Barnett, assistant deputy director of ICE: "The idea is to try to prosecute." If I remember correctly, in the few cases that the domains were confiscated, there was no prosecution, no courts involved. The owners of the domains had practically no means to question or challenge the seizure. At least that's what the media reported at the time.
US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
51–60 of 159 posts
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#52ICE spokesperson: All your domain are belong to U.S.
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#53In the same way that .ca belongs to Canada, com/net/org/us belong to the US. Think of them as the sponsoring organization that originally created them.
The only thing the US government has ever given up is control over the registry and DNS management. Under a MoU[1] that facility was handed over to ICANN with the understanding that they would select US based private sector companies to take on the duties.
Other TLDs that are sponsored internationally but managed in the US (like .me or .ws) is a whole different issue, but this one is pretty clean cut.
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#54Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#55Why is online piracy such a big business (and hence a problem to the rights holders)? Because there are no comparable legal alternatives. So instead of technology and business innovation, let's do legal innovation and sue them people regardless of where they are.
>Why is online piracy such a big business (and hence a problem to the rights holders)? Because there are no comparable legal alternatives. I want to agree with you, because I wish that was the case, but it isn't. The 15-25 set just doesn't care. If they can get a movie for free on bittorrent, or pay $20/mo to stream as many as they want, they'll go for bittorrent the majority of the time.
This is very obvious with music. Everybody I know has a music collection far bigger than what they could reasonably afford.
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#56Everyone else claims .us is in the US jurisdiction. How will this stop anything? Wasn't .com handed to the UN to manage?
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why is online piracy such a big business (and hence a problem to the rights holders)? Because there are no comparable legal alternatives. I want to agree with you, because I wish that was the case, but it isn't. The 15-25 set just doesn't care. If they can get a movie for free on bittorrent, or pay $20/mo to stream as many as they want, they'll go for bittorrent the majority of the time.
Steam. FTFY.
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#58FYI, .com/net/org have always belonged to the United States. In the same way that .ca belongs to Canada, com/net/org/us belong to the US. Think of them as the sponsoring organization that originally created them. The only thing the US government has ever given up is control over the registry and DNS management. Under a MoU[1] that facility was handed over to ICANN with the understanding that they would select US base…
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#59Why is online piracy such a big business (and hence a problem to the rights holders)? Because there are no comparable legal alternatives. So instead of technology and business innovation, let's do legal innovation and sue them people regardless of where they are.
>Why is online piracy such a big business (and hence a problem to the rights holders)? Because there are no comparable legal alternatives. I want to agree with you, because I wish that was the case, but it isn't. The 15-25 set just doesn't care. If they can get a movie for free on bittorrent, or pay $20/mo to stream as many as they want, they'll go for bittorrent the majority of the time.
Re: US claims all .com and .net websites are in its jurisdiction
#60Why is online piracy such a big business (and hence a problem to the rights holders)? Because there are no comparable legal alternatives. So instead of technology and business innovation, let's do legal innovation and sue them people regardless of where they are.
>Why is online piracy such a big business (and hence a problem to the rights holders)? Because there are no comparable legal alternatives. I want to agree with you, because I wish that was the case, but it isn't. The 15-25 set just doesn't care. If they can get a movie for free on bittorrent, or pay $20/mo to stream as many as they want, they'll go for bittorrent the majority of the time.
Many in the "15-25 set" pay about $20/mo to download through an offshore VPS, private trackers and servers. This money would go to the content holders if they didn't cripple their "precious content" with bundling packages, intrusive advertisements, DRM and region restrictions.