Unfortunately with the goons at the department of "homeland" security now disconnecting businesses from "the internet" via control over root DNS servers... this seems kinda possible.
These actions are not constitutional, nor are they legal. And americans are going to have to stand up to their government or before too long it will be businesses like google--which evil as some may see them is law abiding company- forced to bend over for these interests, lest they be put out of business arbitrarily.
Google is to big too be killed, and has already shown its willingness to play to the public gallery over government censorship. I'd assume the MPAA isn't suicidal enough to challenge them in any meaningful way.
If you're going to scare monger at least get your facts straight.
1. They're done with a warrant from a judge. It's no different then freezing ones banking assets.
2. They do not pull anything for the root DNS servers. Instead, they're pulled at the TLD servers (.com, .net, and .org) which are all located within the US.
There is no such thing as a "warrant to pull a domain" (or sieze a bank account) in the US legal system[1]. So, if a "judge" signed a piece of paper, that does not make it a warrant (legally). These were criminal acts, and that is the fact, jack.
The TLD servers are root servers for the TLDs.
Also, your hostility is not appropriate here. Even if someone makes errors, attacking them just says more about you than it does them.
[1] Fourth amendment. The existence of a bank account is evidence, thus a warrant can be issued to seize a bank accounts records. But money is not itself evidence, it is fungible with any other money, thus these warrants are illegal under the fourth amendment, and anyone participating in their service or enforcement is a felon under USC 18-242.
I'm surprised about the MPAA's threat with respect to Google's ISP shutting them down. Isn't half the problem with net neutrality that Google is their own ISP and that they have deals to work with other ISPs? If not, why are they in the middle of the proposal to the FCC? I highly doubt you could disconnect Google from the internet worldwide.
The article seemed to imply that the notice-sending process is automated. Probably there's no one checking that threats meant for residential ISP customers aren't being irrelevantly sent to large Internet companies.
Does torrent freak publish anything that isn't link bait anymore? Look, we found an example of a generic demand letter crafted for an individual sent to a large company? LOLOMGLOL?
Hey look, they just blanket send out notices without actually looking into what they are doing. Not saying we didn't know that before, but it's a novel way of pointing out how stupid it is.
10 comments
[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 33.6 ms ] threadThese actions are not constitutional, nor are they legal. And americans are going to have to stand up to their government or before too long it will be businesses like google--which evil as some may see them is law abiding company- forced to bend over for these interests, lest they be put out of business arbitrarily.
1. They're done with a warrant from a judge. It's no different then freezing ones banking assets.
2. They do not pull anything for the root DNS servers. Instead, they're pulled at the TLD servers (.com, .net, and .org) which are all located within the US.
The TLD servers are root servers for the TLDs.
Also, your hostility is not appropriate here. Even if someone makes errors, attacking them just says more about you than it does them.
[1] Fourth amendment. The existence of a bank account is evidence, thus a warrant can be issued to seize a bank accounts records. But money is not itself evidence, it is fungible with any other money, thus these warrants are illegal under the fourth amendment, and anyone participating in their service or enforcement is a felon under USC 18-242.
Also, it seems to reference the .torrent file, not an actual video file.
Since when did that matter to the MPAA/RIAA?