dslreports logo
 story category
Homeland Security's Domain Seizures On Unsound Footing
First Amendment violations and systemic incompetence
Last month the Department Of Homeland Security seized roughly eighty domains, including at least one search engine, under a broad new copyright protection push. Techdirt has been taking a look at the full affidavit involved in the seizures, and unsurprisingly notes that the government's legal and logistical footing on the seizures is shaky at best. While some legitimate bootleg operations were targeted, in other instances the government essentially took aim at a flood of websites that simply had forums -- wherein users simply posted links to content available elsewhere. Masnick notes that this is going to spell serious trouble for the government on The First Amendment front:
quote:
At no point, does it appear that any effort was made to establish that seizing an entire domain based on a small fraction of what occurred on the site does not violate the First Amendment. This is going to present a pretty serious problem for Homeland Security, because there's a fair amount of legal precedence saying that you need to take into account the First Amendment implications before seizing forms of expression.
Aside from being legally unsound, the agent and Judge involved in the seizure efforts appeared to have no sound understanding of how the Internet even works, believing that by seizing domains with links directing users elsewhere, they could somehow magically stop the transfer of content that's still floating around via hundreds or thousands of websites and distribution networks.
view:
topics flat nest 
Pokesomi
join:2007-11-08
Lake Forest, CA

Pokesomi

Member

Wow, just wow

Who knew someone still cares about our First Amendment Rights.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

1 recommendation

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

said by Pokesomi:

Who knew someone still cares about our First Amendment Rights.

Do you really think Techdirt cared about the 1st amendment issues here? I don't think so. Like much of the internet blogosphere, they really care more about continuing the internet elites long tradition of encouraging copyright infringement(just like Google did until sued about 9 dozen times). And that is because they feel that no one should be able to copyright music & films and that they should be free for the taking. Free speech issues are merely an excuse to support the everything should be free philosophy they espouse.

HappyAnarchy
@iauq.com

HappyAnarchy

Anon

Re: Wow, just wow

This is an extreme parody of their actual position, and as someone who has had their position exaggerated often for effect I would expect better of you.

Oh well.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

1 edit

4 recommendations

Karl Bode to FFH5

News Guy

to FFH5

Do you really think Techdirt cared about the 1st amendment issues here?

As someone who knows Mike, absolutely.

Like much of the internet blogosphere, they really care more about continuing the internet elites long tradition of encouraging copyright infringement.

I can never tell if you're a troll, a professional satire writer, or just incredibly, incredibly confused. Who is the "Internet elite," Mike? People who have blogs and point out the often draconian nature of our copyright laws?

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

said by WernerSchutz:

said by Karl Bode:

I can never tell if you're a troll, a professional satire writer, or just incredibly, incredibly confused. Who is the "Internet elite," Mike? People who have blogs and point out the often draconian nature of our copyright laws?

He is a paid shill.

As Karl well knows, I am not paid by anyone. I've been retired for 10 yrs and live off pension & investments. My opinions are my own.

xNPC
As Usual, Have Nice Day
Premium Member
join:2000-11-08
Errington, BC

xNPC

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

maybe you should start keeping it to yourself.
Roop
join:2003-11-15
Ottawa, ON

Roop to Karl Bode

Member

to Karl Bode

Re: Wow, just wow

draconian indeed. we should abolish copyright entirely:

you made something. that's nice. you didn't make it on your own. you had input from the entire world. from the day you were born, thoughts and ideas have been pouring into your mind from the world around you. now you want to call the creativity of all nature "yours"?

the gall.
Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN

Pv8man to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
Response to MMH:

Right but, my main issue with all of this has nothing to do with copyright law.

It has everything to do with setting the precedent for the Federal Government having the authority to seize websites without proper evidence.

I believe that the government and entertainment industry are working for the same thing.
-----------------------------
The RIAA/MPAA want to have more control over the net to catch copyright infringers ( and also to stop other methods of distribution to prevent competition of independent artists )

The government wants to control the internet for their own purposes of stopping alternative media, but works under the guise that it is all about stopping piracy.

So they work hand in hand, while today they can seize websites without proper judicial oversight of websites accused of promoting copyright infringment.....

tomorrow it could be whistleblower sites or something else the government deems "undesirable"
------------------------------

Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA

Gbcue to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

said by Pokesomi:

Who knew someone still cares about our First Amendment Rights.

Do you really think Techdirt cared about the 1st amendment issues here? I don't think so. Like much of the internet blogosphere, they really care more about continuing the internet elites long tradition of encouraging copyright infringement(just like Google did until sued about 9 dozen times). And that is because they feel that no one should be able to copyright music & films and that they should be free for the taking. Free speech issues are merely an excuse to support the everything should be free philosophy they espouse.

Where's your avatar from?

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

said by Gbcue:

said by FFH5:

said by Pokesomi:

Who knew someone still cares about our First Amendment Rights.

Do you really think Techdirt cared about the 1st amendment issues here? I don't think so. Like much of the internet blogosphere, they really care more about continuing the internet elites long tradition of encouraging copyright infringement(just like Google did until sued about 9 dozen times). And that is because they feel that no one should be able to copyright music & films and that they should be free for the taking. Free speech issues are merely an excuse to support the everything should be free philosophy they espouse.

Where's your avatar from?

I designed it myself using a tool that takes a picture and then avatar's it. Disappointed that I didn't copy it from somewhere thereby shooting down my point.
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

nasadude

Member

Re: Wow, just wow

said by FFH5:

I designed it myself using a tool that takes a picture and then avatar's it. Disappointed that I didn't copy it from somewhere thereby shooting down my point.

I don't know....sure looks like a character from the Simpson's.

that would certainly be enough for the govt to come after you for copyright infringement on Fox's behalf

S_engineer
Premium Member
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

S_engineer

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

It also may get these lawyers to sue you anyways..
Beverage Company Sues Anheuser-Busch Over Totally Different Looking Can Design...»www.techdirt.com/article ··· gn.shtml
or maybe these attorneys...
Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Over Turkey Cooking Instructions
»www.techdirt.com/article ··· ns.shtml

Truth is these copyright laws are being so abused, that it's actually costing taxpayers huge sums of money clogging our courts with this s***!
Techdirt is just having a field day pointing this out.

Cheese
Premium Member
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL

Cheese to nasadude

Premium Member

to nasadude
said by nasadude:

said by FFH5:

I designed it myself using a tool that takes a picture and then avatar's it. Disappointed that I didn't copy it from somewhere thereby shooting down my point.

I don't know....sure looks like a character from the Simpson's.

that was my first thought too

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

There was an official Simpsons website a few years back where you could take a photo and they would simpsonize it in to an avatar.
»web.spotcoolstuff.com/ph ··· -simpson

Web site no longer doing them:
»simpsonizeme.com/
dagg
join:2001-03-25
Galt, CA

dagg to nasadude

Member

to nasadude
it looks like that because he used simpsonize me.. seen enough to recognize it. by the way MMH, next time you use something like that try just coming clean in the first place cause saying you designed it yourself in the way that you did while truthful from a certain angle, makes you come off like like a tool

image search for "simpsonize me" comes up with a ton of variations using the exact same pose.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

said by dagg:

it looks like that because he used simpsonize me.. seen enough to recognize it. by the way MMH, next time you use something like that try just coming clean in the first place cause saying you designed it yourself in the way that you did while truthful from a certain angle, makes you come off like like a tool

Would "just coming clean in the first place" also apply to all those people who are "just downloading linux distros" or "my someone used my internet to share the music, and I had nothing to do with it" or "I don't use BitTorrent to download illegal content"...?

I'd have to say that a good chunk of main-posters here are simply "tools"..

Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA

Gbcue to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

I designed it myself using a tool that takes a picture and then avatar's it. Disappointed that I didn't copy it from somewhere thereby shooting down my point.

It looks like your contributing to copyright infringement. I thought it was from The Simpsons.

The DOJ should seize DSLR for your blatant possible copyright infringement (like all those innocent sites).
Expand your moderator at work

chazpaw
Premium Member
join:2007-03-28
Terrell, TX

chazpaw to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Techdirt does not encourage copyright infringement.
dagg
join:2001-03-25
Galt, CA

dagg to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
you obviously dont actually ever read any of the stuff on techdirt or you have friends that have lied to you a lot.... im gonna go with the first.

techdirt does not, in fact espouse an "everything should be free" philosophy and never have. in fact on several occasions they have quite blatantly said that the 'give it away and hope for money' plan is a very dumb idea.
but you would know this if you actually read anything there rather than listening to what others say about it... right???
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

said by Pokesomi:

Who knew someone still cares about our First Amendment Rights.

Do you really think Techdirt cared about the 1st amendment issues here? I don't think so. Like much of the internet blogosphere, they really care more about continuing the internet elites long tradition of encouraging copyright infringement(just like Google did until sued about 9 dozen times). And that is because they feel that no one should be able to copyright music & films and that they should be free for the taking. Free speech issues are merely an excuse to support the everything should be free philosophy they espouse.

Under current copyright laws the blogosphere is right. if we could get logical copyright laws then the sphere would be wrong.

Logical being fixed terms from point of creation of IP, say 15 years with no extensions ever. right now copyright laws are designed to be broken due to how long they last. Though the moral stance is variable, if you download an Elvis Presley tune you are not cheating the artist out of money because he is long dead. heck downloading Mickey Mouse cartoons is also a gray area now as Walt is long dead too.
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

1 recommendation

axus to Pokesomi

Member

to Pokesomi
Thanks for not letting the issue fade away, Karl Erosion of due process and liberties is no small matter.
gorehound
join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME

gorehound to Pokesomi

Member

to Pokesomi
i hope that a lawsuit comes of this garbage.
cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA

cornelius785 to Pokesomi

Member

to Pokesomi
IMO, I don't think the seizure of domain names does NOT violate the First Amendment as a crime (a little gray as some are torrent sites (which should be considered criminal), etc.) is being commited. Look at the laws on harassment, libel, slander, slurs, etc. . So some how this violates the First Amendment, but all those others don't? Sounds a bit hipocritical if you ask me.

The only thing I kind find truly wrong with domain seizures is the apparent lack of due process. Maybe jurisdiction and given powers that are written in law?
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

Re: Wow, just wow

I have to agree with you. All too often do people stand behind the 1st and say "I have the right of free speech".. which CLEARLY doesn't cover yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater. I also agree with you that due process HAS to be followed.

Copyright is kind of a strange issue. It's more of a civil issue than one of a criminal one. It first has to be established that criminal actions have happened, something that isn't happening. To simply allow police action on an "alleged" copyright infringement is slippery grounds.

I do NOT condone copyright infringement as many do here, however, I'm all too smart to realize that you can't give an inch of an exception as cases are established. And, just as many people will say that this "bullshit" clogs up the courts,.. well, people need to stop pushing the envelope.. it takes two to tango.

I have an issue with domains being seized by the government, period. I think that if a website is violating someone's "rights", it should first be established in a civil case, not criminal.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC

Member

Fantastic

quote:
the agent and Judge involved in the seizure efforts appeared to have no sound understanding of how the Internet even works
Isn't this basically true with everyone involved in the law making process today? (politicians, etc)

Exactly why we'll get nowhere....

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues

Premium Member

Re: Fantastic

said by BlueC:

quote:
the agent and Judge involved in the seizure efforts appeared to have no sound understanding of how the Internet even works
Isn't this basically true with everyone involved in the law making process today? (politicians, etc)

Exactly why we'll get nowhere....

Sure they do, Ted Stevens laid it out for them, it's a series of tubes
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL

1 recommendation

Mr Matt

Member

Re: Fantastic

Unfortunately Ted suffered from a fatal velocity change and went down the tube.
talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon, OH

talz13

Member

Re: Fantastic

Too soon?
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

Re: Fantastic

said by talz13:

Too soon?

Naaa.. he's dead, as should be this joke.
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA

qworster

Member

They've got the guns...

...so they can do whatever they want-DAMN the Constitution!
The Antihero
join:2002-04-09
Enola, PA

The Antihero

Member

Re: They've got the guns...

said by qworster:

...so they can do whatever they want-DAMN the Constitution!

Haven't you heard? It's just a "god damn piece of paper."

I'm still trying to figure out what Homeland Insecurity has to do with copyrights.
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL

1 recommendation

Mr Matt

Member

Above the law and Costitution!

Homeland security management believes that they are above the law and can walk all over the Constitution. I do not believe that sharing copyrighted files can present any danger to American Citizens. The big problem who is going to take homeland security to court for violating the Constitution.
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

axus

Member

Re: Above the law and Costitution!

I believe the agents of DHS were following instructions that sounded like they were in accordance with... some law. And they did get a judge's approval, as they should. The problem is either the law or the DOJ's interpretation of it was used to violate 1st amendment rights.
crucialcolin11
join:2004-09-12
Roseville, CA

crucialcolin11 to Mr Matt

Member

to Mr Matt
indeed and who can afford to take them to the court. I have a feeling that most of the domains shuttered will not be able to fight back at all.

Cheese
Premium Member
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL

Cheese

Premium Member

The Gooberment....

Doesn't care about the First Amendment anymore....
NoOneButMe
join:2001-08-24
TX

NoOneButMe

Member

This is unconstitutional

you cant pass any law that harms people are dose unjust things its kinda like the pot law it dose more harm then good so it is also a illegal law it states clearly that if the law creates more harm then good its illegal like in the case in Montana this week the jury would not convict a pot dealer the jury was nullified that is protected by the constitution these guys losing there sites should fight it and use a jury trial and use the 5th and the 1st amendment

••••••••••••
AricBrown
join:2002-12-11
Amarillo, TX

1 recommendation

AricBrown

Member

Look at the special agents experience...

I just read the affidavit and the Special agent has a Year of experience and a year of training. And part of his affidavit he says his experience makes him qualified to determine this is a criminal act ... Hell my son has more experience and he knows that they are just links and torrents... not the actual file...
dak70
join:2007-05-01
Warminster, PA

dak70

Member

DHS just keep us safe

The DHS was supposed to keep us safe and connect the 'terrorist dots' by having a singular purpose of securing our country.

The Dept. of Homeland Security's mission statement reads, "This Department of Homeland Security’s overriding and urgent mission is to lead the unified national effort to secure the country and preserve our freedoms."

Seizing domains and chasing down copyright infringement is a distraction that makes Americans less safe. The DHS should stick to terror and let the DOJ be the RIAA/MPAA's lap dog.

DHS has officially become just another bloated, politically motivated government law enforcement tool of money brokers.
tweakt
join:2005-10-07
Nashua, NH

tweakt

Member

Email links

What if I email the judge these same links? Would he be prevented from forwarding them by the same legal standing?
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

who decides "unsound legal footing" ???

Techdirt?

A court of law?

hmmmm.... let me think.....

oh yeah....

A COURT OF LAW!

And, since the domain seizures were authorized by Federal judges....

guess they are not on "unsound legal footing" !!!!

At least until/unless a higher court overturns. And there's no sign I've seen that that is happening.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Karl Bode

News Guy

Re: who decides "unsound legal footing" ???

Yeah, wait and watch what the "court of law" decides on this one. Justice ain't swift.

fatness
subtle

join:2000-11-17
fishing

fatness

where this idea came from?

Hugo Chavez
quote:
Fragile press freedoms in Venezuela are under threat after President Hugo Chavez cracked down on Internet content and gave the state greater control over broadcast media, analysts said Tuesday.
quote:
They aim to crack down on media content that "makes an apology of crime," "promotes unrest in the population" or "challenges legally established authorities."

raypsi1
join:2001-04-09
Wayne, MI

raypsi1

Member

big sis

big sis is flexing her muscles just watch out she don't hit you with one of those ta ta's
nitzan
Premium Member
join:2008-02-27

nitzan

Premium Member

Homeland Sexurity?!?

Ok, regardless of whether those sites were doing something wrong or not - what the HELL does HOMELAND SECURITY have to do with file sharing?!? WTF?!? why the hell are my tax dollars being used for something retarded like this?!?

the department of homeland security has NO business seizing domains that do not pose a SECURITY RISK. Why the hell are they getting involved in shit that has NOTHING to do with homeland security?!?

••••
old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA

old_wiz_60

Member

They are just doing the bidding..

of the entertainment industry that is in control of the DOJ and Homeland Security. Enough dirty money changes hands and Homeland Security doesn't really give a rats tushie about any such silly things as the constitution or even legal procedures. I thought Homeland Security was about protecting citizens, not protecting the lifestyles of the rich moguls of the entertainment industry. Apparently, "copyright protection" is far far more important than protecting american citizens from such things as terrorists plotting a nerve gas attack on a U.S. city.

Twaddle
@sbcglobal.net

Twaddle

Anon

Re: They are just doing the bidding..

There is no such thing as due process or constitutional rights when the Dept of Homeland security is concerned. This organization of social misfits, egomaniacs and psychopaths(among more polite terms) can and will do what ever they please. Just try taking them to "court". You would be more successful taking your money time and resources and finding the nearest "S%^Thole and throwing it in it. If DHS wants to shut down a domain it will and if you don't like it then you might as well take up arms and be ready to pay the ultimate price because that is how far the DHS will take their agenda! I've yet to hear of even one case that has been won by the average Joe much less any penalty being paid! We are entering some very dark times!
Twaddle

Twaddle to old_wiz_60

Anon

to old_wiz_60
There is no such thing as due process or constitutional rights when the Dept of Homeland security is concerned. This organization of social misfits, egomaniacs and pschopaths(among more polite terms) can and will do what ever they please. Just try taking them to "court". You would be more successful taking your money time and resources and finding the nearest "S%^Thole and throwing it in it. If DHS wants to shut down a domain it will and if you don't like it then you might as well take up arms and be ready to pay the ultimate price because that is how far the DHS will take their agenda! I've yet to hear of even one case that has been won by the average Joe much less any penalty being paid! We are entering some very dark times!
stufried
Premium Member
join:2003-10-13

stufried

Premium Member

Hyperlinking v. Free Speech

A number of lawyers (mostly from various industries) have convinced judges that hyperlinks are not protected speech, but conduct. Thus posting saying you can get a bootleg copy of Microsoft Office at www.samplewarezsite.com is protected, but saying you can get it at
»samplewarezsite.com/ is not.

I'm simplifying this a bit. Take a look at this ruling:

»scholar.google.com/schol ··· 80000002

and go to the subsection on "linking."
Chubbysumo
join:2009-12-01
Duluth, MN
Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L

Chubbysumo

Member

Re: Hyperlinking v. Free Speech

The problem is that all of these addresses are based in the USA. if the server that hosts the site, and the sites registration is NOT in the USA, this means that the US government cant touch it(without a coordinated legal effort of another country, which isnt likely to happen of copyright infringement). also, as long as you still have the servers IP address, then you can STILL get to the site. they didn't shut down the sites, they stopped DNS redirects to address bar type ins.

On a side note, many of the sites seem to be selling counterfeit goods, and someone seems to have lumped the torrent/sharing sites in there just to try and sneak it past the judge. The sites were all listed NOT in alphabetical order, but in a numbered order, which placed the music sharing and torrent search engine at the bottom. I'm guessing that the judge didn't read the whole thing, as counterfeit goods sellers have their domains seized all the time for completely legal reasons(the Chinese are good at selling counterfeit crap in the US, just Google some cases up, it pretty common). I'm also guessing the DHS was involved because the counterfeit goods sites were funding terrorism that threatened US citizens locally or abroad. I think this was just a try to "slip" these by the judge in a pile of legitimate seizures, and it seems to have worked. All the owner(or previous owner) of the torrent search site has to do is contact the judge that signed the search warrant(he should have gotten a copy, and if he did not, due process was not followed) and explain that his site was lumped in with this, and since there is no pending charges, and since it is NOT a site selling counterfeit goods(like the rest of the sites in the warrant) he should get his domain back. Im guessing the judge will go "oops, sorry, didnt catch that" and issue a bench order to give his domain back, and then the lead investigator will have to call ICANN and tell them to return the domain. This happens more often than you think to legit web sites.

anon7
@comcast.net

anon7

Anon

It shouldn't

of happened to begin with.