Since the us government is beholden to foreign governments and corporate interests, it has no ability or courage to not give those entities more power to seize websites, for example, of people engaging in free speech, and one purpose of the transition process is to aide those foreign governments and corporate entities to consolidate their own power over their citizens, as well as the power of the globalist oligarchy hiding behind phony democracies and hiding stagnant technological progress behind the introduction of 'driverless cars', drones, the 'IWatch' and other technologies designed to help billionaire owned authority oppress the individual human being. Ron |
On 08/04/2016 00:57, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote: > The issue around domain seizures has nothing to do with ICANN. Any > domain seizure cases I’ve seen (including the examples cited by > Parminder) were all made either at the registrar or registry level. > I haven’t see any cases where ICANN has been involved directly (though > they often get named in cases) > You're absolutely correct. And the only "seizures" that were requested, were those of Top Level Domains: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28582478 There are many other sources that describe the case in detail. The judge sided with ICANN in saying that "they are not property subject to attachment under District of Columbia Law". In this case, it is actually a good thing that the case had to go in front of a US court since jurisprudence already existed. Kindest regards, Olivier _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org |