[Chapter-delegates] .org domain seized by U.S. Department of Justice

[Joly MacFie]

Certainly in the November efforts I think it was well established that it
was Verisign. But I do belive they were US registrars.

After a little looking around I found an affidavit from November
http://www.scribd.com/doc/45473003/ICE-affidavit-partial

It would appear to be directed at both registry and registrars..
<http://www.scribd.com/doc/45473003/ICE-affidavit-partial>

with some discussion of it's basis here
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101217/01190512310/homeland-security-presents-evidence-domain-seizures-proves-it-knows-little-about-internet---law.shtml
and more here
http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=1670

One thing is evident - it is very media driven. The November takedowns were
aimed at 'Black Monday' and this time it's the Superbowl.

j



On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:05 AM, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu>
wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 15:59:37 -0500, Eric Burger wrote:
>
> Are you sure this has anything to do with the registry? I just did some
> whois searches on some seized domains, not just rojadirecta.com, and the
> entries look like normal registrations, done by normal registrars, only
> pointing to ICE servers, not the original registrant's servers.
>
> Has there been a case anywhere in the world where a domain was taken where
> the registrant's registrar was not in the U.S.? I am asking for
> informational purposes - I do not know the answer and would be quite
> interested in the answer.
>
> Eric,
>
> Of course, I am not totally sure this has anything to do with the
registry.
> How could I ? The deafening silence of PIR on the case does not help. It
> could be the registrar, but again, GoDaddy did not comment the issue
either.
> According to this post on another list, it was indeed the registry that
> received the notice from the court, although I could not verify the
> information:
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/2011q1/007570.html
>
> I would be relieved if this has happened on the registrar level. At least,
> registrants have a choice when choosing registrars and can factor in that
> sort of risk. At the registry level, this is not the case, unless you want
> to move to another TLD.
>
> My concern here is that this creates a legal uncertainty for domain name
> registrants in .org, which may lead to less registrations, less profits
and
> finally less moneyfor ISOC.  PIR needs to speak up to reassure its
customer
> base.
>
> I do not have the answer to your second question. I think such cases are
> still minimal.
>
> Patrick
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
  VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20110203/a9963c03/attachment.htm>