Something very important happened on the internet this week....

[trumad]

Basically the US Government has decided to seize domain sites without due process.

Here's a link to Sam Seder who can explain it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=550573&mesg_id=550573

And here's a link to my favorite web streaming site that now has

[Newest Reality]

1. Due process?

What ancient custom is that? I vaguely remember something to that effect. Dew Prosessium?

Well, back to our regularly scheduled show ... Profit is Law! Starring: The Koch Brothers with a special guest appearance by a host of wacky, fun-loving billionaires who took over a government and nobody noticed. Brought to you by Monsanto, where, "We are rounding-up the useless eaters and you WILL buy our seeds!"

[davidinalameda]

2. guess you missed the part about ILLEGAL streaming

or maybe you don't care

[snot]

3. In the old days, they' have to at least go to court and get a temporary restraining order based on

a number of criteria, including a likelihood of proving illegality.

[Recursion]

10. Actually, no, not since DMCA

But that was a decade ago; the enforcement at least anecdotally seems a lot more severe now.

[snot]

15. I mean the old old days, when we still had the Constitution.

[davidinalameda]

28. where in the Constitution does it say you're allowed to steal copyrighted material

or did I miss that section

[ChairmanAgnostic]

41. what about due process?

the steps are simple.
First accuse someone of theft.
Next, prove it.
Third, the accused has a constitutional right to face the accusers and provide a defense.

THEN, and only then can you seize the culprit.

This is assbackwards, and yet another example how our constitutional protects receive little more than lip service, regardless of whether Bush's or Obama's DOJ is involved.

[Recursion]

44. Only for criminal sanctions

Taking somebody's domain is not a criminal sanction.

[davidinalameda]

17. I believe that the government can seize property used in the commission of a crime

and I do believe that an internet site could be considered property

you get arrested dealing drugs out of your house, your house gets seized

[rhett o rick]

21. Sounds like you are ok with the government seizing property w/o cause. Very interesting. nm

[davidinalameda]

22. if it's used in a crime

I see no problem with it

but good try to twist what I was saying

[rhett o rick]

23. Here's the deal. The government seizes property when there is a assumption of a crime.

And they dont give it back. These "crimes" have not been proven. But that doesnt matter to the right wing mind. Guilty until proven otherwise. Right??

[markpkessinger]

24. Intellectual Property Crimes Have NEVER been subject to seizures

[davidinalameda]

26. so I'm a right winger because I don't think these websites should be up

and running and the owners shouldn't be allowed to steal copyrighted material

[rhett o rick]

32. Have you not heard of innocent until proven guilty? Most right wingers havent. If the shoe fits. nm

[markpkessinger]

5. I saw something on ALLEGED illegal streaming

Due process means these companies have a right to defend themselves in court before property is seized. Maybe you missed that part of high school civics class?

[unblock]

8. hmm, "civics"

now there's a word that seems to have vanished from the public lexicon....

i think the last politician i heard utter that word was probably jimmy carter.

[trumad]

13. Exactly...

well put.

[davidinalameda]

18. they don't

the example I just gave one of your brethren is you deal drugs out of your house, your house gets seized

you use your car in the commission of a crime, your car gets seized

if you're found innocent, the property is returned

[trumad]

12. Illegal?

Say's who?

No court had deemed this illegal....

Listen to Seder---he explains that in Israel and Spain it was found legal when challenged.

[davidinalameda]

27. the NFL or whatever aren't located in Israel or Spain

they're in this country

it really doesn't matter what those countries say

the signals originate in the US

[trumad]

36. You don't gt it at all...

Let the courts decide if this is illegal.

[rhett o rick]

20. If you think that is some sort of argument you are totally messed up.

If you want to provide an argument, then do so. Stating that "maybe you dont care" is childish.

[Catherina]

4. Egypt. Simple as that. n/t

[Dappleganger]

7. +1000000

[davidinalameda]

19. you're comparing a revolution

to people stealing a TV signal?

[sufrommich]

25. Oh my God. Get a hold of yourself. nt

[Electric Monk]

6. It's only football

(just kidding, I'll be watching this weekend too)

Go Packers!

[FSogol]

9. But, but, a US business (The NFL) wanted them to

:shrug:

[L. Coyote]

11. This is old news. What happened this week is a US Senator complained = Wyden.

[trumad]

14. Actually I went on to my favorite streaming sight

and saw a new page from the Dept. of Justice and Homeland Security saying the seized the site.

Here it is:

[lies and propaganda]

16. my heart SANK when i saw this..

what was wild was that i was alerted to it because Twitter had ATDHE in its trending topics.

[davidinalameda]

29. sucks to be you huh

[trumad]

30. It sucks to be living in a totalitarian state.

[davidinalameda]

33. so the US is a totalitarian state

because the government cracks down on websites that steal copyrighted material for their own use?

[JVS]

40. That's a bit much, I'd say we're more of a halfassatarian-authoritarian hybrid.

Halfassatarian when it comes to serving the public, see HCR or pretty much any social program. Authoritarian when it comes to CORPORATE RIGHTS, because our dear leaders think that shit is super important.

[Forkboy]

31. Almost as much as it sucks to be consistently on the side of douchebags.

[davidinalameda]

34. I'm not on your side

have a good evening

[Forkboy]

35. Yeah, there's a shock.

I knew you weren't on my side a long time ago.

I'm having a great night. Thanks for checking in from your own lifeless, boring one.

[davidinalameda]

42. sticks and stones sweetie

[JVS]

39. Needs more eagles!

[DearAbby]

37. The DHS now endorces laws for Corporations

isn't that special? YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK.

[Hydra]

43. Isn't what they were always there for

Minus some propaganda?

[vssmith]

38. Isn't that prior restraint?