everyone if the things ICANN handles would be moved under neutral party, like UN.

    2. Re:Less US control by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Funny

      It would be best for everyone if the things ICANN handles would be moved under neutral party, like UN

      That's a very funny joke you just made there.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Less US control by ScentCone · · Score: 2

      Are you suggesting that UN is LESS neutral then USA

      No, I'm saying that people who put countries like Iran in charge of UN commissions on human rights have no business dealing with freedom of speech issues like domain management. Of course you know that.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  3. Like the internet by GeneralTurgidson · · Score: 2

    Piracy routes around it. I'm guessing ICE are the guys who accidentally deleted a bunch of SRV records at work and were promptly fired. Who knew they could find a job with those skills.

  4. Pointless by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This will just push people toward less centralized systems; Tor hidden services come to my mind as does Freenet, but there are others out there.

    It is time to admit that the age of copyrights is over, and the longer we wait in developing a new method of monetizing creative works, the harder it will become.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:Pointless by beltsbear · · Score: 2

      Namecoin is one option, decentralized so that it can not be shut down. Namecoin is an addition to DNS and can be added to a regular linux nameserver. http://dot-bit.org/

    2. Re:Pointless by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This will just push people toward less centralized systems; Tor hidden services come to my mind as does Freenet, but there are others out there.

      Really? You really think that someone who Googles for discount ("cheap") versions of otherwise somewhat costly software for automotive use, or who are looking for logo-oriented things like NFL jerseys are going to be sing Tor to do their buying of counterfeit goods? When they want to pull out a credit card and get a brand-name purse or shoe at a tenth of the normal price (and are dumb enough to not consider the fact that they're buying a poorly made rip-off of the actual item), you think they'll be looking to a ghost network of proxies and hidden networks?

      Or is it possible that it's just a lot simpler than that. That, just as mentioned in the fine article, you're dealig with web sites run by scam artists and counterfeiters who are hoping that average consumers looking to place an online order won't recognize that they're dealing with criminals. Sites being run by plainly obvious counterfeiters got shut down, just like their warehouses are shut down if they're within the jurisdiction of law enforcement agencies that see what they're doing and have the mandate to stop them.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Pointless by hedwards · · Score: 2

      False dichotomy, there's no reason why there couldn't be a medium of some sort here. In fact for decades that's how it worked out. People will figure out how to get around restrictions if need be, but you can't do that if the media isn't being produced in the first place.

      As far as that goes we'd have to come a lot further towards totalitarianism before that becomes a serious issue. For all the well justified hubbub we'd be better of just contributing to pay off the few suits that the *AA actually bothers to file.

    4. Re:Pointless by poity · · Score: 2

      It is time to admit that the age of copyrights is over, and the longer we wait in developing a new method of monetizing creative works, the harder it will become.

      I agree, but I have a rather bleak view of it. It seems to me that when confronted with competitors that have only production costs, the creative people will endeavor to make their money in the extremely short window of time before the counterfeiters can get into the market. I fear this would cause them to withhold their revolutionary ideas from the public, to release products with incremental improvement and an emphasis on mass appeal. We'd end up having shorter and shorter intervals of fads made to appeal to hundreds of millions over weeks and months. A few weeks after initial release, when counterfeiters are just catching up, the original creators would start the next fad. It would be like the fashion industry taking over games, music, movies, etc. And from the things we're seeing now, I think we're already heading in that direction.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
  5. Did you read the list of sites? by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The list of sites reads like a "who's who" of counterfeit goods, not torrent sites. I didn't see a single torrent-related site that I recognized on the list.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Did you read the list of sites? by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The list of sites reads like a "who's who" of counterfeit goods, not torrent sites. I didn't see a single torrent-related site that I recognized on the list.

      What does it have anything to do with torrent sites? The problem is that they're seizing domains without due process and shutting down foreign websites, some of which (like Rojadirecta last time) are legal in their home countries.

      This is not the way the internet is supposed to work. And the problem is, if we set this kind of precedent, how long until other countries reciprocate? Do we find it perfectly alright for China to make YouTube disappear from the internet over dissident videos by advertising a route to its IP and then dropping the packets, like Pakistan did in 2010?

      The problem is that we have a choice: We can have an internet which is subject to the least restrictive laws of any country, or we can have an internet which is subject to the most restrictive laws of any country. There is no option that says "the internet as a whole is subject to US law but not French or Chinese law."

      But if it makes you feel any better, the torrent sites are next on the agenda.

  6. Re:I'm confused by apcullen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no bitching about not allowing the sale of counterfeit clothing or pirated software. The point is that the US government is, without any form of due process, taking down web sites. And some of these web sites are located in other countries, where the US government has no direct jurisdiction. There. Now you're not confused anymore.

  7. Re:I'm confused by LordThyGod · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Law" implies some kind of due process. This is more how authoritarian regimes work, by decree.

  8. Length of a domain's history by tepples · · Score: 2

    Can these guys just register a new one tomorrow and be back in business the next time google does an indexing?

    To distinguish serious, established, reliable web sites from fly-by-night web sites, Google is reported to take into account how long a domain has been continuously registered and how many years of registration have been paid in advance.

  9. In other news by lennier1 · · Score: 2

    Minutes later 1000+ domains went online.

  10. Re:I'm confused by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

    And some of these web sites are located in other countries, where the US government has no direct jurisdiction.

    As long as ICAAN is under US Jurisdiction, that's something of a moot point.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  11. alternates by Iamthecheese · · Score: 2

    We need truly open DNS NOW.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  12. Re:I'm confused by Slyfox696 · · Score: 2

    There is no bitching about not allowing the sale of counterfeit clothing or pirated software. The point is that the US government is, without any form of due process, taking down web sites.

    In fairness, and I admit I don't know the whole process, but can those domains not challenge the takedown, and if they win, have the domain restored? At which point, is it any different than when an officer sees you breaking into a car and arrests you for it?

    Don't get me wrong, the idea bothers me as well, and I waffle back and forth about how I feel about their ability to unilaterally take down websites, especially for domains not located in the United States. But the summary makes it sound as if these sites were selling counterfeit goods (many times to American citizens), which affects the regular citizen every bit as much as it does businesses. Which is to say there is a difference between this and the taking down of torrenting sites.

  13. Re:I'm confused by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ok, seriously, here's the answer:

    I don't know that any of the sites in question are selling counterfeit goods. I'm not talking proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt or anything like that, just vague informal subjective stuff. What was autocd.com doing? I never heard of them. I can't even begin to guess.

    Under normal circumstances, this is an easy problem to solve. You just go look at what the accused person was saying. If they're actually guilty and their crime happens to involve soliciting transactions, then all you have to do is go look at the things they've been saying, and you'll very likely see stark black-and-white evidence of them incriminating themselves.

    Oops, we can't see them shooting their mouths off in public about their own crime, because they've been censored.

    That's bad. Really bad. As a very distant-second choice, though, at least some information will eventually come out at their trial. Oops, except we've decided to unanimously vote for parties who say "Fuck due process." There will be no trial.

    I'm being asked to accept on 100% faith that someone did a bad thing. I'll never see any evidence myself that it's true, and I'll never even receive an assurance that "the system" that we all count on serving justice -- the same thing we rely on protecting you and me -- reviewed this apparently-too-sensitive-for-the-public evidence and came to that conclusion. Maybe you're enough of a religious nut for that amount of faith, but I'm not.

    All the formal and informal checks have been bypassed; we're talking about true anarchy and a breakdown of law here. Given that, why would anyone care about something as relatively trivial as counterfeit goods? ICE's actions themselves totally overshadow that.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  14. "autocd.com"? What about Feist vs, Rural Telephon by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    "autocd.com" sold parts catalogs for old vehicles. "AUTO CD.COM is your best, one-stop source for all electronic parts catalogues, auto repair manuals, service manuals, automotive repair, spare parts, auto diagnostics and auto repairs software available.

    Auto parts catalog information is not copyrightable. That's been litigated, and the distributors of the third party parts catalog won. See ATC Distribution Group Inc. v. Whatever It Takes Transmissions & Parts Inc., 402 F.3d 700 (6th Cir. 2005). That follows from Feist vs. Rural Telephone, the telephone directory case. There is no creativity in a parts catalog.

  15. Re:I'm confused by Smallpond · · Score: 3, Insightful

    According to the ICE website, they seize domains after they have collected evidence and obtained a warrant, the same way they seize things in any other crime.
    I don't expect you to read it yourself, but its right here"

    http://www.iprcenter.gov/reports/fact-sheets/operation-in-our-sites/view

    Now go back to your spittle-flecked rant.

  16. Re:I'm confused by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 2

    In fairness, and I admit I don't know the whole process, but can those domains not challenge the takedown, and if they win, have the domain restored? At which point, is it any different than when an officer sees you breaking into a car and arrests you for it?

    Let's consider this for a minute. Assume you can go to court in the US and demand they give you back your domain name.

    You're some guy in Russia who makes barely enough to buy food and shelter by selling legitimate products which you buy as damaged goods for a steep discount and then repair them yourself before reselling. Your website has just disappeared, so you now have no income. In order to get it back, you have to go to court in the United States. The plane ticket will cost you $2000, but first you'll have to get a Russian passport and a US travel visa. Then you'll have to live in a hotel for who knows how long and hire a lawyer who charges more in one day than you make in a year, who you can't communicate with very well because you don't speak very good English. While you're in the US away from your wife and kids you won't be allowed to work or generate any income because your travel visa doesn't allow it. By the time all is said and done, and you've got your domain back, you'll have accumulated a debt equal to about four times your annual income (assuming someone was even willing to lend you the money).

    There is a reason why jurisdiction does not normally extend outside a country's borders. The hardship on someone who has to travel to the other side of the world to protect his livelihood is too great. And you're subjecting foreign nationals to US laws without giving them a vote.

    I think you can see why the analogy to someone breaking into a car is inapt: When you get arrested the government provides you with a lawyer. You get a trial, which is held where you are instead of on the other side of the world. If you can't make bail you have a criminal defendant's right to a speedy trial, and in the meantime the government provides you with food and shelter. By contrast, when you have your domain name taken by a foreign government, there is no trial beforehand, you have no opportunity to be heard, the government doesn't provide you with a lawyer and there is a mountain of bureaucracy and a cash furnace between you and getting back what belongs to you.

  17. Those companies haven't violated any US law by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There has been no trial, in the US or elsewhere, so we should assume that they are innocent.

    Remember:

    First they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

    Then they came for the gays, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't gay.

    Now someone is knocking at my door...

    --
    There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
  18. Other seized sites by hugheseyau · · Score: 2

    When they seize sites, the feds (DOJ/FBI/ICE) point the domains to their server 74.81.170.110. Therefore, using a Reverse IP tool, we can see a list of all seized sites - http://viewdns.info/reverseip/?host=74.81.170.110

  19. How Many Images by pgn674 · · Score: 2

    If you're wondering how many different images exist for all the seizures, the answer is 9. You can see them all here. In my gathering, I found 338 seized domains pointing to 74.208.15.160 and 74.81.170.110