further info:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/court-refuses-give-seized-domain-name-back-claims
Note: this site was legal in Spain, where it operated. Dajaz1.com was legal
the entire time the US government had it out of business.
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Dana wrote:
> Dajaz1.com
so.why is the FBI involved?
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Pretty sure they weren't in the US. New Zealand, I think.
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Vivec wrote:
> >
> > Will they be be able to SUE the US Government for their massive losses
> now
> > that their s
Pretty sure they weren't in the US. New Zealand, I think.
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Will they be be able to SUE the US Government for their massive losses now
> that their site is down?
> It's utter nonsense.
>
> I don't know why any of these companies would host in the
Dajaz1.com...and the answer is no.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57339569-281/dhs-abruptly-abandons-copyright-seizure-of-hip-hop-blog/
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Will they be be able to SUE the US Government for their massive losses now
> that their site is down?
> I
In the case of a site like Megaupload, the site is hosting the files.
It isn't like a forum where they just host message and links to
things. Megaupload is genuinely distributing the material. The
question is whether they had reason to know about all the illegal
material they were distributing on
Will they be be able to SUE the US Government for their massive losses now
that their site is down?
It's utter nonsense.
I don't know why any of these companies would host in the US anymore. If I
had a similar business, I wouldn't.
That includes YouTube, Vimeo etc.
~
More like multiple USERS had illegal files, and if in fact the owners
are not guilty of facilitating the distribution of copyrighted
materials, they will not be convicted. That is why I keep harping on
due process and innocent until proven guilty, neither of which were
included in SOPA or PIPA.
:30 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: FW: Reid cancels procedural vote on PIPA
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 7:19 AM, GMoney wrote:
> I don't think we should necessarily be pissed about a different form
> of this bill eventually coming up for a vote. ANyone who's ever had
> their
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:39 AM, GMoney wrote:
>
> If they are already being prosecuted.why was this law introduced?
> Someone must still be getting ripped off big time? The RIAA?
You presume that someone has to be getting injured in order to justify
a naked power grab?
Judah
~
These laws effectively switch "innocent till proven guilty" to "guilty till
proven innocent" for intelectual property.
Why WOULDN'T the media companies want this? They see their relevance
slipping away due to the internet and they are attacking it - plain as that.
-Cameron
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012
Control. The legally expanded ability to sue a competitor into oblivion
is no small thing. Also, prosecuting someone like the megaupload guys
is a hassle. There is extradition and all sorts of red tape. Who wants
to go through that annoying due process thing? It's easier just to flip
a sw
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> Stealing is already illegal and groups that do large scale stealing
> and dispersal of illegally obtained software and content are already
> being prosecuted. See yesterday's bust of MegaUpload as an example.
> DMCA is way more harmful th
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 7:19 AM, GMoney wrote:
> I don't think we should necessarily be pissed about a different form of
> this bill eventually coming up for a vote. ANyone who's ever had their shit
> stolen online would appreciate some sort of legislation centered around a
> pointed technical so
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71720.html
>
> Reid cancels procedural vote on PIPA
> By: Jennifer Martinez
> January 20, 2012 09:40 AM EST
>
> Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has postponed a procedural vote
> scheduled for Tu
14 matches
Mail list logo
