• Welcome to DNForum.com™ - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars
    If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the oldest global domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 45,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, using our free in-house built tools, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.

"Domainer" to be extradited to USA under copyright laws

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting story, Thank you for posting.

I think it's more about sending a message than anything else.
 
Interesting story, Thank you for posting.

I think it's more about sending a message than anything else.

Yes could be, but it clearly is grossly unfair to extraidte a young man from UK to USA to make that. Especially given that the links were and probably still are on Google and many other sites as well. In fact would be interesting to see show I shall try and find out.

DG
 
How does the US Customs and Border Protection agency know that the TVShack.net website earned over $230,000 in advertising revenue? A British citizen has been audited by the US government? The British government supplied this information to the US government?

Another line from the article mentions that police officers from the UK and America seized equipment at his home? Just imagine the absolute uproar in the US if Chinese and American police officers entered a private home and seized personal property.
 
Just a quick search showed me this site http://www.tv-links.eu/sites-guide/tvshack.net_1/ This is NOT the person in the article but from the "contact" section see they have offices they say in Romania and USA. Why have the US authorities not gone for Google for showing the website in tis results ?. Too hard to fight so they go for poor person in UK. Ridiculous and grossly unfair.

DG
 
Who will be next?

---------- Post added at 12:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 PM ----------

there is a lot of pressure from the big media companies to crack down on online piracy. I've heard a lot of younger people watch movies and tv shows on the net now, and they aren't paying for them or watching them through the media that created them. I'm still renting movies on dvd from the local movie rental store. Another big thing is Youtube converters, to convert songs on Youtube into digital format for your ipod.
 
video sharing sites like vidxden, divshare, vidweed, and others
 
Sad. That's why they should kill SOPA.
 
SOPA attacks the end purchaser.

The copyright issue should be addressed at the registrar level like GoSlappy for example.

It wouldnt take much code to address an API with TESS to cross ref the copyright word database, at the point of sale at Godaddy.

But instead Godaddy would just rather sell you the name, take your money, and support the likes of a SOPA bill to put you, their customer, at risk.

(rant over, once again)
 
Just imagine the absolute uproar in the US if Chinese and American police officers entered a private home and seized personal property.

Unfortunately, there would be none. The only thing that matters to the herd in the U.S. anymore is the latest dress Kim Kardashian is wearing, or what rapper killed what rapper this week.
 
I fine this very unfair and believe he won't be charged but he will need a good lawyer or go solo and represent him self. I see that he did something bad it would same as if he posted a list of drug dealers. He is sort of a middle man in this case providing more of a informational website then hosting actual files.

I give him credit for being smart enough to make 200k with out much of the foot work

Waiting to see how this case resolves
 
the "end purchaser" would be the person that actually ordered and received the counterfeit goods from the site... so no, SOPA does not address them

It sounds like you are saying that the owner of the site should not be liable for what they do, but the Registrar should because the Registrant is using a TM in the ascii string address he registered?
 
It sounds like you are saying that the owner of the site should not be liable for what they do, but the Registrar should because the Registrant is using a TM in the ascii string address he registered?

Close. I most certainly think that owners of sites like described should always be liable for what they do. But it only seems logical that a simple cross check at the registrar level could easily flag any potential TM's and then provide a checkbox that explicity says if you buy this particular name that you risk the legal reprocussions. (granted I know the Godaddy TOS probably already has this, but nobody reads that as a function of buying their names. And if a popup or something happens that may deter some buying of tm issues or at least give pause to consider the tm issue before buying.) As an analogy, this is why we have checks at gun stores to make sure you are legal to buy them. But you are suggesting that there should be no checks to buy guns, just lots more police officers and less due process.(in analogy)

I will be honest, I dont like MUCH of what sopa represents, as there are already mechanisms in place that assist the corporations with protecting their brand, on national and international levels. But sopa pushes that onto a government expense and not as a expense of doing business.


the "end purchaser" would be the person that actually ordered and received the counterfeit goods from the site... so no, SOPA does not address them

I am not talking about purses or watches or files including music. Intellectual property such as a quote of a copyright news post on a blog or forum, currently covered under fair use rules, SOPA calls the 'end user' the blog or forum, and is loosly written enough to make most blogs or forums illegal. In this case you are suggesting the reader of blogs or forums, is the 'end user', but that is not what you are saying for sure I presume.
 
How does the US Customs and Border Protection agency know that the TVShack.net website earned over $230,000 in advertising revenue?

Most likely got that from the advertising provider.
 
While the story makes it look like some innocent kid got caught up in all this just for providing a centralized place to find the illegal files somewhere else, if he did indeed earn over $200k in "advertising" revenue - I can see why they want to hang him.

Whether he hosted the files or not, he seriously profited from their distribution.

Is it a scary precedent? yes.
Should this behavior be excused? I'm not thinking so...
Will he be able to claim immunity through his comparison to Google? Not in this lifetime...
 
Unfortunately, there would be none. The only thing that matters to the herd in the U.S. anymore is the latest dress Kim Kardashian is wearing, or what rapper killed what rapper this week.
Or because that is more like routine INTERPOL work.

And I guess Ricky Gervais "explained" it quite well: Kim Kardashian is "a bit louder, a bit trashier", which usually draws more attention.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom