<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;seized&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:57:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>This T-Shirt Has Been Seized</title>
<dc:creator>Leigh Beadon</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/11022720048/this-t-shirt-has-been-seized.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/11022720048/this-t-shirt-has-been-seized.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p><center><em>&ldquo;Eagles come in all shapes and sizes, but you will recognize them chiefly by their attitudes.&rdquo;<br /><span style="font-size:80%">&ndash; E. F. Schumacher</span></em></center></p>

<p><center><em>NON GENERANT AQUIL&AElig; COLUMBAS<br /><span style="font-size:80%">&ndash; Unknown</span></em></center></p>

<p>For the feds, it&#8217;s not enough to simply seize domain names without warning or due process&#8212;they want to make sure everyone knows the website operators were breaking the law, even if that has yet to be proven in court. That&#8217;s why every domain that gets seized ends up redirecting to one of these dramatic warning pages, replete with the eagle-emblazoned badges of the federal agencies involved. You know the one I mean:</p>

<p><center><a href="http://imgur.com/vwtkN"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/vwtkN.png" title="Hosted by imgur.com" alt="" width=480 /></a></center></p>

<p>I thought eagles were solitary birds&mdash;but apparently they'll flock anywhere the RIAA points. At least that seemed to be the case with the hip-hop blog <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?company=dajaz1">Dajaz1</a>, which was treated to a year of Promethean pecking while the court waited patiently for the RIAA to fail to produce any evidence.</p>

<p>And that's just one of over 700 websites seized without due process. The first round of seizures, commencing the so-called <em>Operation In Our Sites</em> (which I suggest renaming to <em>Operation Motherfucking Eagles</em>), was announced from Disney headquarters, possibly by a <a href="http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s13e01-the-ring">tyrannical Mickey Mouse</a>, but more likely by ICE Director John Morton sporting a dumb grin over the presence of whatever movie stars Disney managed to rustle up for the event. It's <del>Chinatown</del> Hollywood. The only place where eagles and mice get along.</p>

<p>To commemorate the fruits of this alliance, I created the <a href="http://rtb.techdirt.com/products/seized-tee/">Seized Tee</a> for Techdirt's new <a href="http://rtb.techdirt.com/" target="_blank">Insider Shop</a>. Government regulations prevent us from directly replicating agency badges, but that proved to be a plus, since I think I have drastically improved them in terms of both clarity of purpose and, more importantly, overall eagle-ness, which was clearly a prominent factor in their original design:</p>

<p><center><a href="http://rtb.techdirt.com/products/seized-tee/" target="_blank"><img src="http://rtb.techdirt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/seized-480x300.png" /></a></center></p>

<p>Buying the Seized Tee also gets you access to the <a href="http://rtb.techdirt.com/features/#crystal-ball" target="_blank">Techdirt Crystal Ball</a> for one year, two <a href="http://rtb.techdirt.com/features/#fwlw-credits" target="_blank">First Word/Last Word</a> credits, and an <a href="http://rtb.techdirt.com/features/#insider-badge" target="_blank">Insider Badge</a> on your profile and comments. Wear it with pride, and when people ask you about it, be sure to tell them that this kind of government censorship is a real thing that is happening as we speak, and it's a problem that's only going to get worse if it goes unchecked. Eagles do not beget doves.</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/11022720048/this-t-shirt-has-been-seized.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/11022720048/this-t-shirt-has-been-seized.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/11022720048/this-t-shirt-has-been-seized.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>the-eagles-have-landed</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120814/11022720048</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:17:08 PDT</pubDate>
<title>One Day After DC Police Told Not To Interfere With Citizens Recording Them... Police Seize Man's Phone</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120726/12443919846/one-day-after-dc-police-told-not-to-interfere-with-citizens-recording-them-police-seize-mans-phone.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120726/12443919846/one-day-after-dc-police-told-not-to-interfere-with-citizens-recording-them-police-seize-mans-phone.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ So, yesterday, everyone was feeling warm and fuzzy about the very clear statement by Washington DC's police chief Cathy Lanier pushing out a very explicit <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120724/15385919815/dc-police-chief-lays-down-new-cellcamera-policy-dont-seize-dont-delete-dont-interfere.shtml">policy</a> to all DC police concerning mobile phone cameras.  The policy was straightforward: police cannot interfere with someone recording them.  They cannot demand to know why they're recording them.  And they cannot seize the phone.
<br /><br />
It appears that some police officers didn't read the memo.
<br /><br />
As noted by <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/one-day-after-dc-polices-reasonable-camera-policy-phones-still-taken/" target="_blank">Ars Technica</a>, the day after the policy was announced, a police officer <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/one-day-after-dc-polices-reasonable-camera-policy-phones-still-taken/" target="_blank">seized a guy's camera for recording police activities</a>.  They did eventually give the phone back but kept the memory card and the guy is pissed off because the card supposedly has hundreds of photos of his daughter on there.
<br /><br />
The DC police say that they're "looking into" the report.  It would be nice to see them follow up on their original policy statement with a clear rebuke of the officers involved.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120726/12443919846/one-day-after-dc-police-told-not-to-interfere-with-citizens-recording-them-police-seize-mans-phone.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120726/12443919846/one-day-after-dc-police-told-not-to-interfere-with-citizens-recording-them-police-seize-mans-phone.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120726/12443919846/one-day-after-dc-police-told-not-to-interfere-with-citizens-recording-them-police-seize-mans-phone.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>but-of-course</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120726/12443919846</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2011 04:04:34 PST</pubDate>
<title>UK Law Enforcement Also Looking To Be Able To Seize Domains</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/01050013095/uk-law-enforcement-also-looking-to-be-able-to-seize-domains.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/01050013095/uk-law-enforcement-also-looking-to-be-able-to-seize-domains.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Ah, the power of censorship.  It appears that some other countries may be jealous of Homeland Security getting to seize all those domain names, or the proposed COICA law that would allow even more domain seizures in the US.  <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=blinddrew">drew</a> points out that, over in the UK, law enforcement is also asking for official power to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12429808" target="_blank">force Nominet to shut down domains</a> that it claims were "used by criminals."  That seems pretty broad.  Lots of domains are "used by criminals" in one way or another, does that mean they should automatically have the right to shut those domains down?  And with both the US and the UK looking for such rights, won't more and more countries now start to follow?  It certainly makes you wonder about the impact of the overall internet, when various countries can just seek to shut down various domains without any trial determination.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/01050013095/uk-law-enforcement-also-looking-to-be-able-to-seize-domains.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/01050013095/uk-law-enforcement-also-looking-to-be-able-to-seize-domains.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/01050013095/uk-law-enforcement-also-looking-to-be-able-to-seize-domains.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>it's-spreading...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110215/01050013095</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>