64 ms·

Sen. Ron Wyden places a "hold" on the Protect IP Act

197 points by chanks 15y ago

jarin 15y ago
Hopefully if this gets blocked they'll do something about DHS arbitrarily seizing domain names.
- code_duck 15y ago
  The underlying issue there is 'civil forfeiture' in general. My view is that this practice is unconstitutional for any sort of property, and it's causing a lot of problems with the motivation of individuals in law enforcement. Automobiles, cash, and real estate have been being seized with no due process, no warrant and even no arrest for years. Domain names are just a new twist in that story.
  - dailyrorschach 15y ago
    Indeed the entire statute around these things needs to be re-thought out. And even if you are eventually acquitted the property can still remain the property of the state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture#Asset_forfeiture_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture#Asset_forfeitu... Just traveling with "an unusual amount of cash" can get your money taken from you on a traffic stop even if they don't find any evidence of you selling narcotics.
  - SoftwareMaven 15y ago
    I have never understood how those seizures could not be unconstitutional. The laws shouldn't exist, but if they do, the people enforcing them should not be receiving the benefits for enforcing them.
  - CWuestefeld 15y ago
    The underlying issue there is 'civil forfeiture' in general. My view is that this practice is unconstitutional for any sort of property, But property -- cars, domain names, cash, etc. -- is not human, and therefore is not protected by our Bill of Rights. Your domain name does not have the right to a trial, and so, when it is accused of being an accessory in a crime (e.g., the domain name was a person who set up the meeting between the customer and the purveyor of stolen IP), the government is within its authority to detain it and keep it locked up for as long as is deemed necessary. (Not that I buy this bizarre logic, but that's the rationale for asset forfeiture.)
    - Natsu 15y ago
      You're right about that logic being dangerous. The sad thing is that I can think up similar reasoning that would allow them to sidestep the Constitution with respect to the internet entirely too easily and to derail any opposition with meaningless partisan bickering. The more I think about it, the more I think that we need to extend the Bill of Rights.
    - chc 15y ago
      But doesn't the Fifth Amendment explicitly protect property? (I'm not saying you're wrong about their rationale, but the rationale doesn't seem based in reality to me.)
    - code_duck 15y ago
      The 4th amendment regards "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure". That appears to cover seizure of property fairly well, though I suppose the key word is 'unreasonable'. It's also unclear how this is applied to civil matters vs. criminal. Though forfeiture is usually hand-in-hand with criminal charges, they claim it's a civil matter. The 5th amendment says citizens shall not be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." In the US, police can currently take your car, money, or other possessions without even placing you under arrest. This seems to me to violate the spirit of this amendment as well as the 4th.
      - palish 15y ago
        And there is absolutely nothing we can do about it. (I challenge anyone to prove otherwise. I hope I lose.)
      - CWuestefeld 15y ago
        Things are never easy, when you start to break things down to the atomic level. For example, if my wife were to commit a crime, they'd take her away from me without giving me any kind of hearing to protect my interests in her. And believe me, my interest in her is much stronger than in any domain name, or a car. The only difference in this hypothetical is that she, being human, gets to have her own hearing. But with inanimate objects (or intangibles), there's not even an obligation to give the object a hearing. Disclaimer once again: I disagree with my own logic here, I'm just trying to play devil's advocate, illustrating the course that an argument might take.
CoffeeDregs 15y ago
OK, I'm now a fan. I was up in Oregon for grad school during the Senate campaign between Wyden and Smith. I lean libertarian/fiscal-conservative, so was rooting for Smith against the awkward, liberal Wyden. Funny to think about the consequences had my wishes come true: Wyden is taking a well-thought-out, brave and effective position here and I'm reasonably sure that, had my wishes come true, Smith would not have done the same. Go Wyden! Separately and ironically, after bitching about "single-issue voters" and "litmus tests" involving abortion, it seems I'm now exhibiting the same traits with respect to the intarwebs.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- SoftwareMaven 15y ago
  I find myself in a situation where my political-economic philosophies and my individual/corporate rights philosophies have put me in a situation where I feel like my candidate pool is an empty set. If I favor the first, I'm more beholden to my corporate overlords. If I favor the second, the country's spiral towards bankruptcy will speed up. If I find an independent who feels as I do, my vote will be effectively wasted. Nothing quite like feeling completely disenfranchised.
  - muhfuhkuh 15y ago
    "If I favor the first, I'm more beholden to my corporate overlords. If I favor the second, the country's spiral towards bankruptcy will speed up." Didn't the "spiral towards bankruptcy" really put the pedal to the metal when Reagan doubled-down on nukes, pushed lower top-line tax rates, and doubled the national debt and deficit at once? And, for the record, both parties are beholden to corporate overlords. Just a matter of degree. I fall in the "commerce with regulations and literally promote the general welfare" side of the fence, and so I fall in the democratic camp.
    - SoftwareMaven 15y ago
      You are, of course, correct. When I ponder these things holistically, I do tend to think about the parties in terms of what they say their goals are (which, even if everything else about them turns my stomach, the Tea Party has at least raised dichotomy to a level of real discussion). When it actually comes time to vote, those holistic views are chucked in favor of what the candidates are actually saying. In that context, there has rarely been a group not in the second category. It also explains why my voting for the last few elections has tended to lean more towards Democrats, even though I have so many philosophical issues with the party.
mschwar99 15y ago
I don't know if his views on this issue completely line up with the prevailing sentiment here, but this is the second time in recent memory that Sen Wyden has acted to bail out the internet as we know it in the US. If the issue is important to you consider taking a minute to contact his office to express your opinion or even donate something to his campaign. Contact form: http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/ http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/ Campaign: http://www.standtallforamerica.com/contribute/ http://www.standtallforamerica.com/contribute/ For all their flaws, politicians are much more likely to pay attention to issues when they know an engaged audience is watching.
- CoffeeDregs 15y ago
  Dude!, thanks for posting the links. Never would have thought to support him beyond writing a comment (yay, faith in politics...) But I just wrote my first note of thanks to a politician. Tried to donate $50, but they don't take AmEx...
  - megamark16 15y ago
    I wrote him also, and I hope everyone who has a few minutes will take that time to thank Senator Wyden for his efforts to protect our freedoms from overreaching legislature.
shrikant 15y ago
Previous HN love for Wyden: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1922405 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1922405 (the links posted by mschwar99 below displayed as 'visited' in my browser, so I had to check it out on searchyc.com!)
mrpollo 15y ago
is it ok to ask where are they selling it ? lol
turoczy 15y ago
Ron Wyden is one of the few politicians who understands the Web and one of the few folks in Oregon who has understood the potential of Web startups for more than a decade. I'm always proud to send this guy back to Washington. And I'll keep doing it as long as he stands up to bills like this.

197 points by chanks 15y ago

jarin 15y ago

Hopefully if this gets blocked they'll do something about DHS arbitrarily seizing domain names.

code_duck 15y ago
The underlying issue there is 'civil forfeiture' in general. My view is that this practice is unconstitutional for any sort of property, and it's causing a lot of problems with the motivation of individuals in law enforcement. Automobiles, cash, and real estate have been being seized with no due process, no warrant and even no arrest for years. Domain names are just a new twist in that story.
- dailyrorschach 15y ago
  Indeed the entire statute around these things needs to be re-thought out. And even if you are eventually acquitted the property can still remain the property of the state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture#Asset_forfeiture_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture#Asset_forfeitu... Just traveling with "an unusual amount of cash" can get your money taken from you on a traffic stop even if they don't find any evidence of you selling narcotics.
- SoftwareMaven 15y ago
  I have never understood how those seizures could not be unconstitutional. The laws shouldn't exist, but if they do, the people enforcing them should not be receiving the benefits for enforcing them.
- CWuestefeld 15y ago
  The underlying issue there is 'civil forfeiture' in general. My view is that this practice is unconstitutional for any sort of property, But property -- cars, domain names, cash, etc. -- is not human, and therefore is not protected by our Bill of Rights. Your domain name does not have the right to a trial, and so, when it is accused of being an accessory in a crime (e.g., the domain name was a person who set up the meeting between the customer and the purveyor of stolen IP), the government is within its authority to detain it and keep it locked up for as long as is deemed necessary. (Not that I buy this bizarre logic, but that's the rationale for asset forfeiture.)
  - Natsu 15y ago
    You're right about that logic being dangerous. The sad thing is that I can think up similar reasoning that would allow them to sidestep the Constitution with respect to the internet entirely too easily and to derail any opposition with meaningless partisan bickering. The more I think about it, the more I think that we need to extend the Bill of Rights.
  - chc 15y ago
    But doesn't the Fifth Amendment explicitly protect property? (I'm not saying you're wrong about their rationale, but the rationale doesn't seem based in reality to me.)
  - code_duck 15y ago
    The 4th amendment regards "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure". That appears to cover seizure of property fairly well, though I suppose the key word is 'unreasonable'. It's also unclear how this is applied to civil matters vs. criminal. Though forfeiture is usually hand-in-hand with criminal charges, they claim it's a civil matter. The 5th amendment says citizens shall not be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." In the US, police can currently take your car, money, or other possessions without even placing you under arrest. This seems to me to violate the spirit of this amendment as well as the 4th.
    - palish 15y ago
      And there is absolutely nothing we can do about it. (I challenge anyone to prove otherwise. I hope I lose.)
    - CWuestefeld 15y ago
      Things are never easy, when you start to break things down to the atomic level. For example, if my wife were to commit a crime, they'd take her away from me without giving me any kind of hearing to protect my interests in her. And believe me, my interest in her is much stronger than in any domain name, or a car. The only difference in this hypothetical is that she, being human, gets to have her own hearing. But with inanimate objects (or intangibles), there's not even an obligation to give the object a hearing. Disclaimer once again: I disagree with my own logic here, I'm just trying to play devil's advocate, illustrating the course that an argument might take.

CoffeeDregs 15y ago

OK, I'm now a fan. I was up in Oregon for grad school during the Senate campaign between Wyden and Smith. I lean libertarian/fiscal-conservative, so was rooting for Smith against the awkward, liberal Wyden. Funny to think about the consequences had my wishes come true: Wyden is taking a well-thought-out, brave and effective position here and I'm reasonably sure that, had my wishes come true, Smith would not have done the same. Go Wyden! Separately and ironically, after bitching about "single-issue voters" and "litmus tests" involving abortion, it seems I'm now exhibiting the same traits with respect to the intarwebs.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
SoftwareMaven 15y ago
I find myself in a situation where my political-economic philosophies and my individual/corporate rights philosophies have put me in a situation where I feel like my candidate pool is an empty set. If I favor the first, I'm more beholden to my corporate overlords. If I favor the second, the country's spiral towards bankruptcy will speed up. If I find an independent who feels as I do, my vote will be effectively wasted. Nothing quite like feeling completely disenfranchised.
- muhfuhkuh 15y ago
  "If I favor the first, I'm more beholden to my corporate overlords. If I favor the second, the country's spiral towards bankruptcy will speed up." Didn't the "spiral towards bankruptcy" really put the pedal to the metal when Reagan doubled-down on nukes, pushed lower top-line tax rates, and doubled the national debt and deficit at once? And, for the record, both parties are beholden to corporate overlords. Just a matter of degree. I fall in the "commerce with regulations and literally promote the general welfare" side of the fence, and so I fall in the democratic camp.
  - SoftwareMaven 15y ago
    You are, of course, correct. When I ponder these things holistically, I do tend to think about the parties in terms of what they say their goals are (which, even if everything else about them turns my stomach, the Tea Party has at least raised dichotomy to a level of real discussion). When it actually comes time to vote, those holistic views are chucked in favor of what the candidates are actually saying. In that context, there has rarely been a group not in the second category. It also explains why my voting for the last few elections has tended to lean more towards Democrats, even though I have so many philosophical issues with the party.

mschwar99 15y ago

I don't know if his views on this issue completely line up with the prevailing sentiment here, but this is the second time in recent memory that Sen Wyden has acted to bail out the internet as we know it in the US. If the issue is important to you consider taking a minute to contact his office to express your opinion or even donate something to his campaign. Contact form: http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/ http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/ Campaign: http://www.standtallforamerica.com/contribute/ http://www.standtallforamerica.com/contribute/ For all their flaws, politicians are much more likely to pay attention to issues when they know an engaged audience is watching.

CoffeeDregs 15y ago
Dude!, thanks for posting the links. Never would have thought to support him beyond writing a comment (yay, faith in politics...) But I just wrote my first note of thanks to a politician. Tried to donate $50, but they don't take AmEx...
- megamark16 15y ago
  I wrote him also, and I hope everyone who has a few minutes will take that time to thank Senator Wyden for his efforts to protect our freedoms from overreaching legislature.

shrikant 15y ago

Previous HN love for Wyden: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1922405 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1922405 (the links posted by mschwar99 below displayed as 'visited' in my browser, so I had to check it out on searchyc.com!)

mrpollo 15y ago

is it ok to ask where are they selling it ? lol

turoczy 15y ago

Ron Wyden is one of the few politicians who understands the Web and one of the few folks in Oregon who has understood the potential of Web startups for more than a decade. I'm always proud to send this guy back to Washington. And I'll keep doing it as long as he stands up to bills like this.