Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I would support this. Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests. Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam. Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim (this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs <http://www.rojadirecta.me> <http://www.rojadirecta.es> <http://www.rojadirecta.in> as well its original IP address <http://109.235.53.189/>.
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point: < http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
I hope At Large will issue a statement protesting the use of the TLD registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam _______________________________________________ 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
I would support this as well. On Feb 2, 2011, at 10:35 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote:
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim (this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs <http://www.rojadirecta.me> <http://www.rojadirecta.es> <http://www.rojadirecta.in> as well its original IP address <http://109.235.53.189/>.
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point: < http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
I hope At Large will issue a statement protesting the use of the TLD registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
+1 On 2 Feb 2011, at 17:30, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
I would support this as well.
On Feb 2, 2011, at 10:35 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote:
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim (this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs <http://www.rojadirecta.me> <http://www.rojadirecta.es> <http://www.rojadirecta.in> as well its original IP address <http://109.235.53.189/>.
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point: < http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
I hope At Large will issue a statement protesting the use of the TLD registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
I'm not a big fan of ICE, but if, as I understand, rojadirecta used a US registrar and a US proxy service for their domain name, why does anyone think Spanish law applied to the use of their name? Nobody claims that ICE has tried to shut down their operations outside the U.S. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
I'd have no objection if ICE had used GoDaddy as the route to take down the site. Registrants have choice. TLD is different. My comment "this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due process." was extreme. I've no idea what process has been followed. Adam
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
I'm not a big fan of ICE, but if, as I understand, rojadirecta used a US registrar and a US proxy service for their domain name, why does anyone think Spanish law applied to the use of their name?
Nobody claims that ICE has tried to shut down their operations outside the U.S.
Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly _______________________________________________ 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
Adam Peake wrote:
I'd have no objection if ICE had used GoDaddy as the route to take down the site. Registrants have choice. TLD is different.
My comment "this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due process." was extreme. I've no idea what process has been followed.
Adam
The 'problem' is that a due legal process was indeed followed here, and the registries got a notice from the court. As long as an organization is subject to the US law, which includes the ICANN, and there is no exception vis a vis any specific application of the law because of a higher level international commitment, which itself needs to first be imported into the US law, merely making a representation to the US gov against such a practice has little real meaning. The same court order could go to ICANN and the root server operator and they have no option but to comply. Any challenge to such a court order needs to be based on some clear legal provision and not on the general sentiment of the global Internet community. But, yes, writing to the US gov does highlight the problem involved and I think it should be done. Parminder
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site.
Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
I'm not a big fan of ICE, but if, as I understand, rojadirecta used a US registrar and a US proxy service for their domain name, why does anyone think Spanish law applied to the use of their name?
Nobody claims that ICE has tried to shut down their operations outside the U.S.
Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- PK
But under what law is linking i.e "contributory copyright infringement" illegal? Anyone got a copy of any of these court orders? j
The 'problem' is that a due legal process was indeed followed here, and the registries got a notice from the court. As long as an organization is subject to the US law, which includes the ICANN, and there is no exception vis a vis any specific application of the law because of a higher level international commitment, which itself needs to first be imported into the US law, merely making a representation to the US gov against such a practice has little real meaning. The same court order could go to ICANN and the root server operator and they have no option but to comply. Any challenge to such a court order needs to be based on some clear legal provision and not on the general sentiment of the global Internet community.
But, yes, writing to the US gov does highlight the problem involved and I think it should be done.
Parminder
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------
I have objections to ICE and their reliability. 1. Ice fails to attempt to enforce immigration laws that they are required to enforce, such as employer inspections. 2. That it seems as though ICE ignores the principles of due process. That the US government talks about, and even preaches, individual rights. However, they have violated the law regarding individual rights (See http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110202/03320812922/eff-finds-evidence-ove...). I don't object to proper, court supervised process - ie. a lawsuit and resulting seizure.
I'd have no objection if ICE had used GoDaddy as the route to take down the site. Registrants have choice. TLD is different.
My comment "this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due process." was extreme. I've no idea what process has been followed.
Adam
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
I'm not a big fan of ICE, but if, as I understand, rojadirecta used a US registrar and a US proxy service for their domain name, why does anyone think Spanish law applied to the use of their name?
Nobody claims that ICE has tried to shut down their operations outside the U.S.
Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
Bill Silverstein wrote:
I have objections to ICE and their reliability.
1. Ice fails to attempt to enforce immigration laws that they are required to enforce, such as employer inspections.
2. That it seems as though ICE ignores the principles of due process. That the US government talks about, and even preaches, individual rights. However, they have violated the law regarding individual rights (See http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110202/03320812922/eff-finds-evidence-ove...).
I don't object to proper, court supervised process - ie. a lawsuit and resulting seizure.
That may be ok for a US based view of a US citizen. However, what I understand the global community here is seized of is whether the operation of tlds, and thus the continued existence of websites and other internet operations using these tlds, should be subject to the US law. To illustrate with an example, my organisation IT for Change's website used .net tld. Now, can the website be brought down just because the US law at one point thinks that something is being done on the website which is inimical to US interests - maybe under the provision of some emergency laws. And I understand that as an alien my FoE will also not be considered/ protected by a US court at the same level as of a US citizen. parminder
I'd have no objection if ICE had used GoDaddy as the route to take down the site. Registrants have choice. TLD is different.
My comment "this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due process." was extreme. I've no idea what process has been followed.
Adam
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site.
Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
I'm not a big fan of ICE, but if, as I understand, rojadirecta used a US registrar and a US proxy service for their domain name, why does anyone think Spanish law applied to the use of their name?
Nobody claims that ICE has tried to shut down their operations outside the U.S.
Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- PK
I support this, too. I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts. I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint. Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws. Patrick
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of
seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was
against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice
of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM
names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers
COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim
(this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due
process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs
as well its original IP address .
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point:
<
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz... [4]
I hope At Large will issue a statement
protesting the use of the TLD
registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7]
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14] -- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4] http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz... [5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should interfere with events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of
seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was
against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice
of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM
names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers
COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim
(this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due
process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs
as well its original IP address .
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point:
<
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz... [4]
I hope At Large will issue a statement
protesting the use of the TLD
registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7]
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4] http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz... [5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
At one level, this outrage happens simply because of the ignorance of people in thinking that generic names are not associated with a country. The .com, .org, .net domains are widely thought of as "international" but in fact they're not -- witness the miniscule use of the ".us" domain. (Heck, even ".int" isn't truly international, as IANA is US-based and is subject to the same takedown protocols as .com) There is a part of me that hopes this action will alert people outside the US that -- in order to stay outside the bounds of US law -- they need to use non-US registries and registrars. One would think that some of the more canny CCTLD operators might even use that issue in marketing. So if online casinos are illegal in the US, it should be no surprise that its legal system would take steps to shut down -- to whatever extent that it could -- "onlinecasino.com". They'd have no jurisdiction, however on " onlinecasino.co.uk" -- unless that registrant was foolish enough to use a US-based registrar. I don't agree that At-Large has much of a political role to play, in that no country is going to listen to our complaints about content-related domain seizures. And it's not within our ability -- let alone our expertise -- to monitor and pass judgement on what content is illegal in all sovereign countries. Perhaps, though, we do have a role to play in educating users and registrants about the choices they make when obtaining a domain, including issues related to the home location of the registry and registrar. (This need-to-know also extends to the location of the would-be registrant's content hosting, but that's way out of ICANN's scope.) Anything that helps educate the public that there is not a "default" TLD but a set of choices -- each choice with certain benefits and risks -- is both useful and within our ability to provide IMO. - Evan On 3 February 2011 16:08, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should interfere with events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of
seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was
against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice
of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM
names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers
COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim
(this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due
process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs
as well its original IP address .
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point:
<
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[4]
I hope At Large will issue a statement
protesting the use of the TLD
registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7]
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
So if online casinos are illegal in the US, it should be no surprise that its legal system would take steps to shut down -- to whatever extent that it could -- "onlinecasino.com". They'd have no jurisdiction, however on " onlinecasino.co.uk" -- unless that registrant was foolish enough to use a US-based registrar.
If a ccTLD has outsourced its technical function (and several ccTLD do) to a US based registry operator, perhaps the US legal system can shut down a domain under a ccTLD by serving the seizure warrant to the US based registry operator of that ccTLD. Dev T
I don't agree that At-Large has much of a political role to play, in that no country is going to listen to our complaints about content-related domain seizures. And it's not within our ability -- let alone our expertise -- to monitor and pass judgement on what content is illegal in all sovereign countries.
Perhaps, though, we do have a role to play in educating users and registrants about the choices they make when obtaining a domain, including issues related to the home location of the registry and registrar. (This need-to-know also extends to the location of the would-be registrant's content hosting, but that's way out of ICANN's scope.)
Anything that helps educate the public that there is not a "default" TLD but a set of choices -- each choice with certain benefits and risks -- is both useful and within our ability to provide IMO.
- Evan
On 3 February 2011 16:08, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should interfere with events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of
seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was
against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice
of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM
names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers
COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim
(this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due
process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs
as well its original IP address .
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point:
<
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[4]
>
I hope At Large will issue a statement
protesting the use of the TLD
registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7]
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 _______________________________________________ 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
Dear All, This is particularly in response to Evan and Dev's emails. According to TorrentFreak Article at http://torrentfreak.com/us-resume-file-sharing-domain-seizures-110201/ " The site is owned by a Spanish company that pays its taxes and has been declared to operate legally in Spain. In addition, the site is not hosted in the US either. The only connection to the US is that the .org domain is maintained <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afilias> by a US company. This indirect connection to the US makes the seizure a dubious action, according to Rojadirecta’s owner. “In our opinion the US authorities are completely despising the Spanish justice system and sovereignty,” Seoane told TorrentFreak... Despite losing the .org domain, Rojadirecta can still be accessed via rojadirecta.com, rojadirecta.es, rojadirecta.me, rojadirecta.in. The latter two domains are interestingly enough maintained by the same company as the .org domain, but Rojadirecta ensures us that they have many other domains that are not controlled by US authorities or companies. The seizure of Rojadirecta shows that commercial interests are high on the agenda of the US Government. Seizing a domain that has been specifically declared to operate legally in other countries does not appear to be an obstacle. In this light, one has to wonder if generic domain names should be controlled exclusively by US companies." So it would appear that even outsourcing functions give ICE authority to shut down the site! Kind regards Cintra On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin@ttcsweb.org>wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
So if online casinos are illegal in the US, it should be no surprise that its legal system would take steps to shut down -- to whatever extent that
it
could -- "onlinecasino.com". They'd have no jurisdiction, however on " onlinecasino.co.uk" -- unless that registrant was foolish enough to use a US-based registrar.
If a ccTLD has outsourced its technical function (and several ccTLD do) to a US based registry operator, perhaps the US legal system can shut down a domain under a ccTLD by serving the seizure warrant to the US based registry operator of that ccTLD.
Dev T
I don't agree that At-Large has much of a political role to play, in that no country is going to listen to our complaints about content-related domain seizures. And it's not within our ability -- let alone our expertise -- to monitor and pass judgement on what content is illegal in all sovereign countries.
Perhaps, though, we do have a role to play in educating users and registrants about the choices they make when obtaining a domain, including issues related to the home location of the registry and registrar. (This need-to-know also extends to the location of the would-be registrant's content hosting, but that's way out of ICANN's scope.)
Anything that helps educate the public that there is not a "default" TLD but a set of choices -- each choice with certain benefits and risks -- is both useful and within our ability to provide IMO.
- Evan
On 3 February 2011 16:08, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should interfere
with
events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
> I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of > domain name Rojadirecta.org. > > Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. > Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have > ruled the site operates legally. > > It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and > Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of > seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was > against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice > of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM > names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers > COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim > (this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due > process.) > > Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs >
> as well its original IP address > . > > Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a > starting point: > < >
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[4]
> >> > > I hope At Large will issue a statement protesting the use of the TLD > registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG > and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction > where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That > the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in > jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not > possible. > > Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency. > > Adam > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5] > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6] > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7]
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
The Torrentfreak post is incorrect, in that it mentions that Afilias is managing the TLD. Afilias is only the backend provider. It does not take any decisions about which .org domains to takedown or not. Further, Afilias is a registered company in Ireland, and not in the US. It only executes what PIR tells them to do. I have received a direct confirmation from PIR that the takedown notice was delivered to them, at their headquarters in Reston, VA. There was no way for them to avoid executing the court decision. Patrick On 04 Feb 2011, at 10:20, Cintra Sooknanan wrote:
Dear All,
This is particularly in response to Evan and Dev's emails.
According to TorrentFreak Article at http://torrentfreak.com/us-resume-file-sharing-domain-seizures-110201/
" The site is owned by a Spanish company that pays its taxes and has been declared to operate legally in Spain. In addition, the site is not hosted in the US either. The only connection to the US is that the .org domain is maintained <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afilias> by a US company.
This indirect connection to the US makes the seizure a dubious action, according to Rojadirecta’s owner. “In our opinion the US authorities are completely despising the Spanish justice system and sovereignty,” Seoane told TorrentFreak...
Despite losing the .org domain, Rojadirecta can still be accessed via rojadirecta.com, rojadirecta.es, rojadirecta.me, rojadirecta.in. The latter two domains are interestingly enough maintained by the same company as the .org domain, but Rojadirecta ensures us that they have many other domains that are not controlled by US authorities or companies.
The seizure of Rojadirecta shows that commercial interests are high on the agenda of the US Government. Seizing a domain that has been specifically declared to operate legally in other countries does not appear to be an obstacle. In this light, one has to wonder if generic domain names should be controlled exclusively by US companies."
So it would appear that even outsourcing functions give ICE authority to shut down the site!
Kind regards
Cintra
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin@ttcsweb.org>wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
So if online casinos are illegal in the US, it should be no surprise that its legal system would take steps to shut down -- to whatever extent that
it
could -- "onlinecasino.com". They'd have no jurisdiction, however on " onlinecasino.co.uk" -- unless that registrant was foolish enough to use a US-based registrar.
If a ccTLD has outsourced its technical function (and several ccTLD do) to a US based registry operator, perhaps the US legal system can shut down a domain under a ccTLD by serving the seizure warrant to the US based registry operator of that ccTLD.
Dev T
I don't agree that At-Large has much of a political role to play, in that no country is going to listen to our complaints about content-related domain seizures. And it's not within our ability -- let alone our expertise -- to monitor and pass judgement on what content is illegal in all sovereign countries.
Perhaps, though, we do have a role to play in educating users and registrants about the choices they make when obtaining a domain, including issues related to the home location of the registry and registrar. (This need-to-know also extends to the location of the would-be registrant's content hosting, but that's way out of ICANN's scope.)
Anything that helps educate the public that there is not a "default" TLD but a set of choices -- each choice with certain benefits and risks -- is both useful and within our ability to provide IMO.
- Evan
On 3 February 2011 16:08, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should interfere
with
events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
> I would support this. > > Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for > online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal > in Antigua but it matters not to US interests. > > Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she > has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam. > > Carlton > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround > ============================= > > On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > >> I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of >> domain name Rojadirecta.org. >> >> Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. >> Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have >> ruled the site operates legally. >> >> It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and >> Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of >> seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was >> against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice >> of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM >> names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers >> COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim >> (this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due >> process.) >> >> Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs >>
>> as well its original IP address >> . >> >> Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a >> starting point: >> < >>
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[4]
>> >>> >> >> I hope At Large will issue a statement protesting the use of the TLD >> registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG >> and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction >> where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That >> the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in >> jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not >> possible. >> >> Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency. >> >> Adam >> _______________________________________________ >> At-Large mailing list >> At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5] >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6] >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7] >
> At-Large mailing list > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9] > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10] > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Patrick Vande Walle Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu Facebook: http://facebook.vande-walle.eu LinkedIn: http://linkedin.vande-walle.eu
On 4 February 2011 14:26, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick@vande-walle.eu>wrote:
The Torrentfreak post is incorrect, in that it mentions that Afilias is managing the TLD. Afilias is only the backend provider. It does not take any decisions about which .org domains to takedown or not. Further, Afilias is a registered company in Ireland, and not in the US. It only executes what PIR tells them to do.
I have received a direct confirmation from PIR that the takedown notice was delivered to them, at their headquarters in Reston, VA. There was no way for them to avoid executing the court decision.
Affilias has a business presence in five countries -- including the US, whose office is the company's primary public point of contact<http://www.afilias.info/contact-us> -- meaning that it could indeed be the *direct* target of a US government order. It may have its global head office in Ireland, but it's not accurate to say that it is not a registered company in the US. What this means, however, is that it is also possible that the governments of Ireland, Canada, India and the UK *also* have the ability to takedown the site should they have (given themselves) the authority to do so using due process. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
On 4 Feb 2011, at 14:26, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
I have received a direct confirmation from PIR that the takedown notice was delivered to them, at their headquarters in Reston, VA. There was no way for them to avoid executing the court decision.
Could they have appealed the court order and gotten a stay on its execution? Did they try? Do we have reference to the court's decision & warrant other then authority of 18 USC para 981, 2323? a.
Here is the 88 page ICE application to the US District Court in California to seize several domains in November 2010 for Operation in our Sites 2.0 : http://www.docstoc.com/docs/67610787/45705510-Operation-in-Our-Sites-2-0 Dev Anand Teelucksingh On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
Could they have appealed the court order and gotten a stay on its execution? Did they try? Do we have reference to the court's decision & warrant other then authority of 18 USC para 981, 2323?
a. _______________________________________________ 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
would be nice to know what PIR advisory council has to say: Milton, Dave, any comments? Adam On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
On 4 Feb 2011, at 14:26, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
I have received a direct confirmation from PIR that the takedown notice was delivered to them, at their headquarters in Reston, VA. There was no way for them to avoid executing the court decision.
Could they have appealed the court order and gotten a stay on its execution? Did they try? Do we have reference to the court's decision & warrant other then authority of 18 USC para 981, 2323?
a. _______________________________________________ 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
It seems to me that, while there appears a well established process whereby the property of counterfeiters are seized - I see this happening regularly down the block from my studio near Canal Street NYC - ground zero for dodgy handbags and timepieces - it's a different mater when it comes to domains, in that is restricting communication, and thus amounts to censorship, raising first amendment issues. j -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------
On 4 February 2011 15:42, Joly MacFie <joly@punkcast.com> wrote:
It seems to me that, while there appears a well established process whereby the property of counterfeiters are seized - I see this happening regularly down the block from my studio near Canal Street NYC - ground zero for dodgy handbags and timepieces - it's a different mater when it comes to domains, in that is restricting communication, and thus amounts to censorship, raising first amendment issues.
Indeed ... but that's an internal US political and legal discussion beyond the bounds of ICANN. Laws such as the Patriot Act and ACTA trod on freedom of speech as a matter of course. And American society still has its own long list of free-expression taboos, whether it's a bare nipple shown on broadcast TV or nativity scenes in government buildings. And I've heard a rumour that the intellectual property industry has its own views on the limitations of free speech that might be quite different from yours or mine. But no matter. This is not an American mailing list or an American domestic policy discussion; if we're trying to make this issue useful in an ICANN context it needs to be generalized beyond any one country's borders. Many Western countries have hate-speech laws that outlaw content which would be protected speech in the US. So if the opposite instance occurred -- say a "kill the gays" website domain that was registered under a Canadian or European TLD but hosted in the US -- the domain expropriation could conceivably still happen. The US Constitution would not protect against laws in the registrant's or registry's country. IANAL, but this is how I have interpreted the activity I have seen so far. - Evan
I guess, after reading http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002323----000-.... that there isn't much question that the USG has a legal right to seize property, but the question still arises when does linking constitute "distribution".. j On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
On 4 February 2011 15:42, Joly MacFie <joly@punkcast.com> wrote:
It seems to me that, while there appears a well established process whereby the property of counterfeiters are seized - I see this happening regularly down the block from my studio near Canal Street NYC - ground zero for dodgy handbags and timepieces - it's a different mater when it comes to domains, in that is restricting communication, and thus amounts to censorship, raising first amendment issues.
Indeed ... but that's an internal US political and legal discussion beyond the bounds of ICANN. Laws such as the Patriot Act and ACTA trod on freedom of speech as a matter of course. And American society still has its own long list of free-expression taboos, whether it's a bare nipple shown on broadcast TV or nativity scenes in government buildings. And I've heard a rumour that the intellectual property industry has its own views on the limitations of free speech that might be quite different from yours or mine.
But no matter. This is not an American mailing list or an American domestic policy discussion; if we're trying to make this issue useful in an ICANN context it needs to be generalized beyond any one country's borders.
Many Western countries have hate-speech laws that outlaw content which would be protected speech in the US. So if the opposite instance occurred -- say a "kill the gays" website domain that was registered under a Canadian or European TLD but hosted in the US -- the domain expropriation could conceivably still happen. The US Constitution would not protect against laws in the registrant's or registry's country.
IANAL, but this is how I have interpreted the activity I have seen so far.
- Evan _______________________________________________ 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
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------
ICE press release here: http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1102/110202newyork.htm <http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1102/110202newyork.htm>j On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Joly MacFie <joly@punkcast.com> wrote:
I guess, after reading http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002323----000-.... that there isn't much question that the USG has a legal right to seize property, but the question still arises when does linking constitute "distribution"..
j
--
Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------
ICE boss John Morton gave the keynote at the recent Congressional Internet Caucus Stae of the Net. He starts talking about domain takedowns at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWZY_LujUhc&feature=player_detailpage#t=328s <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWZY_LujUhc&feature=player_detailpage#t=328s>* In all cases they obtained illicit goods via the sites before obtaining warrants. * He says they served the registries. * All seizures can be challenged in federal court. * After they seized 8 sites in June, 81 more sites shut down voluntarily. * One re-emerged under a different name. Working with UK police it was again shutdown. * Seizure banners have received 25m hits. Some sites got more hits after seizure. * After 131 referrals from industry they enforced 81 in November. (81 obviously a magic number) * Pirates don't pay taxes or health care, invest in America. * Criticism provides publicity which is helpful.. * Not interested in limiting speech or due process * Internet is not above the law. Then, in answer to question, about whther this set a bad example for Internet freedom in other countries. * All except 5 sites were selling counterfeit hard goods. * In the case of the 5 sites, special care taken to establish 1) content is illicit, and 2) knowingly supplied, in order to obtain court order. j On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Joly MacFie <joly@punkcast.com> wrote:
ICE press release here: http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1102/110202newyork.htm
<http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1102/110202newyork.htm>j
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Joly MacFie <joly@punkcast.com> wrote:
I guess, after reading http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002323----000-.... that there isn't much question that the USG has a legal right to seize property, but the question still arises when does linking constitute "distribution"..
j
--
Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------
Dev Wrote: If a ccTLD has outsourced its technical function (and several ccTLD do) to a US based registry operator, perhaps the US legal system can shut down a domain under a ccTLD by serving the seizure warrant to the US based registry operator of that ccTLD. Dev T In actual fact, yes. Here's something else. Domains representing search engine that had a link to the domain of the USG's primary interest were also seized! Aiding and abetting, it is said. Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin@ttcsweb.org>wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
So if online casinos are illegal in the US, it should be no surprise that its legal system would take steps to shut down -- to whatever extent that
it
could -- "onlinecasino.com". They'd have no jurisdiction, however on " onlinecasino.co.uk" -- unless that registrant was foolish enough to use a US-based registrar.
If a ccTLD has outsourced its technical function (and several ccTLD do) to a US based registry operator, perhaps the US legal system can shut down a domain under a ccTLD by serving the seizure warrant to the US based registry operator of that ccTLD.
Dev T
I don't agree that At-Large has much of a political role to play, in that no country is going to listen to our complaints about content-related domain seizures. And it's not within our ability -- let alone our expertise -- to monitor and pass judgement on what content is illegal in all sovereign countries.
Perhaps, though, we do have a role to play in educating users and registrants about the choices they make when obtaining a domain, including issues related to the home location of the registry and registrar. (This need-to-know also extends to the location of the would-be registrant's content hosting, but that's way out of ICANN's scope.)
Anything that helps educate the public that there is not a "default" TLD but a set of choices -- each choice with certain benefits and risks -- is both useful and within our ability to provide IMO.
- Evan
On 3 February 2011 16:08, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should interfere
with
events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
> I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of > domain name Rojadirecta.org. > > Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. > Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have > ruled the site operates legally. > > It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and > Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of > seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was > against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice > of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM > names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers > COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim > (this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due > process.) > > Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs >
> as well its original IP address > . > > Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a > starting point: > < >
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[4]
> >> > > I hope At Large will issue a statement protesting the use of the TLD > registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG > and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction > where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That > the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in > jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not > possible. > > Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency. > > Adam > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5] > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6] > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7]
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
I would note that the same is true for a technical function located in any other country in the world. The US is not a unique sovereign in this regard. So the larger question should be one of the relationship between the types of sites in a domain and the laws of the country in which the administrative or technical functions reside and whether that should be a consideration regarding the location of those functions. Of course then one has to take into account is this a policy area in which ICANN has a role or is just an observer and possible commentator. Ray
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlton Samuels Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 9:54 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
Dev Wrote: If a ccTLD has outsourced its technical function (and several ccTLD do) to a US based registry operator, perhaps the US legal system can shut down a domain under a ccTLD by serving the seizure warrant to the US based registry operator of that ccTLD.
Dev T
In actual fact, yes.
Here's something else. Domains representing search engine that had a link to the domain of the USG's primary interest were also seized! Aiding and abetting, it is said.
Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin@ttcsweb.org>wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
So if online casinos are illegal in the US, it should be no
surprise that
its legal system would take steps to shut down -- to whatever extent that it could -- "onlinecasino.com". They'd have no jurisdiction, however on " onlinecasino.co.uk" -- unless that registrant was foolish enough to use a US-based registrar.
If a ccTLD has outsourced its technical function (and several ccTLD do) to a US based registry operator, perhaps the US legal system can shut down a domain under a ccTLD by serving the seizure warrant to the US based registry operator of that ccTLD.
Dev T
I don't agree that At-Large has much of a political role to play, in that no country is going to listen to our complaints about content-related domain seizures. And it's not within our ability -- let alone our expertise -- to monitor and pass judgement on what content is illegal in all sovereign countries.
Perhaps, though, we do have a role to play in educating users and registrants about the choices they make when obtaining a domain, including issues related to the home location of the registry and registrar. (This need-to-know also extends to the location of the would-be registrant's content hosting, but that's way out of ICANN's scope.)
Anything that helps educate the public that there is not a "default" TLD but a set of choices -- each choice with certain benefits and risks -- is both useful and within our ability to provide IMO.
- Evan
On 3 February 2011 16:08, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should
interfere with
events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
> I would support this. > > Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for > online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal > in Antigua but it matters not to US interests. > > Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she > has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam. > > Carlton > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround > ============================= > > On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > >> I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of >> domain name Rojadirecta.org. >> >> Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. >> Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have >> ruled the site operates legally. >> >> It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and >> Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of >> seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was >> against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice >> of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM >> names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers >> COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim >> (this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due >> process.) >> >> Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs >>
>> as well its original IP address >> . >> >> Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a >> starting point: >> < >>
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland- security-seizes-spanish-domain-name-that-had-already-been-declared- legal.shtml
[4]
>> >>> >> >> I hope At Large will issue a statement protesting the use of the TLD >> registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG >> and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction >> where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That >> the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in >> jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not >> possible. >> >> Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency. >> >> Adam >> _______________________________________________ >> At-Large mailing list >> At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5] >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6] >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7] >
> At-Large mailing list > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9] > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10] > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland- security-seizes-spanish-domain-name-that-had-already-been-declared- legal.shtml
[5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
It seems pretty straightforward. Any domain you register may be subject to scrutiny -- based on the content of the site as well as the name itself -- under the laws of ANY of 1. The country in which your registry is based 2. The country in which your registry operator is based 3. The country in which your registrar is based 4. The country in which your ISP or web host is based 5. The country in which you are based In many, MANY cases at least one of these is the US. As Carlton and Dev were saying, (1) and (2) are not necessarily the same country. The [.tv] TLD is a ccTLD of Tuvalu, but it is operated in the USA. But that;'s not the end of it. Other jurisdictions than the five above could claim that you are infringing their laws because of the global reach of the Internet (ie, you are accessible in their country even if you do not have a presence there). While their direct influence over your ability to run your site is not as strong as that of the five above, they can take other steps: - ban (ie, legally block) your domain inside the country - charge you (the owner, or an executive in the case of corporate ownership) in your absence, and arrest you if you ever travel there<http://www.ecardscasino.com/news/070906.html>(even in transit) The extent of this exposure by registrants is not well known. As I said, At-Large has a role to play in education about this. - Evan
Oh, I forgot one. On 4 February 2011 10:32, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
[...]
Other jurisdictions than the five above could claim that you are infringing
their laws because of the global reach of the Internet (ie, you are accessible in their country even if you do not have a presence there). While their direct influence over your ability to run your site is not as strong as that of the five above, they can take other steps:
- ban (ie, legally block) your domain inside the country - charge you (the owner, or an executive in the case of corporate ownership) in your absence, and arrest you if you ever travel there<http://www.ecardscasino.com/news/070906.html>(even in transit)
- Force<http://rose.casinocitytimes.com/article/why-visa-is-dropping-online-gambling-5938>or pressure financial institutions located in their or partner countries not to process monetary transcations<http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/14/wikileaks-says-funding-is-blocked>on behalf your site - Evan
+++1! Good thing you're on the page. For IMHO, this is the most insidious of all!! Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Oh, I forgot one.
On 4 February 2011 10:32, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
[...]
Other jurisdictions than the five above could claim that you are infringing
their laws because of the global reach of the Internet (ie, you are accessible in their country even if you do not have a presence there). While their direct influence over your ability to run your site is not as strong as that of the five above, they can take other steps:
- ban (ie, legally block) your domain inside the country - charge you (the owner, or an executive in the case of corporate ownership) in your absence, and arrest you if you ever travel there< http://www.ecardscasino.com/news/070906.html>(even in transit)
- Force< http://rose.casinocitytimes.com/article/why-visa-is-dropping-online-gambling...
or pressure financial institutions located in their or partner countries not to process monetary transcations< http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/14/wikileaks-says-funding-is-blocke... on behalf your site
- Evan _______________________________________________ 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
A US Senator has written to ICE and the US Attorney General regarding the domain name seizures : http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110202/23363812934/senator-wyden-asks-wtf... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/02/senator-us-domain-name-seizu... Dev T On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
At one level, this outrage happens simply because of the ignorance of people in thinking that generic names are not associated with a country.
The .com, .org, .net domains are widely thought of as "international" but in fact they're not -- witness the miniscule use of the ".us" domain. (Heck, even ".int" isn't truly international, as IANA is US-based and is subject to the same takedown protocols as .com)
There is a part of me that hopes this action will alert people outside the US that -- in order to stay outside the bounds of US law -- they need to use non-US registries and registrars. One would think that some of the more canny CCTLD operators might even use that issue in marketing.
So if online casinos are illegal in the US, it should be no surprise that its legal system would take steps to shut down -- to whatever extent that it could -- "onlinecasino.com". They'd have no jurisdiction, however on " onlinecasino.co.uk" -- unless that registrant was foolish enough to use a US-based registrar.
I don't agree that At-Large has much of a political role to play, in that no country is going to listen to our complaints about content-related domain seizures. And it's not within our ability -- let alone our expertise -- to monitor and pass judgement on what content is illegal in all sovereign countries.
Perhaps, though, we do have a role to play in educating users and registrants about the choices they make when obtaining a domain, including issues related to the home location of the registry and registrar. (This need-to-know also extends to the location of the would-be registrant's content hosting, but that's way out of ICANN's scope.)
Anything that helps educate the public that there is not a "default" TLD but a set of choices -- each choice with certain benefits and risks -- is both useful and within our ability to provide IMO.
- Evan
On 3 February 2011 16:08, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is Unspeakable!!! It is commonly knowledge that No one Nation or State should interfere with events beyond its boundaries - unfortunately there are no boundaries when it comes to the Internet. Internet-based businesses are lucrative yes! It is time a Government to change/review its Customs/Revenue Collection systems not to take actions that affect the rest of the Internet communities. The GAC should see into this to avoid similar attacks to such a neutral media. Time for a Change is overdue on this.
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:44:01 +0100 From: patrick@vande-walle.eu To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] U.S. seizure of .ORG domain name
I support this, too.
I am not discussing here if the site infringed on US laws. This is apparently the case. However, the decision to take down the domain has consequences well outside the territorial boundaries where US laws apply. It gets even worse when there is one court decision of a sovereign country which says that the site is legal. AFAIK, Spain is not a banana republic. I am convinced that due diligence and fairness where followed by Spanish courts.
I find it grossly impolite, to say the least, to impose one's legal and moral values to the entire world. This is what needs to transpire from our complaint.
Over here, when court decisions order to block web sites, local ISPs are told to either block DNS queries for the domain or null route the IP address. I am not saying this is ideal or even effective. But at least, the impact does not spread beyond the territorial limits of the laws.
Patrick
I would support this.
Btw, the USG has used similar tactics to take down domains that are used for online gaming centred on Antigua in the Caribbean . Online gaming is legal in Antigua but it matters not to US interests.
Antigua has sought relief at the WTO on areas of WTO jurisdiction and she has repeatedly prevailed. Still has not mattered to our Uncle Sam.
Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
I propose the At Large/ALAC protest the U.S. government's seizure of domain name Rojadirecta.org.
Rojadirecta is a popular sports streaming and P2P download site. Rojadirecta is a legitimate Spanish business. Two Spanish courts have ruled the site operates legally.
It seems the U.S. Government Homeland Security's Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) division used the TLD as the means of
seizure in an attempt to take down the site. If the action was
against the registrar then a registrant would at least have a choice
of jurisdiction. But this action on ORG, and the actions on .COM
names last November essentially means the U.S. government considers
COM, NET and ORG to be nothing more than ccTLDs subject to U.S. whim
(this isn't a legal action, there has been no court case, no due
process.)
Rojadirecta is now available under other TLDs
as well its original IP address .
Expect there will be a lot written about this, this article's ok as a starting point:
<
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[4]
>
I hope At Large will issue a statement
protesting the use of the TLD
registry as a means of takedown. That it recommends when the NET, ORG and COM contracts are renegotiated they should move to a jurisdiction where such unilateral action by a government is not possible. That the new applicant guidebook require applicants to only locate in jurisdictions where such unilateral action by a government is not possible.
Legitimate businesses should not be subject to the whim of a U.S. agency.
Adam
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [5]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [6]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [7]
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [9]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [10]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [11]
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [12]
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [13]
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [14]
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
Links: ------ [1] http://www.rojadirecta.me [2] http://www.rojadirecta.es [3] http://www.rojadirecta.in [4]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seiz...
[5] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [6] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [7] http://atlarge.icann.org [8] mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp [9] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [10] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [11] http://atlarge.icann.org [12] mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org [13] https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large [14] http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 _______________________________________________ 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
participants (14)
-
Adam Peake -
Antony Van Couvering -
Avri Doria -
Bill Silverstein -
Carlton Samuels -
Cintra Sooknanan -
Dev Anand Teelucksingh -
Evan Leibovitch -
John R. Levine -
Joly MacFie -
parminder -
Patrick Vande Walle -
Ray Plzak -
Yassin Mshana