Uncle Sam: If It Ends in .Com, It's .Seizable

The current (Obama) administration uses the 'might makes right' argument a lot. Not just this administration, of course, previous administrations have made that argument when it suited their whims, but the current administration's use is excessive. Clearly, the Feds have the power to seize, but does that power constitute a 'right'. Is 'right' even the proper term? Aren't 'rights' held by individuals. Wouldn't 'authority' be a better term? I.e., the Constitution grants the federal government the authority to do certain things, but only the people have the 'right' to grant that authority via the Constitution.

Our president has publicly expressed dissatisfaction with the way the US Constitution is written.

From his point of view the Constitution should not be written as individual rights, but as the rights of the government.

I think that point of view is, at least in part, the rational driving much of the policy toward business and social issues in the USA. He sees the Constitution as a set of negative rights that are an impediment to his vision of America.

In the end it still all about power and the money trail that follows it is pretty good evidence of that.

It always sounds like a good idea.

I can practically predict the rest of the story.

People will use the opportunity to start totally offshore .*** domain names that are completely out of the range of an increasingly intrusive US government.

The US government will respond by blocking access to any of these sites by anyone who lives on US soil...................much like the Chinese do. The technology is already available. And thus will begin the era of the US government controlling internet access by it's citizens...................just like in China.

Once they run out of sites that are deemed illegal, they will target sites that disagree with whatever administration happens to be in place.

It was fun while it lasted. They will not allow the internet to remain an untamed wild west of the free exchange of information and ideas..................they see it as a threat to their power, control, and very existence.......................just like communist China.

So now the whole world has to conform to US Law?

Still, I suppose having a fully democratic and accountable government doing this is better than a despotic, totalitarian one....

Still, I suppose having a fully democratic and accountable government doing this is better than a despotic, totalitarian one....

Tongue in cheek?

It's getting difficult to tell the difference.

To be honest, I don't know. When I started typing that sentence I was serious; by the time I got to the end, I was questioning my sanity.

I know the feeling.

I don't know how it is in the UK, but more and more often in the US, whether it's the IRS, or the government in general, they create new ways to keep us safe and get the bad guys, but there is no due process involved. Innocent people get swept up, and there is absolutely no recourse. People that are doing nothing wrong do have a reason to worry.

Getting that way here. We have more CCTV cameras per capita than any other country...and yet few of them have good enough images to prosecute the law breakers.

Oddly enough, I don't have a problem with the cameras. Of course, I'm just another random, fairly nondescript bloke out of a million. One would think that they'd use cameras that had good enough resolution to actually identify the bad guys...................................maybe in next year's budget.

[Edit}

I say I don't mind cameras, but I don't go into cities unless I have to...............cities themselves make me uncomfortable. I only run into cameras in stores and banks.

Now, if they are using cameras combined with facial recognition software, and running checks on everyone that enters the frame.....................I have a problem with that.

Heading that way. It's certainly used in riot / public disturbance events.

You still here? I though they would have had you on a plane to Guantanamo by now.
Del
(Does Orange suit you?)

I've got big black SUVs with tinted windows sitting just outside the house. I wonder what it means?

Your GM dealership application has been approved?

Priceless!!! Made me smile.

Good one.

Actually the secret agents are all driving Volts and I've got a full tank of gas...............they'll never catch me.

Not when that massive coronal ejection hits the Earth today and fries everyone's electronics.

I'm not talking about the head of a certain beer, either.

Thanks for taking the bait role. No matter what I really believe, I'm going to keep on playing devil's advocate until I see that one of you has been snatched.

Glad you were playing devil's advocate. For a second I thought you were okay with having the US government dictate what sites stay up, in Canada.

Of course, our laws make so much sense, I really don't see why anyone on the planet would have a hard time adhering to them. Resistance is futile.

Al Gore invented the internet, and Al Gore can taketh away your internet privileges.

Just checking back in... It appears we are still here. Another doomsday prediction gone bad. But it was on Fox News!

Anyway, enjoy the pretty light show in the sky tonight. ;-)

I actually heard a blurb on the radio today, saying that you could see the sunspots with the naked eye............................but make sure to wear good sun glasses while looking at the sun.

The guy was serious.

Yeah, stare at the sun, then look away and you will see sun spots everywhere you look!

It's no wonder that lawyers keep so busy.

Better drowned than duffers. If not duffers won't drown.

Evolution in action....

_{Oh yeah! Still "free"....it's all relative}

Clashes with my hair.

Damn - going to have to change colour again to foil the recognition software....

Somewhat better. Any government is going to try to push the envelope in that regard and our system relies on a series of checks and balances to keep that pot from boiling over.

The fly in the ointment with that is the ruling administration gets to pick some of the members that act as that controlling balance and can (to some degree) charter wider paths of control with less accountability for their actions.

The other issue is that we are still the 800 pound gorilla on the block and the US has not been too skittish about throwing that weight around from time to time.

ICANN is just one example. There are some advantages to having that US controlled and there are some discrete dangers as demonstrated in the posted link and the point Kramarat has just made.

I'm expecting to see a flurry of .*** domains that are completely out of reach of the US governent. Not necessarily illegal either. I'm guessing that more than one country isn't going to be comfortable with the US doing this.

Then again, maybe the domains will be there..................and we won't see them at all.

Shhhhhh, you'll get extradited with talk like that.
Del

As yes! Those fully reciprocal (not) extradition laws. Whoever signed those off should be lynched.

http://cr4.globalspec.com/comment/819023

The world is a better place because of the Anonymous. :)

Given that requirement you pointed out the topic should have never have been posted by CR4 in the first place.

These websites were engaged in illegal activity ie; ripping off Americans...Part of the role of the Government is to protect it's citizens from organised crime...The're finally doing their job...The criticism I see here is unfounded....Show me one site you think was unfairly shutdown...

Wrong.

Bodog.com was targeted because federal law generally makes it illegal to offer online sports wagering and to payoff online bets in the United States, even though online gambling isn't illegal globally.

This particular site wasn't ripping off anyone.

Still, many outside the United States, like China, India and Russia, distrust ICANN and want control of the net's naming system to be turned over to an organization such as the International Telecommunications Union, an affiliate of the United Nations. Last year, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin met with Hamadoun Toure, the ITU's chief, and said he wanted international control over the internet "using the monitoring capabilities of the International Telecommunication Union."

This is all about much more than stopping bad guys. There are existing laws already and place to get them.

Time will tell.

Bodog is still on line and accessible ,they just changed their web address, for one thing..and I suspect they were breaking several laws, both federal and state, for another...The fact that you are attempting to protect these activities, is without merit...or do you consider these people to be above the law for some reason?

They are operating outside the US. Gambling is legal all over the place, including in the US as long as the government can get their cut in the form of taxes. In the case of state lotteries, the government takes the profit from gambling and taxes the winnings. Almost sounds like it should be illegal.

In the case of bodog, sure I'll defend them if they were running a legitimate business. The lawbreakers were the people that reside in the US, accessed the site, and gambled. That's who the feds should be going after, if anyone. Better yet, they could keep their noses out of it, and let people know that if they are dealing with sites outside the US, whether it's shopping or gambling, they do so at their own risk, and to expect no help from US authorities.

I know people that play online poker. Their accounts run a max of about $500. The feds need to stop chasing around chickens. If they can't find something productive to do, they need to start sending home workers and making serious permanent cuts.

The market will quickly destroy gambling sites that are not legit...................people talk, and word travels fast.

This is about control. Nothing else.

Do you really think that people spend their lives only wanting to help others, and aspire to a government position to get it done?

One of the surprising things I learned since 9-11 is the strange ways that terrorist organizations raise money.... there was a documentary I recall, about these groups using everything from coupon fraud to an infant formula scam, to get cash. Do you see your government targeting all online gambling institutions? No? Do you think there's a reason for going after Bodog specifically, then? Wonder why then.

Just wondering.

This isn't about terrorism.

Did you read the entire article?

As a Canadian, are you comfortable with the US government being able to shut down any Canadian site that ends in .com, .org, .net or dot anything that is under verisign?

The government has very effective ways of tracking down both terrorists and criminals.

If you are comfortable with handing over control to the US government, (internationally), of which domains exist and which don't, based solely on interpretation of US law.....................I really don't know what else to say.

If the rest of the world feels the same, then I would strongly suggest that they study up on US law. In regard to the internet................it will be global law.

The domain names of the gambling sites were yanked because internet gambling is illegal in the US. Think about the potential ramifications of this.

My money is on the entire internet becoming country specific.

.usa

.can

.mex

And so on. No more free speech across borders.

I think everybody, everywhere, needs to put serious consideration into what is really going on when their government tells them that they are being protected and made safer.

Well, if shutting you down doesn't do it there is always the "targeted killing" that the DOJ appears ready to authorize.

It concerns me that the US government can, at will, essentially censor any foreign private enterprise by seizing their web domain.

What is used to protect can also be used as a tool of tyranny. The same principles employed for silencing any organization, foreign or domestic, can also shut down political speech. We have witnessed government, state, and local seizure of private property before without due cause.

The one famous example was a private company had one of their jets seized when one of their passengers was arrested at the terminating airport for money laundering or some drug offense. Because the arrested party had hired that company to provide his transportation, the plane was seized and the owner had to buy it back at auction.

The jet owner was never charged nor implicated in the arrest, but his property simply became government property at the discretion of the feds.

These incidents are not all that uncommon and represent a threat to what liberty we still have (I know the Anonymous Poster will be jumping in all over me in a few minutes).

In the specific case from the first post it appeared that the Justice Department went after a foreign company because that company was a venue for US citizens to break the law. By law the Justice Department can not arrest or raid a foreign company not operating on US soil, so they employed a legal work around that effectively attacks and punishes foreign entities without due process or a mechanism to defend at the discretion of of the Department of Justice.

I can see why the rest of the world is concerned that the US has absolute power over the internet and its domains. While that may be better than China or Iran having that power, power does corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I agree.. if a government uses all means to bring down criminal ripoffs...well okay.

We, (citizens), need to be very careful with the power that we grant the government. Once we roll over and allow them to do something, it will be that way forever more.

If it's okay for the government to use all means to get criminal ripoffs, is it okay for them to use all means to prevent gun violence?

House to house searches for illegal weapons?

Can they use all means to stop drug abuse?

Random drug tests for everybody?

After all, if it saves one life it's worth it. If you are doing nothing wrong, what's the problem? It's just a minor inconvenience....................right?

I wonder what we are supposed to do, if one day we wake up and realize that the government has become the bad guys?

Kram, I totally agree with you, about being careful with the power that we grant government. But in this case, the question of legitimacy has been publicly raised and is disputed freely. There is not so much opportunity for the government to abuse a power, when their actions are transparent and subject to public scrutiny every step of the way. The day it is abused, it will be public knowledge and they will pay the price for the abuse as long as they are democratically elected, as well as facing challenges in court. I would be the first to stand up for that.

The real danger in our day and age is the corruption of democratic governments which takes place in secrecy, not in the public eye IMHO. This is no joke, this is really the big threat we are facing. Public officials become pawns of organized crime. The police do not investigate or prosecute their criminal partners. Crimes of privilege become commonplace, and there is no longer any protection for victims of crime. It is not publicly known, identified or disputed, it is built up in secret while our rights are eroded privately, case by case, instead of publicly stripped away, to maintain the facade of a 'democratic' society. When the rot becomes so blatant that everyone knows about it, then the corrupted governments are ready to make the leap to public totalitarianism. But not until then. Until that day, since I do believe organized crime is the enemy that corrupts government, I have to support the reasonable exercise of power to bring criminal enterprises down...

It isn't what goes on behind closed doors that worries me as much as what goes on right in front of the people and most people just don't care!

I think Ben Franklin said it best: "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, deserve neither."

Every right we give away, every freedom we sacrifice on the altar or "security", is one we will have to fight to get back.

On a side note, most of my firearms are unregistered. I will stop,"by whatever means necessary," anyone trying to force me to register them.

As far as drugs are concerned, here is a little bit of info about drug seizure laws.

At three a.m. in a Va. neighborhood a drug dealer pulled into a man's driveway, to do a drug deal with the man in his passenger seat, (he didn't want to wreck his BMW while doing the deal.)

He was observed by the local LEO's and arrested. His car was seized, and so was the HOME of the man whose driveway he pulled into!!

The reason: The home owners property facilitated the transaction!

That is the sort of enforcement we have to look forward to, if we let these idiot lawyers continue to run OUR country. And folks, it is still ours, whether Washington likes it or not. We have to make them remember who is in charge.

Regards, Dragon

Those stories are becoming far too common. Here in NC there have been cases where eminent domain has been used to take people's property, (they pay them whatever they say is fair, not the property owners), and the land is used to build privately owned shopping centers.

The problem is, when government is already using thuggery and strong arm tacticts against ordinary citizens, should we all stand up and cheer when they tell us that they can and will sieze web domains....................to keep us safe?

Although I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole, most of the gambling sites are legit. Why not treat them like the government sanctioned gambling that takes place in the US? Losses can be written off, and winnings are taxed.

It's interesting that the government is so concerned about about gambling, and yet in my state, and I'm sure most others, very slick advertising is run all day long, designed to entice people into buying lottery tickets.

Remind me again, where were those survivalist threads, and the underground house built from shipping containers thread, how to store your firearms.........

At this rate the CR4wlSpace will become a physical reality......

Here's an example - in a different field of commerce - of the power the government has, based on an old statute that it has re-interpreted to suit its latest quest for more power.

Fish and Wildlife... and guitars?

One time I beat my dog with a braided whip for eating my boot and yelled "NO,No,No, and now when I yell, NO, he stops what ever he is doing. Hopeing to please his master..When we live in fear for what ever the reason or what caused the fear we become pawns..And used when the master says 'no'..If you take risk on the internet and loose, you took the risk..on the street or in cyberspace. YOU must protect what is yours..

The parable you have correct,do not miss the gist of the story, we live in fear of 911, we live in fear of the word 'terriost', we live in fear of the word 'drugs' and anything 'the powers that be' can promote these fears for things that will inprove their power over the citizen. You can bet that when I go to sleep the ole dog has another boot..

If it was a metaphor, it wasn't a good one. You were/are not making your point clear.

Maybe we should visit some Chinese or North Korean chat rooms and ask them how they feel about they safety they enjoy by having the "State" determine which outside sites are illegal or inappropriate.