by Mike Masnick
Tue, Feb 15th 2011 8:35am
As a bunch of the proprietors of domain names seized in earlier questionable domain seizures are preparing to fight back against the seizures, Homeland Security can't resist seizing more domain names. This time, it looks like the seizures were more focused on sites selling counterfeit physical goods, and the seizures were purposely timed to Valentine's Day. Going after sites that sell counterfeit goods makes a lot more sense than some of the other sites that were seized in the past, but there still are serious questions about the legality of such a seizure prior to any adversarial hearing, and with no attempt to even communicate with the site operators. I don't know if this is the case or not, but how does ICE know that these sites did not believe they were selling legitimate products? What's wrong with going through an adversarial hearing in which the site's operators are allowed to defend themselves? If they're really breaking the law, let that be determined at a trial. At the very least, considering the widespread questions about the legality of these seizures, wouldn't it make sense for Homeland Security and ICE to wait until the legality of such seizures is reviewed by a court?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Appeals Court Says It's Perfectly Fine For The DOJ To Steal Kim Dotcom's Money Before Any Trial
- State Supreme Court Says Secret Software Used In Sentencing Determinations Not A Violation Of Due Process Rights
- Former Homeland Security Advisor: Tech Companies Have The Burden Of Proving Harm Of Backdoored Encryption
- Kickass Torrents Gets The Megaupload Treatment: Site Seized, Owner Arrested And Charged With Criminal Infringement
- Homeland Security Committee Thinks Backdoors Are Bad, But Encryption Still A Problem The Government Needs To Fix