Mozilla Refuses to Drop Domain Seizure Circumvention App

[Baradiel]

Go Mozilla! I can't stand the way the internet is getting policed by America. I truly hate it.

Man, if THAT pisses you off, then stay FAR AWAY from the Chinese.

Thats more state censorship. The chinese government restricts the population of its own country. It isn't right, but its sortof understandable.

What this is is international busybodying.

 

[Giest4life]

America doesn't have jurisdiction on the internet, I don't really see how they could legally do this.

As the American Gov. invented the internet (read: the army) I'm pretty sure there's a strong case that they do have jurisdiction on the internet.

By that logic, I guess, Alexander Flemming's Estate owns the rights to ALL the penicillin produced in the world.

 

[The Grim Ace]

Finally, a major company of some kind is really standing up for our freedom of information. Kudos like crazy to Mozilla for doing what they've done and hopefully continuing with it.

 

[Low Key]

America doesn't have jurisdiction on the internet, I don't really see how they could legally do this.

As the American Gov. invented the internet (read: the army) I'm pretty sure there's a strong case that they do have jurisdiction on the internet.

That makes no difference at all. TPB would already be down if the US had jurisdiction. The internet hasn't been private for decades.

 

[mjc0961]

Well, that add-on doesn't sound like a very nice one. But, if all they did was ask that it be removed, that gives Mozilla the right to say no. If they really want it down, let them go get a court order. Not that it'll do any good, because add-ons can still be hosted elsewhere. They're just going to cause a Streisand Effect on this add-on.

 

[Steve the Pocket]

Wow. An Internet company that actually has balls. Go Mozilla! Don't back down without a fight! Go all the way and make them take the whole goddamned DMCA to the Supreme Court! (Or make them shut you down and go down in history as the biggest martyrs to your cause yet. It's been ages since we've had any causes anyone's been willing to actually risk their business for.)

 

[Rayansaki]

America doesn't have jurisdiction on the internet, I don't really see how they could legally do this.

As the American Gov. invented the internet (read: the army) I'm pretty sure there's a strong case that they do have jurisdiction on the internet.

Oh ok. Then I guess the descendent of whoever invented the wheel has jurisdiction inside every car.

 

[Tanis]

This is troll, yes? Cause, if not - must be Kim Jon Ill, Mao, or Stalin in disguise. No AMERICAN - who support the US Constitution would be a fan of the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. A.C.T 2 - unless they're traitors.

Ok, you owe me my sanity, as now I have to defend this guy, even though I dislike hate what he said. You just used the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. There are plenty of Americans who do support the PATRIOT act, which does not make them traitors. It certainly makes me and many others think much less of them, but it doesn't make them traitors.

I have no idea what "No True Scotsman" is...
.
What else would you call any American citizen that thinks its fine and dandy to use the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, Judicial Precedence, The System of Checks & Balances, and 'Common Sense' (get it?) - as toilet paper or a blunt roll...
.
.
....Which is basically what the PATRIOT Act does...
.
.
Unless, you could argue, it just makes them inbreed, ignorant & ill-informed, "Special E.D." types.
Which, I could go ahead and agree with.
.
.
.
However, to me, anyone who claims to be an American but supports polices that go against everything that has made/makes this nation so amazing in the past/present/future...
Well, they're a traitor - maybe not to the American Government - but to the people and spirit that of the 'American Way' we all aspire to.
.
.
.
TL/DR?
Americans should be better than this, it's insulting.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Requesting that the Government follow the law does not make you traitors.

/salute Mozilla.

 

[Quiet Stranger]

What's a domain seizure?

 

[sosolidshoe]

America doesn't have jurisdiction on the internet, I don't really see how they could legally do this.

As the American Gov. invented the internet (read: the army) I'm pretty sure there's a strong case that they do have jurisdiction on the internet.

DARPA created the basic network on the back of which the internet as we know it was designed by CERN. So by your insane troll-logic, that means France and Switzerland have jurisdiction over the internet.

 

[jaguarman134]

What's a domain seizure?

its when a domain has a fit

 

[Eri]

If the domains are not in the US, Homeland Security has no jurisdiction over them.

You can say that all you want, but that's not going to stop them if they want something down.

 

[MrTub]

If the domains are not in the US, Homeland Security has no jurisdiction over them.

You can say that all you want, but that's not going to stop them if they want something down.

Right.. That is why Piratebay is down, right?

 

[zehydra]

I'm a big supporter of Homeland Security, and actually felt that "The Patriot Act" does not go far enough in what it needs to do. I supported Gitmo, and all kinds of things that make left wingers uneasy to even think about.... however in reading this, and similar things, I can't help but say "WTF Is Homeland Security doing involved in this?". There is no justification for using what is supposed to be an organization intended to defend the country against terrorist threats, acting as a punkhammer for anti-piracy slapfights. It's sort of like how the definition of "Terrorism" is extended and trampled on to deal with any kind of major case that law enforcement needs a bit more oomph with.

It's like this, unless Homeland Security can prove that there is some direct connection to terrorism, they need to butt out. By this I don't just mean hypothetical exploitation by terrorists.

It's this kind of irresponsibility, and the breadth of operations of "Homeland Security" that cause people to have so many problems with them. I believe such organizations can operate without abuses of their authority, or taking undue advantage of a broad mandate, but actions like this certainly make my defense of them being a lot more difficult. Piracy revolves around private businesses losing money, NOT about threats to our nation as a whole, Homeland Security has no part being involved here, heck there are plenty of criminal cases that they get involved in where they shouldn't besides this.

I might not care for piracy, but this while thing just generally stinks. Piracy might be wrong, but you can commit greater wrongs in the course of going after it, and abusing authority given to deal with terrorists so some company can save a few bucks is one of
those greater evils.

What's interesting is that you are in favor of the patriot act, but you fear the abuse of power.

 

[Kargathia]

I have no idea what "No True Scotsman" is...

Explained short and sweet: you disagreeing with their opinion does not mean they aren't "True" Americans/Scotsmen.

You do realise that if I'd ask one of them I'm pretty liable to get an answer declaring that you're "a traitor to the American People"?

I do, however, agree with that terrorism is no excuse to start secret police practices. Just keep in mind that according to the democratic principle even people you think are idiots have an equal vote =)

 

[samsonguy920]

Frankly I am with Mozilla on this one. I am tired of federal agencies in the US acting like they can do whatever they want with the internet, when it is actually an international entity. Now while servers within the US are within jurisdiction of said agencies, there have been many cases of the FBI and such trying to shut down or peek into servers outside of the US. Then there is the fact that the Department of Homeland Security has no place telling people what to have in their domain name. Not in the US, and frankly shouldn't be anywhere else.
I hope the DHS takes this to court. Mozilla will be more than happy to take this all the way to the Supreme Court, where many of the DHS's policies will get put under the magnifying glass and maybe we can finally get rid of that crap of paper called the Patriot Act completely.

For once, I respect a lawyer. He should be crowned "The Greatest Lawyer. Of All Time."

Not a hard title to get, seeing as what some lawyers do now-a-days.

OT: I don't really use FF or this app, but I can say that they asked some good questions.

Yeah, but Lincoln was a lawyer.

And he stuck to his guns and chose to not allow the Union to be divided, even though it was decided before he took the oath of office(South Carolina seceded a month after Lincoln was elected and a month before he was inaugurated). Mozilla's lawyer is doing the same thing here, sticking to his guns and telling DHS to get a warrant. DHS is in the practice of doing things without judges involved, so they are probably going to try to bluff Mozilla out before trying to make a court case out of this.

 

[Nurb]

I think this is a good thing.

We need a good, public, and visible exposure of a government agency called "homeland security" doing the bidding of corporate interests by seizing domains that have nothing to do with terrorism or national security.

Go mozilla

 

[samsonguy920]

If the domains are not in the US, Homeland Security has no jurisdiction over them.

You can say that all you want, but that's not going to stop them if they want something down.

It will stop them when the owners of the foreign domains take it to their government leaders, and those leaders threaten trade sanctions against the US. That would be when the White House tells the DHS to go sit in the corner.

 

[McMullen]

I'm a big supporter of Homeland Security, and actually felt that "The Patriot Act" does not go far enough in what it needs to do. I supported Gitmo, and all kinds of things that make left wingers uneasy to even think about.... however in reading this, and similar things, I can't help but say "WTF Is Homeland Security doing involved in this?". There is no justification for using what is supposed to be an organization intended to defend the country against terrorist threats, acting as a punkhammer for anti-piracy slapfights. It's sort of like how the definition of "Terrorism" is extended and trampled on to deal with any kind of major case that law enforcement needs a bit more oomph with.

It's like this, unless Homeland Security can prove that there is some direct connection to terrorism, they need to butt out. By this I don't just mean hypothetical exploitation by terrorists.

It's this kind of irresponsibility, and the breadth of operations of "Homeland Security" that cause people to have so many problems with them. I believe such organizations can operate without abuses of their authority, or taking undue advantage of a broad mandate, but actions like this certainly make my defense of them being a lot more difficult. Piracy revolves around private businesses losing money, NOT about threats to our nation as a whole, Homeland Security has no part being involved here, heck there are plenty of criminal cases that they get involved in where they shouldn't besides this.

I might not care for piracy, but this while thing just generally stinks. Piracy might be wrong, but you can commit greater wrongs in the course of going after it, and abusing authority given to deal with terrorists so some company can save a few bucks is one of
those greater evils.

This is troll, yes?
Cause, if not - must be Kim Jon Ill, Mao, or Stalin in disguise.

No AMERICAN - who support the US Constitution would be a fan of the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. A.C.T 2 - unless they're traitors.

Ok, you owe me my sanity, as now I have to defend this guy, even though I dislike hate what he said. You just used the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. There are plenty of Americans who do support the PATRIOT act, which does not make them traitors. It certainly makes me and many others think much less of them, but it doesn't make them traitors.

I appreciate you taking that bullet so I didn't have to. Still, at least the guy who supports the Act acknowledges that DHS has definitely overstepped its bounds, if not legally then certainly in its original purpose. That's farther than many are willing to go towards questioning the wisdom of post-9/11 "security".