4 ms·
Right, so you threaten all of them with jail until they hand over the keys to a US Court to continue to do the takedowns for copyright enforcement / ISIS websit
by mugsie 7y ago
Right, so you threaten all of them with jail until they hand over the keys to a US Court to continue to do the takedowns for copyright enforcement / ISIS website / scam site pretending to be Amazon / the new Silk Road / $reason.
We have seen this before, where people who run these services are personally held in contempt until they comply with the order.
- rcoveson 7y agoThis is exactly the reason that peer-to-peer services never work. Tor, BitTorrent, cryptocurrency: Failures, all. Each of their users threatened individually by US law enforcement until the service died.
- LyndsySimon 7y agoThere are no "people who run these services" in the case of blockchain name resolution, though. There is (usually) a single person who possesses the private key necessary to update the records for a domain - if they find out who that is, they're welcome to use legal compulsion to force them to act. * I say "usually" because more complex permissions schemes are possible with Bitcoin Script. m-of-n in particular I could see being very useful; it could allow individuals to update some parts of the record but not all - for instance, make it mathematically impossible to abandon the domain or move where it's pointed, but still possible to update contact information.
- troquerre 7y agoThere’s no one to threaten. You may be able to find one or two people running the fullnode but it’d be immensely difficult to find everyone running a fullnode around the world and threaten them.