Rep. Lofgren Again Explains How And Why Domain Seizures Violate The Law
from the and-another-lawyer dept
Lofgren correctly points out that falling back on the legality of seizures for things like drugs does not apply, because this is a First Amendment issue, and then points out that it appears to be prior restraint:
Ars: So how did these seizures differ from, say, narcotics seizures in which some of the same issues about a non-adversarial hearing apply?Nice to see yet another "lawyer" speaking out about this, and especially nice that it happens to be someone in Congress, who can hopefully get more attention on this concerning subject.
Rep. Lofgren: You're never going to have a free speech issue when it comes to a pile of cocaine.
Ars: The recording industry also objected to the First Amendment concerns you raised, saying that the First Amendment is "not a shield for illegal behavior."
Rep. Lofgren: They completely missed the point, and I would think intentionally so. This is prior restraint of speech, and you can't do that in America.