Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Begins Shutting Down Websites

This is it, reported today, front page of drudgereport:

thehill.com...

Homeland security has begun, with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to shut down webistes. Torrent sites, fraudulent products, etc.

Who will be next? ATS?

lol noticed this comment below the article: RapGodFathers lives on, new URL: www.rapgodfathers.info

For one there are literally thousands of sites they will need to shut down and secondly as fast as they can shut them down new sites will spring up

I hope not. ATS doesn't condone illegal activities. ATS is a business and probably makes alot of money, and I'm assuming they pay their taxes, so the government will probably let them slide.


On the flip side, I'm sure this law can be abused, and anyone with a bone to pick in the government can shut XYZ site down on the fly.

the law, from what I read, basically allows for the shutdown of pirate websites

damn...not that I ever used them before -whistles innocently-

ATS is not a piracy website from what I understand.


interesting sidenote...thepiratebay is hosting the wikileaks documents...so, if you want em, better grab the torrent now before that goes away.

TPB is hosted on remote servers that aren't in this country. So how do they shut them down?

Originally posted by SaturnFX
the law, from what I read, basically allows for the shutdown of pirate websites

damn...not that I ever used them before -whistles innocently-

ATS is not a piracy website from what I understand.


interesting sidenote...thepiratebay is hosting the wikileaks documents...so, if you want em, better grab the torrent now before that goes away.

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
TPB is hosted on remote servers that aren't in this country. So how do they shut them down?

I would think block them from the states would be easiest.

woops, this is a repeat thread. someone should delete it.

my bad.

reply to post by WashingtonGrewHemp


No one here approves of bootlegging or theft. We should all respect private property and property rights.

BUT no "website" steals or sells ANYTHING! It is a portal.

Websites are private property.

COICA has not yet passed the Senate or become law.

The President is seizing property (thru DHS/ICE) with NO DUE PROCESS!

ATS is a website, no? Anyone here ever see un-credited use of others' "property?"

You are all getting the Change you Hoped for, sheep.

Look what you've done to my country!

jw

reply to post by jdub297



No file sharer approves of theft or bootlegging either.

Unless you are asserting file sharing is either one of these things, which it isn't.

The same arguments used against someone downloading a song for free and listening to it can be used against someone who plays a song for another person to listen to. And please, feel free to prove me wrong through any form of manipulation of language you can. You'll just show I'm right because you can't. It's the same damn argument.

Mind you, people have been copying everything from vinyls to tape cassettes for decades. None of that was illegal. And none of that was "being crack down upon". While this will certainly lead to pirating getting a large crackdown, the legislation will be used for other purposes, so much so that you can't even call it abuse because that's its intent and purpose.

Another fact is pirating isn't hurting any industry outside possibly the movie industry.

With music, you basically have two situations. You're either a no name artist trying to become big, and fact is if no one knows who you are they won't ever pay 15$ for the piece of plastic you're trying to hawk after a concert. Whereas if you made them free, available for download or give disks away free, your popularity will grow. Much faster than any no name trying to make money from it.

Now, if you are a known and established artist, you still don't gain much from selling records. Originally, the purpose of selling records for the artist never had anything to do with making money on the artist end. 99% of the profit is going to the record companies. Originally, the gain for the artist was the spread of his music through the available mass media at the time. This being radio. And well, you need records for the radio stations to play. And you can sell records to the people who can play them. That's about it.

The money from being an established artist comes from, like the majority of money prior to that, gigs you play. Artists make much more from their concerts than anything else. Hell, artists make more money from gigs, merchandise, promotional deals, and simply their image than record sales. Record sales seriously mean jack# to them.

The major push, especially from record labels, is because they are becoming unneeded. Today the equipment for producing music that is studio quality is so cheap and readily available that you're an idiot if you're an artist and you don't do this. And the internet gives the ability to reach so many people through free avenues that you don't need to make records to become famous. Several artists in recent years have proven this.

Funny fact is, the genre of music who pioneered and pushes the envelope in home studio equipment and usage, Electronic music, would be most affected by this push. Considering most DJ's I know minimum have over a terabyte of music, most of which is either incredibly cheap (dollar each) or openly available for free, you can see the effect this would have on the industry.

In fact, that's the entire motive for the record labels. They're colluding with ISP providers (many of whom are eventually connected through some means) and the government to gain control over it. Doing so will MAKE artists need to go through them again to become popular, which makes home studios pointless because anything you produce you can't share freely for popularity BECAUSE ITS ILLEGAL NOW.

This is just going to hit dooms day scenario where ISP's can charge access to sites, government can censor sites, and record studios gain a monopoly over music again. Thankfully, unlike the masses of drooling twits who infest this planet and let corruption and bad people reign, most people who care about the internet aren't useless mouth breathers. It isn't the Korean war that just started up again now, we have a cyber war between the powers that be and the powers that should be. Who you want to side with, I don't know. But # has kinda sucked under the powers that be, so I'll choose the latter.

reply to post by SpectreDC


Great reply, Spectre. The far reaching effects this is going to have on musicians is pretty ominous. There are artists out there who put songs for download on their MySpace for free. It leaves one to wonder what the feds will do about that? Are they going to go after the social networking sites as well? Or just force the social networks to no longer allow any sort of ability to make something downloadable. Also will they monitor each and every ISP to assure that nothing is ripped into MP3 from these sources with the many programs out there that will do so. It seems like this could really open up a huge can of worms, niot to mention lead to yet more beaurocrazy.

It's really a sad evolution, because once upon a time labels actually care about developing artists and talent, but those days are long gone The music industry has been in pretty dire straights for a long time now, and this isn't going to help anyone but the greed driven labels who only care about profit.

replying to earlier thread on this topic, please delete my post, thanks

reply to post by SpectreDC

You have completely missed my point.

Obama's DHS is seizing people's property (websites) WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.

Since you missed it, I'll repeat it: No "website" can ever sell anything or steal anything; it is a portal.

If you think I've got fake furs or rolexes, come get them. If you think I've stolen someone's copyrighted material, show me.

My point is that the government has the burden of proof to establish justification for prosecution, search, et c. BEFORE it can act; and, it does not appear that they've bothered to take any steps to establish the prerequisites for seizure.

No file sharer approves of theft or bootlegging either.
Unless you are asserting file sharing is either one of these things, which it isn't.
The same arguments used against someone downloading a song for free and listening to it can be used against someone who plays a song for another person to listen to. And please, feel free to prove me wrong through any form of manipulation of language you can. You'll just show I'm right because you can't. It's the same damn argument.

Nothing I've written even touches on this, so you've picked the wrong fight.

You need to focus on the bigger picture.

ANY site with plagiarized content is subject to seizure as they are doing right now. How many times have you seen people publish stuff here without giving proper credit? Dozens per day!

If you accept that what DHS is doing is permissible, then say goodbye to ATS.

It is not just file sharers they're attacking!

Are you just too focused on stolen music to see the real threat?

reply to post by jdub297


I think the phrase "Obama's DHS" is a little misleading. It's not like that department was created under his watch or anything. Actually pretty much all of the current bad stuff that's going on is Bush's fault. I realize I'm a little off topic, but that phrase just stuck out to me.