Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

In the confiscated site they used an example, in the article on Mashable, they weren't even hosting files. The website just had links to different sites that shared torrent files. So, is it illegal to merely link to a site where an illegal action would most likely take place? I honestly don't know. But, I do feel the normal legal proceedings should take place, perhaps a DMCA notice, attorney contacting hosting, court action, something to that effect. There may be exceptions, in extremely rare cases, if a website is making immediate death threats, and advocating violence against a specific individual, something along those lines. But, tossing aside our rights of due process over copyright infringment does seem a little overkill. Thanks for your opinion, I think we're pretty much on the same page.

I "own" my own house. However, like most people, I had to get a loan to "buy" it. Therefore, I need to make monthly payments. Even though I make payments, I still believe it's mine. I'm hoping it will build in value, just as my domain will as I work on my sites and build links and traffic. Believe me, if I came home one day, and found a government lock on the door, I would tell them it's really mine! If they still tried to take it, I would want legal proceedings and the opportunity to defend my property from being seized by the government.

 

Speaking of payments, the money in your pocket is not yours either, if you are using dollars. You can take a match to the paper money, destroy it, and be taken to court for "destruction of government property". The law is seldom enforced. The only ones who can legally destroy money are... the banks, the ones who probably put the word "tenant" in the deed to your house and land. Is this off topic or what ?

 

Any cop will tell you, ignorance of the law is no excuse for violating it. From what I can tell, at least a few of the sites shut down were intimately familiar with the law and felt they were in no way in violation of it:

@Bluestarent: Your property is not even yours after you have paid for it in full. It is why it is called "Real Estate" or "Royal Estate". It is deeded to you by the government. If you have any doubts, try discontinuing payments on your property taxes. It is a fact we all live with. Now imagine ICE seizing your house after accusing you of facilitating the sale of illegal drugs from it. A year or two down the road, you may plea out, or be found not guilty, but more than likely, your house is gone for inability to make the payments while you paid rent in some other location. Brings to mind issues with our constitutional right to a speedy trial these days as well.

 

Which can be applied to the "digital" "real estate" called domains. Continuing to pay a tax to
someone else is a clear indicator that the person receiving the money believes that it is their property.

 

Just because we agree that everything you think you "own" can be ripped away from you at the whim of the government, doesn't make it right. I'm hoping we agree on that as well. By the way, have you heard Facebook is having some success at trademarking the word "face"? Hope you haven't used it for commercial purposes.

 

As far as linking, I was searching for the law in this regard, this is just a Wiki, but all I could discover on a brief search.

Another interesting article I found, is that when the governments shuts down sites they may be trying to get information on all its visitors.

Really, I never realized how serious all this is. I thought copyright infringement would be a legal matter between the owner of the material that had been infringed upon, and the webmaster that was illegally distributing it. For example, they would send them a cease and desist order, perhaps hire a lawyer, and at most, file a lawsuit. But, it does seem strange the government is handling it the way they are.

 

No, but I heard a woman claimed the sun was hers and was going to try to charge people to use it. That of course would also make her liable for all the damage the solar wind does to technology.

 

It will be interesting to see if they can prove financial gain, since commercial advantage seems out of the question. Personally, I think they'll find it a stretch to prove torrent-finder has even aided in copyright infringement, under the current definition of the law, financial gain and commercial advantage aside. Nevertheless, I'm certain the Feds have a hard on to make an example of somebody for something here. They finally got a conviction against PirateBay in a country where such activities were not even against the law. Once again, subjugating foreign courts to US laws.

 

Some people are wondering if some of these shutdowns are really hoaxes.

 

Thanks for finding that legal information, interesting. Did you read further down in that link you posted that Torrent-Finder changed from the confiscated .com, and is now fully functioning under .info? I wonder if more torrent sites will just avoid the .com in the future?

It could happen, but it looks like ICE Homeland Security Investigations is taking responsibility.

 

This is the first time I have replied to my own post... but I found this : LINK

The man was charged with a felony for :

"The judge charged the men with mutilating coins, which is considered a felony, not a misdemeanor, a fact Mr. Foster discovered 45 years later."