Law Professor Talking About Domain Seizure CampaignAdded: Thursday, December 9th, 2010
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
Derek Bambauer points out that American government, by seizing domains even before adjudication at trial, is actually seizing material – both legal and not. This makes the US government just as guilty of web filtering as France (hate speech), China (Tianneman Square), and Saudi Arabia (porn), but with particular focus on censoring copyrighted content wherever it may exist.
An Assistant Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School decided to break down the “head-scratching” rationale behind the US authorities’ domain names seizing campaign.
ICE has recently seized almost a hundred of domain names of websites accused of being involved in selling or providing access to counterfeit products and copyright infringing content. Now Professor Bambauer joins the teams of critics of this campaign. He says that civil seizure of things used in crime is quite weird. Another weird thing is that the government no more feels the need to notify the domain name owners of a civil complaint against their property it is going to seize.
Besides, Professor Bambauer discusses the question of censorship, saying that the authorities, by seizing domains, are in fact seizing material even before it has been proved unauthorized in the court. He also mentions that the seizures conducted are not narrow, but overbroad and underbroad at the same time. They are underbroad because there are clearly more than a hundred websites out there providing access to copyrighted material, and overbroad because seizing a domain removes both legal and illegal content.
All in all, the event of mass domain names seizure can turn to be a troubling one for the United States. Besides, as it was already suggested in relation with the controversial COICA legislation, US can set a precedent that any other country in the world can easily seize or block a domain name if it doesn’t like its content for some purpose. This will undoubtedly harm the rights of Internet subscribers and human rights defenders to speak and access legitimate material on the Internet. Meanwhile, in many cases, domain owners won’t be able to appear in an American courtroom to counter the accusations made against them. This, in result, will make them guilty by default, which can hardly be a good example for the United States to show the rest of the world.
December 9th, 2010Posted by:
Thursday, December 9th, 2010
|"This, in result, will make them guilty by default, which can hardly be a good example for the United States to show the rest of the world."|
So what's new? The USA have been setting bad examples for years in theatres of war all over the world ever since they defeated the Japanese in WW2. I'm sure not everyone will agree with my POV on this one but then... these are the same rednecks that believe the American media propaganda. Just as IRA taught the Brits in Northern Ireland, America too is learning a valuable lesson about non-conventional warfare (terrorists don't follow the TV God). Nowhere else is modern terrorism top prevalent as the online arena and I believe this will be a losing war for the USA in the long run. After all... real freedom of expression has an unlimited rank and file in our youth.
|Oh yes--a very nicely written article SaM, thanks!|
|posted by (2010-12-12 10:18:12)|
|Sam Thanks for the Fantastic articles! Hmm,this stinks, you know its a repeat of history, this exact same thing happens 30 years ago, when the UK government tried to shut down Radio Rock,a pirate radio station based in the north sea, on a shIp! They have this bullshit attitude of,well we dont like it so lets create a law that makes it illegal and easy to control. What they never seem to take into account is that they are the minoriy in this world, they are the outdated software and the virus that we as free race of man should purge from our exsistance. in some countries thay claim it to be morally wrong(file-sharing), but there is no1 to criticise how immoral it is to run a country/s on a notion and motivation of greed. which is the true driving force of any political figure. Take into account Africa, which holds 65% of world fossil fuels and has the most Arabele land in fact such good land, that if Zimbabwe,Nigeria,and Congo were to stop fighting and start farming they can produce enough food to sustain the world population with out limit, in Africa the culture of sharing is a way of life, not a luxury, the people here in Africa do not have the opportunity to worry about such petty things as "piracy" as they more worried about living to see the next day, dodging land mines and figuring out where the next days meals will come from. if they never shared or the government prevented the sharing 90% would die. Some believe that what you sow is what you reap,what most of the so called "1st world" countries are sowing is a global communist/socialist/capitalist movement , camouflaged by the war against " piracy and terror" . what they will reap will be the next evolutionary step for man kind, and they are not included in those plans as who in their right mind can forgive such oppression. No free man. Catch a wake up!||
Most Popular Stories