Enom accused of abetting Hezbollah

[Adam DickerAdam Dicker is verified member.]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/278846_hezweb26.html

-=DCG=-

 

[ColdGin]

It´s good to know about what is doing enom.

 

[Domainguy12]

Demand Media and eNom are helping Hezbollah

"[Hezbollah] depends on a Bellevue company that may be violating federal law by lending technological assistance

eNom Inc., a domain-name registrar and Web-hosting company, could face large fines, and its executives could get jail time, according to the Treasury Department, which helps implement the law

as the site's registrar, eNom has allowed Al-Manar to quickly move its site from one host computer to another, the ADL said.

"ENom should not be doing business with them. It's not a question of morals or ethics -- it could be breaking the law."

Officials from eNom and Demand Media didn't respond Tuesday to repeated requests for comment.

people identified as aiding terrorist groups can be fined $10,000 for each civil violation of the law and fined $50,000, plus be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison, for each criminal violation."

anyone else going to move domains away from them?

 

[Adam DickerAdam Dicker is verified member.]

It said they would release a statement Tuesday i believe.

-=DCG=-

 

[RatherGood]

It seems like we are entering an era where US based registrars will have to start policing the internet.

 

[Leading Names]

I think it's ridiculous.

Registrars shouldn't have to police their clients. From what I can see, all Enom allowed them to do was change the Name Servers, big deal. What about ICANN, the host, the developers of software used on the site, the credit card company who processed the renewal fees etc, all of which provided technological assistance at some level.

- Rob

 

[SouthernTn]

I think it's ridiculous.

Registrars shouldn't have to police their clients. From what I can see, all Enom allowed them to do was change the Name Servers, big deal. What about ICANN, the host, the developers of software used on the site, the credit card company who processed the renewal fees etc, all of which provided technological assistance at some level.

- Rob

^ You're right.. I think everyone needs to be on their tippy toes about these kinds of things. enom and others who these people used.

 

[QuantumBeam]

I have alot of my domains with Enom and I am concened.

you know better than that....
As the old saying goes " don't put all your eggs in one basket"
:gossip:

 

[Daniel Domainer]

There's an interesting comment on this story here, proving the media likes to be sensational and the general public doesn't have a clue as to the role of a domain registrar.

 

[Ian]

There's an interesting comment on this story here, proving the media likes to be sensational and the general public doesn't have a clue as to the role of a domain registrar.

A very sensational perspective to look at it from the author of the article. Neither do I think that eNom is to blame cuz had it known their customer was a terrorist, services would definitely have been terminated for him/her.
just my 2 cents

 

[typeins]

Exactly right, i dont see why they should be agents of the police.

A client is a client, should they have to do police checks now to provide hosting? or contact the UN to see if its ok to provide hosting to somebody?..

If they are prosecuted, then dick cheney should also be arrested since he invented the internet.

I think it's ridiculous.

Registrars shouldn't have to police their clients. From what I can see, all Enom allowed them to do was change the Name Servers, big deal. What about ICANN, the host, the developers of software used on the site, the credit card company who processed the renewal fees etc, all of which provided technological assistance at some level.

- Rob

 

[Daniel Domainer]

If they are prosecuted, then dick cheney should also be arrested since he invented the internet.

Hmmm...all this time I thought it was Al Gore who invented it. Well bust my britches and blast me in the face with bird shot!

 

[typeins]

lol yeah thats who i meant haha

 

[webfreak]

That federal law, signed by President Bush just weeks after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, bans providing financial and technological support to terrorists.

So, no more Internet?

 

[Adam DickerAdam Dicker is verified member.]

I think the whole thing is rubbish and we should take a stand behind Enom.

-=DCG=-

 

[Domagon]

Jurisdiction is, in large part, determined by where the registrar is located...

Likely something Al-Manar TV (according to the article is considered a "terrorist" organization by the U.S.) never considered ...

I say that since there are numerous other registrars, including in the middle east, that Al-Manar TV could have likely found suitable for their needs ... assuming Al-Manar TV acts quickly, they may be able to transfer the domain(s) out to a registrar in the middle east or wherever somewhere that's more sympathetic to their cause, etc...

With that said, there's still a chance that the registry itself could pull the domain(s), but far as I know that's generally the purview of registrars (in regards to .com / .net domains) ... but it's not beyond the realm of possibilities since the .com registry is operated by a U.S.-based company.

As time goes on, I bet the U.S. government will more aggressively target the domain names of various groups, including those that merely disagree with government policy ... ie. sites that promote legalizing drugs, etc.

Digressing a bit, but anyways people doing business in the U.S. should be aware that numerous laws / regulations exist that prohibit free trade with others located in other select countries, those (even if based in the U.S.) associated with "terrorist" organizations, people on various "terror" / watch lists, such as that maintained by the U.S. Treasury Dept.

In a nutshell, the internet, including the domain name realm, is increasingly becoming more regulated / restricted with the Al-Manar TV incident being another example of that.

Ron

 

[Bill Roy]

This is surely a ridiculous and obviously bias article. Surely you would have to be 'knowingly culpable' to commit a crime. It seems that Enom acted immediately it was made aware of the situation and is therefore not culpable!

The way to look at it is if a bus driver lets a passenger on a bus and the passenger then goes and robs a bank is the bus driver (and company) accomplices to the robbery before the fact? Of course not (assuming they did not know the passenger was going to rob the bank).

There is no apparent evidence that Enom acted in anything but innocense.

 

[March2005]

Imagine that you are a CIA intelligence analyst. Would you rather monitor Hezbollah's website(s), or for them to have no website(s)?

My guess is that some agencies and departments of the US government WANTS terrorist organizations to have websites so that they can keep track of them.

Does "Brian Marcus, ADL's director of Internet monitoring" want to have something to monitor, or would he prefer that all terrorist groups go even more underground so that they will be harder to catch?

Note that no text from "Executive Order 13224" actually appears in the article.

That federal law, signed by President Bush just weeks after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, bans providing financial and technological support to terrorists.

Was providing such support legal before September 11?

If a search engine indexes the webpage of a terrorist group, is that technological support? If a newspaper links to the website of a terrorist group, is that technological support (passing PageRank)?

 

[Finexe]

I think the whole thing is rubbish and we should take a stand behind Enom.

-=DCG=-

Well said !

 

[Ubiquitous]

I think the whole thing is rubbish and we should take a stand behind Enom.

-=DCG=-

If a DNforum member was a terrorist would they get banned?