Isn't this how Reagan supposedly brought down the USSR?
Hehe, actually it is pretty much the story isn't it. But in the case of the USSR, turns out there was never enough money in communism to begin with. Was it Wright who called that one first?
Isn't this like seizing an entire multi-million dollar fully loaded cargo ship because a crew members scorned ex said that one of the crew had a half smoked joint in his pocket.
I laughed, then cried when I realized this is probably "OK".
It seems like it would be an international issue to me.
What is definitely a concern, however, is that by unilaterally seizing domain names, they bring into question the validity of the US's status as "trusted gatekeeper" of the root servers for our global DNS. Additionally, these actions could be create a lack of faith in the IANA as viable, or even potent, international governance.
If the IANA goes down, DNS as a global technology dies with it. Nations, regions and partisans will make their own name systems, fragmenting the global community and throttling international commerce.
How does the first amendment not apply to communication online? A website is a vehicle of expression and speech, and taking away from the effectiveness of that tool, by denying it a registered name for instance, inhibits this activity.
Should we allow police to cut a part of someone's vocal cord before trial if they "talk like a terrorist"?
The "police actions" here were made without mandate and without jurisdiction. There is nothing that differentiates these actions from vigilantism. Uniform or no, without some form of mandate, the DHS most definitely overstepped their bounds on this one.
bonus layer of silly: Techdirt at least Has presented alternatives.
Giving "them" what they ask for nets the same result as criticism: some chump comes in here holding their hands on their ears singing "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA" as loud as their little girl lungs can possibly support. This pretty much mirrors their leadership's ongoing response to the collapse of their business model, so on that weak premise I would argue Techdirt write-ups get the most executive responses in the comments of any site on the Net.
They can go and get Assange if it makes them feel better. It won't change a thing, though, since he's just an insane website operator. If they want to stop the leaks they'll have to go ... a bit deeper... try out a little 'introspection' if you will.
Platforms like Wikileaks are a dime a dozen. Disgruntled employees (former or no) are priceless.
I think many of us are still left wondering, even in the case of the criminal counterfeiting operations, whether due process was even considered before executing the seizures.
I realize there is a precedent for property seizures without due process which came from our infamous "war on drugs", but didn't we need to write a special laws specific to drug offenses to allow this circumvention?
What guidelines were used to affect these censors and under which civil or criminal code are the name seizures permitted?
I'm not able to listen to the audio at work, but from the blog entry he makes it seem like the TSA is set up in-line with the customs check for incoming international passengers as part of the arrival procedure.
Do the international arrivals in Cincinnati get dumped into a terminal at a point where departing passengers have already been screened, perhaps?
I agree with Anon. Tim/DH, your style and tone can give good balance to Mike's write-ups. More! If you ever catch yourself trying to "be like Mike" here, put on your suit and sing a cover of "My Way" Shatner style... and please post the video.
Heh, how many enlisted do you think would have signed up if it were not for the pay and benefits? It's funny that they call then "volunteers" when most only sign up for what they can get out of it for themselves.
The "volunteer" part is for voluntarily signing your rights away and putting your fate in the hands of Uncle Sam. If you don't like it, feel free to petition your congressman to bring back conscription (the draft).
Rather than enforce a lawful Internet in America, you would prefer to reduce all Internet laws to the lowest common denominator to match the most lawless country in the world?
I think you missed the point. COICA dismantles years of international cooperation that leaves us with a universal name technology. When the trusted gatekeeper can no longer be trusted, the gate will be abandoned.
For the Internet users, this means that instead of everyone being able to look up names from a global source, there will be myriad systems in play, each needing to be configured individually and being run by a national, regional or partisan interest. This spells "very bad" for commerce.
Under COICA, all blocks would have to be considered by a judge.
Leaving habeus corpus in tact, "I'm sure"? Also, I thought a judge has to review the block within days of it being enacted, not before it was enacted. Either way, there is no due process if they can curtail your 1st amendment rights before giving you a chance to respond.
The only way to make this fair is to give the accused a window to respond before the censor goes up, and to make public all blocking activity. Unfortunately this would not work for the "key stakeholders".
Please explain to me what the existing laws on the books are to address a pirate server hosted in Pakistan/Iran/N.Korea/etc. or any country that does not believe in enforcing American IP rights.
In such cases, blocking is the only approach that can be applied. Unless you are arguing for the abolition of IP enforcement.
And here you illustrate the post-COICA type of scenario that would unravel years of progress made by having the U.S. acting as the "trusted gatekeeper" for IANA and hosting the 'root' servers.
DNS is a globally used technology because everyone agrees to use it and it is trusted, mostly, to be managed fairly.
If the U.S. throws away it's credibility on COICA, Internet commerce of all kinds will be stifled by the fragmentation of what was once a universal technology.
You must have a very idealistic world view if you believe all legal cases must be 100% black or 100% white before a judge should be allowed to render a verdict. Being a judge is never that easy. But they manage every day. It is their responsibility, based on the criteria in the bill, to draw the line. They do this every day they hold a gavel.
True, and this is basically how we determine if something is "infringement" or not, with a judge and jury. Infringement most definitely is "not black and white", and yet COICA wants relegate the early determination to industry and DOJ representatives. Censor first, justify later. Sounds "a bit" like a setup to me.
Word that I get from the ABA IP Section is that the Chamber and the IP lobby will be pressing hard to get a vote. Stay tuned....
Thanks for sharing here, Paul. Lots of us are keeping their channels fixed on this one... and of course the ACTA ruse on "discovery International".
It is tragic that Senators don't yet seem to see the great potential for harm the "remedy" has for all Internet commerce. Without a trusted gatekeeper, what are now globally shared technologies will fragment into national, regional and partisan solutions.
Anything to spread your desperate pro-piracy agenda, right? Go Pirates!! Rah! Rah! Rah!
You do realize that the EU has a Pirate Party because of the sheer number of idiots willing to spew this same inane crap in legislative sessions, right?
Call an independent musician or the Creative Commons piracy if you must, but this only hastens the demise of the former middle-men overlords. What will you do when there is no longer an avenue to monetize spurious connections to 40 year old songs?
The provision in question calls for a partnership between industry representatives and the blessed DOJ. In other words: a big corporation points out a target, and the DOJ "kills" it. There is no provision for due process before the "kill", it must be disputed in appeals/motion to quash once the block (censor) goes into place.
Tell me, how long do you think the ideal of supporting creators and promoting innovation last if this bill passes?
The ideal will not even be attempted.
This bill needs to go down in flames if they refuse to cut the crap.
On the post: How The US Response Turns 'Failed' Terrorist Attacks Into Successes
Re:
Hehe, actually it is pretty much the story isn't it. But in the case of the USSR, turns out there was never enough money in communism to begin with. Was it Wright who called that one first?
On the post: Amazon Bows To US Censorship Pressure: Refuses To Host Wikileaks
Re: "Censorship" of Wikileaks???
Are you or are you not a witch?
On the post: Homeland Security Admits That It's The Private Police Force Of The Entertainment Industry
Re:
I laughed, then cried when I realized this is probably "OK".
On the post: Homeland Security Admits That It's The Private Police Force Of The Entertainment Industry
Re: international
What is definitely a concern, however, is that by unilaterally seizing domain names, they bring into question the validity of the US's status as "trusted gatekeeper" of the root servers for our global DNS. Additionally, these actions could be create a lack of faith in the IANA as viable, or even potent, international governance.
If the IANA goes down, DNS as a global technology dies with it. Nations, regions and partisans will make their own name systems, fragmenting the global community and throttling international commerce.
On the post: Homeland Security Admits That It's The Private Police Force Of The Entertainment Industry
Re: Dur process is not the problem
How does the first amendment not apply to communication online? A website is a vehicle of expression and speech, and taking away from the effectiveness of that tool, by denying it a registered name for instance, inhibits this activity.
Should we allow police to cut a part of someone's vocal cord before trial if they "talk like a terrorist"?
The "police actions" here were made without mandate and without jurisdiction. There is nothing that differentiates these actions from vigilantism. Uniform or no, without some form of mandate, the DHS most definitely overstepped their bounds on this one.
On the post: Irony: Ebook About Clueless Media Moguls Costs Many Times Brand New Hardcover Version
Re: The Ebook Market Is A Fad
I'm definitely thinking you've got it.
On the post: PC Mag Responds To Legacy Recording Industry's 'Complaint' Letter
Re: Re: Re:
Giving "them" what they ask for nets the same result as criticism: some chump comes in here holding their hands on their ears singing "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA" as loud as their little girl lungs can possibly support. This pretty much mirrors their leadership's ongoing response to the collapse of their business model, so on that weak premise I would argue Techdirt write-ups get the most executive responses in the comments of any site on the Net.
On the post: Justice Department Trying To Figure Out How To Twist US Laws To Charge Julian Assange
Platforms like Wikileaks are a dime a dozen. Disgruntled employees (former or no) are priceless.
On the post: If Newly Seized Domains Were Purely Dedicated To Infringement, Why Was Kanye West Using One?
Re:
I realize there is a precedent for property seizures without due process which came from our infamous "war on drugs", but didn't we need to write a special laws specific to drug offenses to allow this circumvention?
What guidelines were used to affect these censors and under which civil or criminal code are the name seizures permitted?
On the post: TSA Claims You Need To Be Naked Scanned Or Groped After A Flight?
Re: Poor airport design
Do the international arrivals in Cincinnati get dumped into a terminal at a point where departing passengers have already been screened, perhaps?
On the post: Don't Blame 'Piracy' For Your Own Failures To Engage
Re: Excellent article, Tim.
On the post: Newspapers Say: Shut Up And Get Scanned And Groped
Re: Re: Re: Soliders dying...
The "volunteer" part is for voluntarily signing your rights away and putting your fate in the hands of Uncle Sam. If you don't like it, feel free to petition your congressman to bring back conscription (the draft).
On the post: Why Voting For COICA Is A Vote For Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So much for going after the terror-fringement sites in Pakistan, then?
On the post: Why Voting For COICA Is A Vote For Censorship
Re: Re: Re:
I think you missed the point. COICA dismantles years of international cooperation that leaves us with a universal name technology. When the trusted gatekeeper can no longer be trusted, the gate will be abandoned.
For the Internet users, this means that instead of everyone being able to look up names from a global source, there will be myriad systems in play, each needing to be configured individually and being run by a national, regional or partisan interest. This spells "very bad" for commerce.
On the post: Why Voting For COICA Is A Vote For Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Leaving habeus corpus in tact, "I'm sure"? Also, I thought a judge has to review the block within days of it being enacted, not before it was enacted. Either way, there is no due process if they can curtail your 1st amendment rights before giving you a chance to respond.
The only way to make this fair is to give the accused a window to respond before the censor goes up, and to make public all blocking activity. Unfortunately this would not work for the "key stakeholders".
On the post: Why Voting For COICA Is A Vote For Censorship
Re:
And here you illustrate the post-COICA type of scenario that would unravel years of progress made by having the U.S. acting as the "trusted gatekeeper" for IANA and hosting the 'root' servers.
DNS is a globally used technology because everyone agrees to use it and it is trusted, mostly, to be managed fairly.
If the U.S. throws away it's credibility on COICA, Internet commerce of all kinds will be stifled by the fragmentation of what was once a universal technology.
On the post: Why Voting For COICA Is A Vote For Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
True, and this is basically how we determine if something is "infringement" or not, with a judge and jury. Infringement most definitely is "not black and white", and yet COICA wants relegate the early determination to industry and DOJ representatives. Censor first, justify later. Sounds "a bit" like a setup to me.
On the post: Senator Wyden Says He'll Block COICA Censorship Bill
Re: What can one Senator do
Thanks for sharing here, Paul. Lots of us are keeping their channels fixed on this one... and of course the ACTA ruse on "discovery International".
It is tragic that Senators don't yet seem to see the great potential for harm the "remedy" has for all Internet commerce. Without a trusted gatekeeper, what are now globally shared technologies will fragment into national, regional and partisan solutions.
On the post: Senator Wyden Says He'll Block COICA Censorship Bill
Re:
You do realize that the EU has a Pirate Party because of the sheer number of idiots willing to spew this same inane crap in legislative sessions, right?
Call an independent musician or the Creative Commons piracy if you must, but this only hastens the demise of the former middle-men overlords. What will you do when there is no longer an avenue to monetize spurious connections to 40 year old songs?
On the post: The 19 Senators Who Voted To Censor The Internet
Re: COICA is not Censoring the internet
Tell me, how long do you think the ideal of supporting creators and promoting innovation last if this bill passes?
The ideal will not even be attempted.
This bill needs to go down in flames if they refuse to cut the crap.
Next >>