Eric Holder Claims Terrorists Are Involved In 'IP Theft'

from the oh-come-on dept

You may have heard about a fair bit about Attorney General Eric Holder testifying before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday morning. He was -- quite reasonably -- raked over the coals by members of both parties for the incredible decision to obtain phone records from AP reporters, under very questionable circumstances.

There was one other odd tidbit that might be worth discussing around here as well. Suddenly, in the middle of all the questions about the Associated Press, Rep. Mel Watt -- who, during the SOPA markup famously declared that he didn't understand the technology, or why tech people were concerned, but also that he didn't care and wanted to pass SOPA without bothering to understand -- started asking questions about copyright and "enforcement." Yes, Mel Watt is the ranking member on the IP subcommittee (scary enough in its own right), but it seemed completely off topic.

Most of the coverage on Watt's questioning has focused on the fact that he did most of his questioning with his two-year-old grandson on his lap, who interrupts the questioning at one point. But the questions were ridiculous, as were the answers, and deserve some scrutiny. First, despite it being soundly rejected when SOPA went down in flames, Watt asks Holder if Congress should make online streaming of infringing material a felony, rather than the misdemeanor that it currently is. There are all sorts of problems with this idea, as we've discussed in the past, but Holder embraced the idea wholeheartedly, saying that the Justice Department would love to have "another tool," ignoring just how widely the DOJ has abused existing tools to shut down legitimate companies and websites.

And then Watt directly asks about a connection to terrorism:

Watt: Are there increasing indications of links between this problem and terrorism? Have you found any of those links and would you describe them for the committee?

Holder: Yes, that's a very good question. It's something that's very worrisome. As we saw organized crime get into a variety of other businesses in order to support their efforts, we're now seeing terrorist groups getting into the theft of intellectual property. Again, to generate money to support what they're trying to do for their terrorist means. So we have to broaden our enforcement efforts, broaden the investigative efforts that we take, to examine what are the precise reasons why people are engaging in this kind of intellectual property thievery. And to consider whether or not there's a terrorist connection to it. This is a relatively new phenomenon, but one we have to be aware of.

Watt then asks about things that Congress can do to help, and Holder says he's "particularly concerned" about this problem, and he asks for "enhanced penalties" for "intellectual property theft." That all sounds very interesting. And it might be, if there were any truth to it at all. Unfortunately, there's not. We've yet to see a single piece of evidence supporting the idea that terrorists are involved in infringement. The claim has been around for years, and we've asked for evidence for years, and none has ever been provided. Because it doesn't exist. Researcher Joe Karaganis looked into the issue a few years ago and found that there were some very vague reports of organized crime being involved in counterfeit CDs/DVDs in the 80s and 90s. But that was small and short-lived -- in large part because online infringement basically made that business obsolete:

Arguing that piracy is integral to such networks [organized crime and terrorism] means ignoring the dramatic changes in the technology and organizational structure of the pirate market over the past decade. By necessity, evidentiary standards become very loose. Decades-old stories are recycled as proof of contemporary terrorist connections, anecdotes stand in as evidence of wider systemic linkages, and the threshold for what counts as organized crime is set very low. The RAND study, which reprises and builds on earlier IFPI and Interpol reporting, is constructed almost entirely around such practices. Prominent stories about IRA involvement in movie piracy and Hezbollah involvement in DVD and software piracy date, respectively, to the 1980s and 1990s. Street vendor networks in Mexico City--a subject we treat at length in the Mexico chapter--are mischaracterized as criminal gangs connected with the drug trade. Piracy in Russia is attributed to criminal mafias rather than to the chronically porous boundary between licit and illicit enterprise. The Pakistani criminal gang D-Company, far from "forging a clear pirate monopoly" in Bollywood, in RAND's words, plays a small and diminishing part in Indian DVD piracy--its smuggling networks dwarfed by local production.

The US record isn't more convincing in this regard. Jeffrey McIllwain examined the Department of Justice’s IP-related prosecutions between 2000 and 2004 and found that only 49 out of the 105 cases alleged that the defendant operated within larger, organized networks. Nearly all of these were "warez" distribution groups for pirated software--hacker communities that are explicitly and often fiercely non-commercial in orientation. McIllwain found "no overt references to professional organized crime groups" in any of the DOJ's criminal charges (McIllwain 2005:27). If organized crime is a serious problem in these contexts, it should not be difficult to produce a stronger evidentiary record.

In other words, Rep. Mel Watt, a well known supporter of Hollywood's position on copyright, tossed a bogus softball FUD talking point to Eric Holder in the middle of an important hearing about a very different subject, and Holder proceeded to make claims to Congress that have been made for decades without a single bit of evidence to support it.

Holder has plenty of other serious issues to deal with these days, but it makes me incredibly uncomfortable to see our Attorney General appear to be spreading known scare stories that have been proven bogus from decades ago as if they're new, despite a single bit of evidence concerning any modern connection to terrorism.

Filed Under: copyright, counterfeiting, eric holder, mel watt, terrorism

As Expected, ICE Seizes 313 Websites In Its Role As The NFL's Private Police Force

from the government-overreach dept

Earlier this week, we predicted that either today or tomorrow, we'd hear about ICE and the DOJ once again seizing a bunch of websites... and here it is. This morning, ICE announced that it had seized another 313 websites based on its highly questionable legal theory concerning taking down websites without any adversarial hearing. Of course, lately it's moved away from doing site seizures concerning websites that deal with content/copyright issues, and focused instead on those it claims are selling counterfeit merchandise. Along those lines, ICE announced that it arrested a few people with counterfeit Super Bowl merchandise.

Of course, this is all for show. Waiting until just a couple days before the Super Bowl is pretty ridiculous, since if people were going to buy merch, they already did so. This is just ICE, once again, generating headlines for the corporations it seems to think it represents. As is his usual MO, ICE boss John Morton talked up just how "successful" this operation was, based on his own metrics, claiming "This just takes good old-fashioned police work, people getting out on the streets."

Funny, then, that he completely leaves out the parts where they seized legitimate merchandise and hassled the seller. It appears that, sometimes, ICE just isn't very good at "good old-fashioned police work." And that's especially true when it seems to be taking orders from big companies, rather than the public it is supposed to be protecting.

Filed Under: counterfeiting, dhs, doj, domain seizures, homeland security, ice, merchandise, super bowl, trademark
Companies: nfl

Annual Cyber-Monday ICE Take Down Blitz 2012

from the nice-use-of-ICE-resources,-guys dept

It's cyber-Monday, the day when many of us basically go to Amazon.com and get a bunch of gifts for friends and family because going to the store this time of year is as dangerous as a North Korean prison camp. I say "many of us" partially to account for anyone out there who doesn't celebrate Christmas and partially to account for the hardworking folks at America's Immigration and Customs Enforcement, who instead spend the day posing as shoppers to shut down internet sites that they think are selling infringing or counterfeit products and replacing their web pages with handy little ICE "naughty" badges (Just like Santa would do! Yay!). We covered their exploits last year as they went about taking down 150 domains, sans the websites in question being able to tell their side of the story. It's like justice, minus any of that annoying rights of the accused crap!

Well, ICE is at it again, this time taking down only 132 websites, in their effort to stop commerce they decide they don't like.

"This operation is a great example of the tremendous cooperation between ICE and our international partners at the [Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center]," ICE Director John Morton said in a statement. "Our partnerships enable us to go after criminals who are duping unsuspecting shoppers all over the world. This is not an American problem, it is a global one and it is a fight we must win."

As with last year, ICE appears to be focusing on trademark infringers and counterfeiters, but they haven't released the list of sites seized yet, so we can't be sure there aren't any Dajaz1-type screw-ups in there as well. Still, the question remains why they have to do this en masse on one day instead of going through the more tedious, though transparent, process of taking the sites to court. Yes, the article states that they are getting court orders to take down the sites, but why not actually drag site owners into the courtroom and give them a chance to represent themselves before shutting down their ability to operate entirely? Is it likely that most, if not all, of these sites are infringing some way? Perhaps, but given that we've seen ICE take down innocent sites in the past, why not err on the side of caution and actually follow the justice process?

I also find Morton's comment about this not being an "American problem" quite amusing given the annual cyber-Monday take down blitz. If this isn't an America-focused event, why is it being conducted on cyber-Monday, a predominantly American marketing term?

Filed Under: copyright, counterfeiting, dhs, domain seizures, free speech, ice, trademark

Crime Inc. Produces Thoughtful, Nuanced Episode About Piracy (Haha, Just Kidding! Cue Scary Music)

from the too-bad dept

Earlier this year, after a series of long and detailed phone calls in which I tried to explain to producers of CNBC's 'Crime Inc.' why the claims about "piracy" were exaggerated, and how conflating physical bootlegging and unauthorized digital downloads was a mistake, we did a filmed interview that took place over a few hours in San Francisco. I had hoped that maybe, just maybe, they'd be able to present the story of copyright infringement with a bit of nuance, rather than the typical "run for your lives! theft! piracy! gangsters!" Unfortunately, it appears that the show went in the other direction and did the cliche and totally bogus storyline that digital downloads are a form of organized crime costing billions. I haven't yet seen the whole program, but judging from the show's online description and "extras" along with its video preview, this is going to be more of the same garbage: From the voice-over, scary music, and video clips, this looks like a repeat of what 60 Minutes put on a few years ago. Given that CNBC is (of course) owned by NBC Universal, perhaps that's not too surprising. But I had hoped that maybe, just maybe, they could be convinced to present a more nuanced position. Instead, the video clip clearly presents downloading in the same light as physical bootlegging, claims billions of "losses" and suggests the whole thing is a criminal epidemic, rather than a situation in which a failure by the entertainment industry to adapt is a major part of the problem.

One of the "extras" shows ICE boss John Morton gleefully talking about seizing and forfeiting domain names -- which is odd timing given that just yesterday the feds had to give back one of those domain names because Morton and his crew totally screwed up. But don't bet on seeing that in this report.

The show officially airs today (times depend on where you are). I have no idea if any of my footage even made it into the show, but given the positioning of everything shown on the website, it wouldn't surprise me if the points I made about how much of this is exaggerated and misleading don't make it into the episode, or if they do, they're presented completely out of context. So much for trying to bring a little sanity to reporting on these things. I guess reporting on reality, rather than the industry's spin, just doesn't play on cable news.

Filed Under: cnbc, copyright, counterfeiting, crime inc., scary music

US Chamber Of Commerce Launches Ad Campaign For Son Of SOPA

from the of-course-they-are dept

Next to the MPAA, the main lobbying organization that pushed SOPA was the US Chamber of Commerce. The organization and its laughably inept "Global Intellectual Property Center" are infamous for the fact that they have absolutely no shame in using completely bogus numbers to argue for bad laws that their highest spending backers support. Not surprisingly, the USCoC did not take the loss over SOPA lightly, and it appears that they're gearing up for the next version of SOPA in 2013. As pointed out by Gautham Nagesh, the USCoC has kicked off a new ad campaign priming the pump for new legislation to "protect intellectual property."

In other words: get ready for "son of SOPA."

The powerful business lobby, perhaps the biggest supporter of controversial legislation intended to stem online piracy, is at it again. The group is up with a billboard advertisement in Manhattan's Times Square and an online video series urging Congress to "protect America's IP rights."

The Chamber is claiming that "this is an awareness campaign.... not political," but no one believes that. They've also set up a "website" at DangerousFakes.com, which includes a silly video and more debunked stats.

World-wide cross border trade in physical counterfeits alone costs the global economy $250 billion a year.

This number is so bogus that it's been debunked through and through over and over again through the years. As we have explained, the real number may be closer to about $5 billion (still decently large, but nowhere near $250 billion) and that $250 billion is based on a single unsourced claim in an article in Forbes from 20 years ago. In other words: bogus.

96% of all online pharmacies are operating illegally, many out of compliance with international IP laws that protect the public health and safety.

Of course, this depends on how you define "illegally." Many are merely gray market re-importers, helping people get more affordable, and perfectly legitimate drugs. But the big pharma companies (USCoC members, of course) don't like the competition and efforts to drive down their insane margins.

In the United States, the domestic value of counterfeit pharmaceutical seizures in FY 2011 rose by more than $11 million, an increase of almost 200%.

And, again, how much of that was gray market, legitimate drugs that were just being re-imported? And how much of it were true "fakes"? Also, if the problem is really $250 billion, doesn't it seem to highlight how small a problem fake drugs are if the US seized just $11 million approximately $17 million worth? (Update: Correcting the number based on $11 million being the "increase" of "almost 200%" to approximate the total). Oh, and note that they said "domestic value," not the actual price. That's because they're taking the fake drugs and then inflating them way up to the price that would have been charged. Meaning the real amount seized was much, much less.

Counterfeits also have the potential to put our military at risk and jeopardize our national security missions, according to two recent reports by the Department of Commerce and the Government Accountability Office.

More fear mongering. And of course, if the military is buying counterfeit parts, shouldn't the focus be on the military's procurement process? Why is the military buying from shady equipment dealers in the first place?

The thing is, there is a risk from fake drugs and military equipment, but it's a really, really, really small problem. Barely noticeable. That's why the Chamber likes to lump those in with other things, like copyright infringement, because then they can pretend that the "risk" is really big. But it's not. I'm all for focusing in on stopping those who actually sell truly fake drugs and fake military parts, but there really aren't that many of those out there, and they can be targeted specifically, rather than passing broad legislation with massive consequences for the rest of the internet.

But that's not how the Chamber works.

Filed Under: bogus facts, counterfeiting, policy, politics, sopa
Companies: us chamber of commerce

What Happens If File Sharing Can Also Be Prosecuted As Trademark Infringement?

from the messy dept

In the arguments over ACTA, one criticism seemed widely accepted: that it tries to bundle together two quite different challenges -- tackling counterfeit goods, like fake medicines, and dealing with unauthorized file sharing. One popular suggestion was that ACTA should be split in two in order to handle those separately – for example, David Martin, the politician who played a key role in convincing the European Parliament to reject ACTA this week, supports this approach.

But a case reported on TorrentFreak suggests that the distinction between the two worlds is starting to blur:

A New York federal court has ordered a rare default judgment in favor of John Wiley & Sons, one of the world’s largest book publishers. Robert Carpenter from Poughkeepsie, New York, has been ordered to pay the publisher $7,000 in damages for sharing a copy of "WordPress All-in-One For Dummies" on BitTorrent. According to Judge William Pauley, the man is guilty of both copyright and trademark infringement.

The judge specified that $2,000 of those damages were "for Carpenter’s counterfeiting of Wiley’s Trademarks". As TorrentFreak notes:

To our knowledge, this is the first time that sharing files on BitTorrent has been viewed as counterfeiting, a description that’s usually reserved for fake goods sold as the real deal.

That's troubling, because it would seem to open the door for anti-counterfeiting measures aimed at tackling serious trademark infringement to be applied routinely to P2P sharing of copyright files simply because they are exact copies of originals. That, in its turn, would mean that separating ACTA's measures against counterfeit goods from those dealing with online infringement might not be enough to solve the treaty's problems, since the former would still apply to the digital world. Yet another reason to bin ACTA completely and to start again from scratch.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: acta, bittorrent, counterfeiting, david martin, european parliament, file sharing, robert carpenter

Ad Industry Is Already Getting Ads Off Of 'Rogue' Sites; So Why Did We Need Legislation?

from the just-saying... dept

Recently, the Association of National Advertisers (ANA) and the American Association of Advertising Agencies (4A's) put together a statement of best practices as part of an "International Anti-Counterfeiting Conference." The best practices say that advertisers and marketers should be explicit that they don't want their ads on "rogue" sites. This leads to a bunch of thoughts.

First up, as Dan Mitchell at Fortune points out, the companies that already advertise on "rogue" sites aren't the major advertisers. For all the talk by copyright maximalists of how big companies are getting rich off of rogue sites, that shows they don't know much about how advertising works. The ads that show up on most of those sites is the crappiest of the crappiest of advertising -- the pure bottom-filler type crap that doesn't pay very much at all. While Mitchell uses this to suggest that such a best practices won't "staunch the flow of revenues" to these sites, he totally ignores the more important point: that it shows that these sites aren't making very much money in the first place because all the advertisers who actually pay decent ad rates have already made sure their ads don't show up on these sites.

Second, this raises questions about why the MPAA was so insistent on the need for SOPA. It sure looks like the major players in the industry are already doing things like blocking ads from "rogue" sites voluntarily. It's amazing how the entertainment industry likes to pretend that companies would never do such things without a law, when they do it all the time anyway.

Finally, the Adweek article (first link above) notes that ad giant GroupM already had put in place a blacklist. But what the Adweek article unfortunately left out was that the "list" GroupM came up with was a complete joke -- listing all sorts of perfectly legitimate sites, like the Internet Archive, Vimeo and Soundcloud. Oh yeah, and a bunch of hip hop blogs... and 50Cent's personal website. It's great to declare that they won't let ads show up on "rogue" sites, but it gets worrisome when they define "rogue" sites so broadly.

Filed Under: ana, counterfeiting, rogue sites, sopa
Companies: groupm, mpaa

Why The Chances of China Joining ACTA Or TPP Are Practically Zero

from the why-on-earth-would-it? dept

As Michael Geist and others have pointed out, ACTA is the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement without the main sources of counterfeits being involved -- notably, China. This has required some skilful footwork on the part of ACTA supporters, who need to justify the ratification of a loosely-worded treaty with potentially harmful effects on Internet service providers, civil liberties and developing countries, but which doesn't provide the key benefit claimed in its name. Here's how the European Union's representatives tried to deal with this issue in a "statement on IP Enforcement Trends" made at the WTO Council for TRIPS:

ACTA is an agreement between a limited number of countries.

But it is a significant first step. It establishes a nucleus of countries that are committed to the highest standards of intellectual property rights enforcement. A nucleus that will grow. The World Trade Organisation had a different name, a weaker structure and only nine members when it started out in 1948. After Russia’s accession later this year, nearly all world trade will be bound by its rules.

We would have liked to have negotiated this agreement at a global level. That was not possible. But the countries who have joined us in this agreement will soon begin to see the benefits of good enforcement, in terms of investment and in terms of innovation.

Since the vast majority of ACTA's participants already have "good enforcement", the last sentence only makes sense if it's referring to signatories like Mexico and Morocco. So is the EU seriously claiming that ACTA is going to lead to a flood of investment in those nations? If so, when? Immediately? In ten years? All-in-all, it seems a pretty dubious metric for the success of ACTA, and a poor incentive for others to join.

That's especially the case for China, which probably needs investment less than any nation on earth, since its currency reserves are currently around the $3 trillion mark. But even if external investment isn't much of an incentive, maybe there are others.

That wasn't the case back in 2010, when China was unconvinced about the value of ACTA:

Causing particular concern to them [India and China] is the draft Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) being negotiated by Australia, Canada, the EU and its 27 member states, Japan, Rep.Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the US. Briefly, China's and India's lengthy statements argued that ACTA and other agreements could:

• Conflict with TRIPS Agreement (a reference to TRIPS Art.1.1) and other WTO agreements, and cause legal uncertainty
• Undermine the balance of rights, obligations and flexibilities that were carefully negotiated in the various WTO agreements
• Distort trade or create trade barriers, and disrupt goods in transit or transhipment
• Undermine flexibilities built into TRIPS (such as for public health, and trade in generic medicines)
• Undermine governments’ freedom to allocate resources on intellectual property by forcing them to focus on enforcement

Of course that was two years ago, and ACTA has changed during that time. Perhaps China is more positive about it now. This is how it felt last week, when it was at that same WTO Council for TRIPS meeting:

China said many provisions of ACTA go beyond the TRIPS provisions.

Still not happy, apparently. But maybe China doesn't like the Western bias of ACTA, which basically consists of the US and the EU, plus a few other smaller nations thrown in to give a semblance of globalization. Perhaps China will join TPP instead?

A recent article provides some insight into China's attitude towards TPP, and its plans in this area:

For evidence of China's vision for an integrated East Asian political economy -- binding China, Japan, and Korea -- look at remarks of China's Commerce Minister yesterday in Beijing. Speaking at a press conference during the ongoing Chinese National People's Congress, Minister of Commerce Chen Deming's said of that Japanese entry into negotiations of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade pact, if it happens, "Should not be allowed to influence progress on other types of cooperation in the East Asian region."

Translation: Japan should give priority to and focus first on the talks being promoted by Beijing to create a regional Free Trade Agreement (FTA) which would closely bind China, Japan, and Korea.

In other words, far from contemplating joining TPP -- and thus helping to address the same issues about that treaty failing to deal with counterfeiting in the same way that ACTA fails -- China clearly wants to promote its own regional Free Trade Agreement (FTA) for leading East Asian nations. One reason is that China would be the clear economic heavyweight of that group, not the US as in ACTA or TPP.

That's the key problem with the ACTA proponents' vague hope that China will one day join a treaty it had no input on and which aims to shut down parts of its economy: ACTA would not only diminish China's sovereignty in terms of limiting what laws it could pass, it would also undermine its attempts to strengthen China's position as the undisputed regional leader in South-East Asia.

There is simply no benefit for China to join ACTA or TPP; and without China, both become largely pointless exercises.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: acta, china, counterfeiting, tpp

ICE Propaganda Film Pats Itself On The Back For Censoring The Web; Promises Much More To Come

from the walk-and-talk-john dept

Homeland Security's ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) group has put out a slickly produced video patting itself on the back for all of its work censoring the web in 2011, and promising much more of that kind of thing in the future: It stars ICE Director John Morton, reprising his usual ridiculous refrain in which he conflates actual counterfeit goods with copyright infringement. But this time, he shows off his ability to stroll quickly through a warehouse while doing a walk-and-talk. I have to admit that it feels like a parody video most of the time. He kicks it off with a claim that he's explaining how to "steal an American job." Then he claims, "here's how to save an American job: IPR enforcement!"

He's wrong. First of all, the "job loss" from counterfeits is totally and completely exaggerated. As has been shown by multiple studies, most people buying counterfeits (hell, and downloading infringing works) wouldn't have bought the real thing instead. They know they're buying a fake good. So no "job" is lost there. And, as the government's own GAO noted last year, the idea that this all leads to lost jobs simply isn't supported by the data.

Second, enforcement does not "save jobs." It does put massive burdens on legitimate sites. Something Morton should know about since he's been taking down legitimate American sites with no legal basis for quite some time.

But before we get to that, he shows off some counterfeit products. There's a handbag, some fake drugs (they always have to show the fake drugs, despite it being a tiny issue, but they have to show some sort of "danger"). And then there's a video game mod chip. He says it "allows you to hack into video games and steal the game for free. That's illegal. That's IP theft." Of course, it's debatable if mod-chips are really illegal. They have substantial non-infringing purposes other than "hacking into video games to steal them for free" (do people steal stuff not for free?). But, you know, that's ICE under John Morton: declaring it illegal for you to modify products you legally purchased, like your gaming console. Thanks, US government!

Then we get to website censorship. And boy is he proud of that. You can see him gleaming as he says that ICE has "done a phenomenal job" and "every time they make a bust, every time they make an arrest, an American job is saved."

So, I wonder, can John Morton explain whose job was saved when his staffers incorrectly seized and censored Dajaz1.com for over a year? I'm curious. Because it sure seems like he actually hurt the ability of the Americans who run that site to make money. I'm curious whose job was saved when his staff deported a missing teen to Colombia (where she was not from). Is that the kind of "phenomenal" work under John Morton we should expect more of?

He then shows off "the news coverage" that ICE has gotten for seizing websites. Notice that he leaves out the stories about the mistaken seizure of multiple websites beyond Dajaz1. Like the seizure of 84,000 legitimate sites that were replaced with a statement claiming that they were all involved in child porn. Somehow those clips just didn't make the cut. Phenomenal work "saving American jobs!"

Morton goes on to talk up how "proud of the results" he is over the seizing of websites. Once again, no mention of the ones he seized by mistake, causing tremendous harm to those who he falsely declared as criminals. What's amazing is that he's never issued an apology over those false seizures. Instead, he's "proud of the phenomenal job" his team has done? What a joke.

Finally, he highlights the PSA that ICE put on the websites they forfeited. What he leaves out, of course, is that the PSA was both created by and owned by NBC Universal -- something ICE has never publicly admitted, but which we found out via FOIA requests. It's still shocking that a government agency would be using misleading propaganda from a private company and pretending that it's an official government production. Even worse, despite numerous requests, ICE has failed to show any proof that it properly licensed the video from NBC Universal, leading us to wonder if they "pirated" it.

ICE under John Morton has become a massive joke and a disgrace to American ideals of innocent until proven guilty and important things like free speech and due process. Rather than making this joke of a video (which certainly has Hollywood-style production... I wonder how that happened...), Morton should be issuing apologies for the mistakes that were made under his watch, and tendering his resignation. Instead, he's celebrating? Sickening.

Filed Under: censorship, counterfeiting, domains, homeland security, ice, john morton, operation in our sites

ICE Seizes Another 150 Domains As SOPA/PIPA Debate Heats Up

from the this-is-how-censorship-works dept

Torrentfreak was the first to point out that Homeland Security's ICE group has ramped up their domain seizures, seizing 131 domains on Friday. They also grabbed one more today. That last one is interesting, since the seizure came on a .com that was actually transferred from a DNS provider in Australia, which raises additional questions about ICE's jurisdiction here (though may explain why the transfer came two days later). Update: that last one looks like it was a prank. However, ICE has officially announced that it seized 150 domains -- and of course, timed it to coincide with "Cyber Monday." Nothing like the feds propping up a marketing campaign.

It looks like, as it has done recently, most of these seizures focused on trademark issues with sites selling counterfeit goods. These are somewhat less troubling than some of last year's seizures of blogs and forums that had tons of protected speech -- and which appeared to link to content that was sent by copyright holders directly for promotional purposes. Still there are significant questions concerning the legality of such seizures, with ongoing challenges. It kind of makes you wonder if ICE is ramping up these seizures for a reason. The challenges concerning its authority to do so continue, while SOPA and PIPA, which would expand its ability to do these kinds of seizures, has been running into more speedbumps than expected. So might as well seize as many domains as possible before the party ends...

Filed Under: counterfeiting, doj, domain seizures, homeland security, ice, operation in our sites, trademark