WWW . TEL . COMMUNITY - The .tel domain forum

Welcome to the Tel.community.

You are invited to participate in the growing .tel
community!

To take full advantage of everything offered by
our forum, please log in if you are already a
member or join our community if you're not yet.

The registration at TelTalk.org is free and easy!

Thank you for participation!
WWW . TEL . COMMUNITY - The .tel domain forum

Welcome to the objective forum for .tel domains! Read it first when anything is happening with .tel!

Please join the LIVE CHAT for all REGISTERED members at the bottom of our forum!

Response to USA Domain seizures

Share
avatar
Telnic
High-Flyer
High-Flyer

Join date : 2014-12-30
Posts : 2903 Points : 8966
Reputation : 0
Warning level : 100 %

Response to USA Domain seizures

Post by Telnic on Tue 30 Dec 2014, 2:18 pm

Cees11-30-2010 10:22 PM




Response to USA Domain seizures
 
A very interesting read RE the future? of the DNS.

http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-b...izures-101130/

dialaroom11-30-2010 10:44 PM




Quote:



Originally Posted by Cees (Post 11699)
A very interesting read RE the future? of the DNS.

http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-b...izures-101130/



[size]
Thanks Cees, don't totally understand content, can anyone on the forum precis this so that we can all understand?[/size]

rgolds12-03-2010 06:05 PM




Basically, federal agencies of the US government seized 80+ domains suspected of facilitating copyright infringement. Examples of the seized domains:

http://torrent-finder.com/
http://dvdscollection.com/

As I understand it, the US government only has jurisdiction to seize domains hosted by US-based registrars.

In response to these seizures, people and groups are pushing for wide adoption of decentralized DNS (much like the BitTorrent protocol), such that no government or other agency will be able to seize domains, because there will be no central location from which to perform the seizure.

The difficulty to implement such a system is that specific people, or ISPs, must adopt support for these decentralized DNS extensions. If someone has domain.p2p, only people who have installed the necessary service, or are customers of ISPs that support it, will be able to resolve that domain to an IP. Everyone else using a DNS service that doesn't support the .p2p extension will be unable to resolve that domain.

maximka12-03-2010 10:58 PM




http://domenforum.net/showthread.php?t=114299
In Russian domain-forum people talk that it was ICANN who under pressure seized the domain names from their owners. It was not US-based registrars. Also people there think that it is connected with response of US government to the last action of Wikileaks. Not good news, by my opinion, because now not the courts but the US government will decide who is good and who is bad. Dark ages can be back.

rgolds12-03-2010 11:08 PM




Quote:



Originally Posted by maximka (Post 11752)
http://domenforum.net/showthread.php?t=114299
In Russian domain-forum people talk that it was ICANN who under pressure seized the domain names from their owners. It was not US-based registrars. Also people there think that it is connected with response of US government to the last action of Wikileaks. Not good news, by my opinion, because now not the courts but the US government will decide who is good and who is bad.



[size]
That's not true - the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security got valid warrants from federal judges. You can see that in the notice posted on the seized sites: "This domain name has been seized by ICE - Homeland Security Investigations, pursuant to a seizure warrant issued by a United States District Court under the authority of 18 U.S.C. §§ 981 and 2323."

Additionally, it apparently wasn't ICANN, but VeriSign, that transferred control of the domains: http://domainincite.com/icann-had-no...rrent-domains/[/size]

maximka12-03-2010 11:25 PM




Quote:



Originally Posted by rgolds (Post 11753)
Additionally, it apparently wasn't ICANN, but VeriSign, that transferred control of the domains:http://domainincite.com/icann-had-no...rrent-domains/


[size]
rgolds, thanks for the link. Very interesting comments are under that article. Here only one of them:

Quote:
[/size]



Khaled Fattal says: December 1, 2010 at 5:25 am
...This has the most gravest of implications and consequences vis-a-vis the international community and the current Governance model.

Another key issue is “transparent due legal process”, which is clearly lacking here.

Should nations and communities around the world become concerned or alarmed that their Internet will be subject to US laws in their own sovereign jurisdictions?



rgolds12-04-2010 07:42 PM




True, that is a separate issue to consider. However, when it's US entities having their copyrights blatantly infringed (i.e. losing money because of people copying their work), it seems somewhat reasonable that the US takes actions to protect them.

Imagine if you put lots of time and hard work into something, like making software, to make a living, then seeing that people are freely copying and distributing it, which pretty much negates all your hard work, and makes it harder for you to pay your bills - that would absorb! Seizing domains maybe isn't the right way to go about it... but then again, I don't think anyone's really identified a 'right way' to go about it.

Cees12-04-2010 09:37 PM




rgolds, thanks for the briefing.
I'll include this if I may.
Their have been behind the scenes efforts for a long time in the USA to gain more control over the Internet and that's not going to stop anytime soon, it's an insidious gene politicians and others behind the curtains have, and they will keep pushing and use any hoary excuse to push this unhealthy agenda. 
You have to keep in mind the US system is open to having stacked Judges, this doesn't auger well for a free internet.
RE the protection of IP etc, I think you will find that in its formative years the USA showed a similar disrespect for IP.

    Current date/time is Mon 20 Nov 2017, 2:47 am