Exactly, DHS consolidated functions that used to be in separate departments (Customs, INS) > -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Rotenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 11:09 AM > To: Milton L Mueller > Cc: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: U.S. Government Seizes BitTorrent Search Engine Domain and > More > > As a US lawyer, it seems odd to me that the DHS would have > this role. International law enforcement matters are routinely > coordinated by the Dept. of Justice. ICE is a relatively > recent creation, gathering powers that traditionally resided > with Customs and the INS. > > Marc. > > On Nov 28, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > > Not so odd, Marc, because Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is > part of DHS. > > Customs would be the primary agency involved in transnational > counterfeiting enforcement actions. > > Recall ACTA and related negotiations. Interesting that this can go on > without COICA. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: NCSG-NCUC [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of > >> Marc Rotenberg > >> Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 8:26 AM > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Re: [NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS] U.S. Government Seizes BitTorrent > >> Search Engine Domain and More > >> > >> According to the New York York Times, it was the Dept of > >> Homeland Security (the same agency that brought us > >> airport body scanners) that seized the BitTorrent site and others. > >> This seems odd since it is the US Dept of Justice that would > >> typically investigate copyright matters. > >> > >> Note also that this action took place prior to Senate action > >> on COICA. > >> > >> Marc Rotenberg > >> EPIC > >> > >> ----------------------------- > >> > >> > >> > >> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/technology/27torrent.html > >> > >> U.S. Shuts Down Web Sites in Piracy Crackdown > >> By BEN SISARIO > >> Published: November 26, 2010 > >> > >> In what appears to be the latest phase of a far-reaching federal > >> crackdown on online piracy of music and movies, the Web addresses of > >> a number of sites that facilitate illegal file-sharing were seized > >> this week by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a division of the > >> Department of Homeland Security. > >> > >> By Friday morning, visiting the addresses of a handful of sites that > >> either hosted unauthorized copies of films and music or allowed > >> users to search for them elsewhere on the Internet produced a notice > >> that said, in part: "This domain name has been seized by ICE - > >> Homeland Security Investigations, pursuant to a seizure warrant > >> issued by a United States District Court." > >> > >> * * * > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Nov 27, 2010, at 1:57 AM, Alex Gakuru wrote: > >> > >>> Does this mean *all* search engines with links will be shut down > >>> anytime, including 'Big G'? > >>> > >>> On 11/27/10, Alex Gakuru <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >>>> Why complained earlier on expectations that cash strapped ccTLDs > >> especially > >>>> in Africa/developing cannot afford parallel servers, databases and > >> time > >>>> costs to enforce third parties IP/copyrights/trademark etc > interests. > >> It > >>>> somehow 'feels' safer NOT to register a .com now? > >>>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> > >> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The latest info that I've seen is that Verisign assigned new DNS > >> servers > >>>>> at the Registry level, and then locked the domain so that even the > >>>>> Registrar > >>>>> can't update it. So now it looks like it may have been VeriSign > who > >>>>> "seized" them. No word on ICANN's role in this situation, if any. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Nov 26, 2010, at 8:29 PM, Marc Perkel wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> So was it ICANN that actually did the seizing? > >>>>> > >>>>> On 11/26/2010 7:25 PM, Michael Haffely wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> The concerning part about the report from today is that the domain > >> owner > >>>>> never received any complaint or due process before the domains > were > >>>>> seized. > >>>>> It appears that no Cease and Desist, warrant, suit, or other > >> criminal > >>>>> complaint was brought up before the domain was taken. What if > (for > >> an > >>>>> example) this behavior is taken up by the Patent and Copyright > >> "trolls". > >>>>> What happens to an individual/nonprofit/organization when they > have > >> their > >>>>> domain yanked out from under them? > >>>>> > >>>>> If ICANN is to seize domains from their rightful owners by demand > of > >> a > >>>>> law > >>>>> enforcement agency we need to have a clear, *rapid* appeals > process > >> to > >>>>> prevent abuse by corporations, law enforcement agencies, and > >> governments. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -Mike H. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Andrew A. Adams <[log in to unmask]> > >> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Very similar moves are happening in the UK, with Nominet (UK non- > >> profit > >>>>>> with > >>>>>> the .uk (and .gb) country-code delegation) engaging with the UK's > >> SOCA > >>>>>> (Serious and Organised Crime Agency *) to remove 1200 "sites > >> engaged in > >>>>>> selling counterfeit goods" recently and now doing a more explicit > >> deal > >>>>>> with > >>>>>> the police to take down the DNS registration for sites "alleged > to > >> be > >>>>>> involved in criminal activity". > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/25/nominet_crime/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> (*) The SOCA is a rather dodgy organisation, IMHO. When it was > set > >> up > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> then home secrewtary made a big thing of it not being actually > >> police > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> therefore not bound by the requirements that the police have to > >> respect > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> human rights of citizens. THat's a recipe for a secret police > >> operating > >>>>>> extra-judicially and here we see exactly that kind of approach. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I am very worried by these kinds of moves. Zittrain's "The Future > >> of the > >>>>>> Internet" and Mueller's "Networks and States" concerns about > >> censorship > >>>>>> becoming the norm not the exception online seem to be coming > true. > >> While > >>>>>> I'm > >>>>>> not in favour of criminals having free reign, the trouble is that > >> all > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> hard won freedoms such as due process, balance of rights, etc. > seem > >> to > >>>>>> be > >>>>>> being thrown out in the digital domain. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Professor Andrew A Adams [log in to unmask] > >>>>>> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and > >>>>>> Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics > >>>>>> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/ > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> IP JUSTICE > >>>>> Robin Gross, Executive Director > >>>>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA > >>>>> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 > >>>>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> regards, > >>>> > >>>> Alex Gakuru > >>>> http://www.mwenyeji.com > >>>> Hosting, surprise yourself! > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> regards, > >>> > >>> Alex Gakuru > >>> http://www.mwenyeji.com > >>> Hosting, surprise yourself!