Home / News

EFF: Government Domain Name Seizures Violate First Amendment

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has urged a federal court to return two domain names seized in what the organization calls U.S. government's fundamentally flawed anti-infringement campaign. "This misguided intellectual property enforcement effort is causing serious collateral damage to free speech rights," said EFF Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry. "These domain seizures should cease unless and until the government can fix the First Amendment flaws inherent in the program."

Read full story: Electronic Frontier Foundation

By CircleID Reporter – CircleID's internal staff reporting on news tips and developing stories. Do you have information the professional Internet community should be aware of? Contact us. Visit Page

CircleID Newsletter The Weekly Wrap

More and more professionals are choosing to publish critical posts on CircleID from all corners of the Internet industry. If you find it hard to keep up daily, consider subscribing to our weekly digest. We will provide you a convenient summary report once a week sent directly to your inbox. It's a quick and easy read.

I make a point of reading CircleID. There is no getting around the utility of knowing what thoughtful people are thinking and saying about our industry.

Co-designer of the TCP/IP Protocols & the Architecture of the Internet


Since when did the first amendment include protection for commercial speech? By Suresh Ramasubramanian  –  Jun 21, 2011 8:05 pm PDT

Or is this the famous EFF slippery slope argument, saying "but it could have been a personal domain"?

The EFF isn't always wrong By The Famous Brett Watson  –  Jun 22, 2011 3:58 am PDT

According to this somewhat more informative article from Wired, the site is primarily a discussion board. Discussions posted by users on such a site are "commercial" only in the same sense that my private email is commercial because it's hosted by Google. It isn't a personal domain, but the free speech of a large number of private persons — non-Americans, for what that matters — was adversely impacted by the confiscation. Surely that's what matters?

This should be an interesting case.

Add Your Comments

 To post your comments, please login or create an account.



New TLDs

Sponsored byAfilias


Sponsored byThreat Intelligence Platform


Sponsored byVerisign


Sponsored byWhoisXML API

Brand Protection

Sponsored byAppdetex

IP Addressing

Sponsored byIPv4.Global

Domain Names

Sponsored byVerisign

DNS Security

Sponsored byAfilias