

Feds Seize 307 Sports-Related Domains Ahead of Super Sunday - FredBrach
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/02/sports-domains-seized/

======
neilparikh
"Under civil forfeiture laws, the person losing the property has to prove that
the items were not used to commit crimes."

That seems a bit backwards to me. I thought people were supposed to be
innocent until proven guilty?

~~~
anonymoushn
People are presumed innocent. To get around this, legal action is taken
against the assets.

Edit: This document contains some information about asset forfeiture
<http://www.justice.gov/usao/ri/projects/esguidelines.pdf>

~~~
pyre
Which is how you get stuff like:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_v._$124,700>

~~~
beedogs
Wow, brilliant explanation of the reversal decision by the appellate court in
that one. "We reverse."

~~~
slapshot
Wikipedia quoted only the first paragraph of the opinion. The full thing is
here: <http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/08/053295P.pdf>

------
ck2
Gotta protect those billionaire team owners and millionaire players - what
would they do without their safetynet?

Once again law enforcement using their massive budget and "terrorist level"
tools to help the 1%

I don't see any mention of a warrant or judicial review?

Meanwhile Nevada has nearly 13% (published) unemployment.

------
bruce511
I get what they're trying to do, but a) there are a lot more TLDs in the world
than .com, .net, .org. So sites with a following, and a way to reach that
following (twitter, Facebook etc) will quickly, and easily fall outside their
grasp.

b) perhaps more concerning is the lack of due process. I get why they're
frustrated, so because the owners are either outside their jurisdiction, or
because they can't actually find the owners of the site, it's easiest to kill
the DNS entry. Ineffective maybe, but at least they're seen to be doing
_something_.

c) it's clearly better that 100 innocent sites should be closed than that a
guilty one should keep its DNS entry.

While I get where they're coming from, I wonder where it ends? How long before
they become a bug that needs to be worked around....

~~~
nodata
> c) it's clearly better that 100 innocent sites should be closed than that a
> guilty one should keep its DNS entry.

Did you mean to write this?

~~~
Animus7
Sarcasm, I'm sure.

