U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
torrentfreak.com
U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
1–10 of 161 posts
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#2While there are more important things in life (like being accused wrongly of child pornography), I wonder how that effects their Google rankings to suddenly have your entire domain ripped out from underneath you and pointing to a duplicate content site.
Is there any recourse for this action? Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure.
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#3While there are more important things in life (like being accused wrongly of child pornography), I wonder how that effects their Google rankings to suddenly have your entire domain ripped out from underneath you and pointing to a duplicate content site. Is there any recourse for this action? Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure.
> Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure.
Oh, I think that boundary was crossed a long time ago. It's more a problem of the US government not giving two fucks about its own Constitution.
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#4While there are more important things in life (like being accused wrongly of child pornography), I wonder how that effects their Google rankings to suddenly have your entire domain ripped out from underneath you and pointing to a duplicate content site. Is there any recourse for this action? Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure.
> Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure. Oh, I think that boundary was crossed a long time ago. It's more a problem of the US government not giving two fucks about its own Constitution.
I don't know the entire process well, but wouldn't that be something that you'd presumably file in Federal District court and start there? Once/if it hits the Supreme Court, I don't think the government could really ignore it could they?
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#5While there are more important things in life (like being accused wrongly of child pornography), I wonder how that effects their Google rankings to suddenly have your entire domain ripped out from underneath you and pointing to a duplicate content site. Is there any recourse for this action? Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure.
This is clearly an example unreasonable seizure, and it seems the DHS exists solely to perform unreasonable searches.
This trend towards outright censorship is a worrying one. While I can't speak to the content of any of the sites in this round of censorship/seizure, the DHS certainly seems to be acting outside their mandate.
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#6While there are more important things in life (like being accused wrongly of child pornography), I wonder how that effects their Google rankings to suddenly have your entire domain ripped out from underneath you and pointing to a duplicate content site. Is there any recourse for this action? Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure.
This is clearly an example unreasonable seizure, and it seems the DHS exists solely to perform unreasonable searches. This trend towards outright censorship is a worrying one. While I can't speak to the content of any of the sites in this round of censorship/seizure, the DHS certainly seems to be acting outside their mandate.
As a supporter (and someone who voted for) Obama, I'm frustrated by his lack of comment/participation on this subject. There's no way he can think this is constitutional.
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#7[deleted]
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#8It's amazing that these operations and bills are intentionally wrapped in wording that makes them politically untouchable. I can see why lawmakers wouldn't want to investigate this. Who wants to be the congressman/woman that went against Operation Save our children?
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#9[deleted]
Re: U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seems that this would trigger unreasonable search and seizure. Oh, I think that boundary was crossed a long time ago. It's more a problem of the US government not giving two fucks about its own Constitution.
I don't know the entire process well, but wouldn't that be something that you'd presumably file in Federal District court and start there? Once/if it hits the Supreme Court, I don't think the government could really ignore it could they?
As an example, let's look at the warrantless wiretapping that AT&T did on the behest of the NSA[0]. The EFF filed two cases in response that claimed it was a blatant violation of the 4th amendment: Jewel v. NSA[1] & Hepting v. AT&T[2], against the government & AT&T, respectively.
Here's the latest news on Jewel v. NSA:
> In April, the Obama administration moved to dismiss Jewel, claiming that litigation over the wiretapping program would require the government to disclose privileged "state secrets,” and that they were immune from suit.
According to the documents on the EFF site, they appealed the ruling, but there hasn't been anything posted about the results of that.
How about the case against AT&T?
> In June of 2009, a federal judge dismissed Hepting and dozens of other lawsuits against telecoms, ruling that the companies had immunity from liability under the controversial FISA Amendments Act (FISAAA), which was enacted in response to our court victories in Hepting. Signed by President Bush in 2008, the FISAAA allows the Attorney General to require the dismissal of the lawsuits over the telecoms' participation in the warrantless surveillance program if the government secretly certifies to the court that the surveillance did not occur, was legal, or was authorized by the president -- certification that was filed in September of 2008. EFF is planning to appeal the decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, primarily arguing that FISAAA is unconstitutional in granting to the president broad discretion to block the courts from considering the core constitutional privacy claims of millions of Americans.
0: https://www.eff.org/issues/nsa-spying