Feds disable movie piracy websites in raids

Thu Jul 1 14:56:25 UTC 2010

On 1 jul 2010, at 15.20, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

> n Jul 1, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
> 
>> The question is because gTLDs operations are in the USA, does it mean that the USA have control over all those domain names?
>> 
>> Can we trust solely the USA for such control?
>> 
>> This will come back with a vengeance in the JPA negotiations, ICANN, etc...

JPA discussions are concluded and replaced with the AoC. The discussion on the renewal of the IANA contract I suspect will be a recurring theme in IGF in Villnius. 

> Yeah, because if the domains were housed in another country than the USofA, that country's court system & law enforcement surely wouldn't feel any sort of authority over the machines on their sovereign soil.  It's just the evil USA that would dare to think in such a fashion.  Oh, wait....

If you look at the . level i.e ICANN my understanding is that if it was a treaty or UN organization that does not apply. However as we are talking gTLD level you are indeed right. 

> Is it possible the law enforcement officers went through the standard due process for the country in which they operate, Just Like Any Other Law Enforcement Agency Would?  Nahh, no way we could consider that.  It wouldn't allow us to bang on the US and make hollow threats about future negotiations.
> 
> 
> It's fun to bang on the US, but let's try to keep even a hint of reality & perspective in our rants.  Please?

Best regards,

- kurtis -

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20100701/49d47841/attachment.sig>