5 ms·

Is this true even if they're not hosted on a US-controlled TLD such as .com? If they use the .es TLD, then shouldn't anyone with access to a name server that a

by frisco 15y ago

Is this true even if they're not hosted on a US-controlled TLD such as .com? If they use the .es TLD, then shouldn't anyone with access to a name server that accurately mirrors the zones for that domain have access? I don't see how it's in the US's power to prevent that. Perhaps there'd be a transition period where international name servers stop trusting US mirrors of international TLDs and US root name servers, but if you stop using those it should still work. Right?

gasull 15y ago
> If they use the .es TLD, then shouldn't anyone with access to a name server that accurately mirrors the zones for that domain have access? I don't see how it's in the US's power to prevent that. I think ICANN still has the power to censor .es domains. Can anyone please either confirm or correct me? > Perhaps there'd be a transition period where international name servers stop trusting US mirrors of international TLDs and US root name servers, but if you stop using those it should still work. Right? BlockAid DNS and Telecomix DNS don't remove domains taken down by ICE. But how long until port 53 to BlockAid and Telecomix is blocked in the US? Anyway, most people won't change their nameservers and Reddit would loose most of its revenue if the domain reddit.com was taken down, and to prevent it they would need to monitor/censor the user-generated content, and they can't afford it. Bottom line: SOPA would make Reddit too expensive to run to be profitable.
- wmf 15y ago
  I think ICANN still has the power to censor .es domains. Technically this is true, but it would cause a revolt that would just end up destroying ICANN.
  - dextorious 15y ago
    """Technically this is true, but it would cause a revolt that would just end up destroying ICANN.""" Yes, because American's are so rebellious that any attempt to suppress their liberties coughpatriotactcough results in a revolt... Actually, 99% of American rebelliousness is in merely quoting the constitution and the 4 amendments in a world and a political and law system that has render most of those obsolete in practice... For example, the "right to bear arms" meant something WHEN people could use those to overturn their government --now, it's just an excuse for people to get guns to "protect their property" against robberies and such.
    - wmf 15y ago
      If ICANN starts breaking non-US domains, I have a feeling it's not Americans who would revolt.
wmf 15y ago
Under SOPA, a name server that accurately mirrors the zones for that domain is illegal. http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/12/15/stopping-sopas-anti-circumvention.html http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/12/15/stopping-s...
- frisco 15y ago
  Ok, so it could be considered illegal in the US -- but it's not in the US, nor has anything to do with the US. If someone is running an accurate name server outside the US, with no ties to the US, that does no business with the US, the US can say it's "illegal" all they want but it's still there.
  - masklinn 15y ago
    > If someone is running an accurate name server outside the US, with no ties to the US, that does no business with the US, the US can say it's "illegal" all they want but it's still there. Yes.
  - weinzierl 15y ago
    We've been through this in Germany. When the Zugangserschwerungsgesetz passed Blogs and Forums were full with tutorials about how you can change the name server in various operating systems. The Zugangserschwerungsgesetz was never implemented so we don't know how many people would have actually used an alternative resolver.
weinzierl 15y ago
As far as I understand it, they can force every DNS provider under US-jurisdiction (usually the ISP, for instance Comcast, but also OpenDNS and Google) to remove or alter DNS records. This works for .com the same as for .es, but of course it doesn't prevent you from using a name server outside the US. At least that is how the "Zugangserschwerungsgesetz" in Germany works and I think SOPA will be similar in this respect, but I might be wrong..
- morsch 15y ago
  > At least that is how the "Zugangserschwerungsgesetz" in Germany works Worked. It was never really applied and it's been repealed since.
  - weinzierl 15y ago
    That's true, it was never applied and it was revoked on 1 December 2011. Nevertheless it was valid law for almost two years.
- jannes 15y ago
  At least that is how the "Zugangserschwerungsgesetz" in Germany works and I think SOPA will be similar in this respect, but I might be wrong.. No, that's how the Zugangserschwerungsgesetz (access hindrance law) was supposed to work. But it didn't pass and the governemt abandoned it after a public debate. Edit: ok, it turns out I'm misinformed. The law passed somehow after it was already dead, so it was never applied. Germany was lucky that somehow it was achieved to make this law subject of public debate. Maybe Americans should copy the strategies that were used by German activists back in 2008 :) But on the other hand, I think that it would be a lot more difficult to achieve this in the American media environment. America's media was asleep when the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq, it will also be asleep this time.
  - weinzierl 15y ago
    It did pass indeed and was signed on February 2010, so it was valid law until it's revocation on 1 December 2011. Additionally all of the larger ISPs implemented the necessary technical infrastructure. It is true that the law was never applied, but still it was valid law.

by frisco 15y ago

gasull 15y ago

> If they use the .es TLD, then shouldn't anyone with access to a name server that accurately mirrors the zones for that domain have access? I don't see how it's in the US's power to prevent that. I think ICANN still has the power to censor .es domains. Can anyone please either confirm or correct me? > Perhaps there'd be a transition period where international name servers stop trusting US mirrors of international TLDs and US root name servers, but if you stop using those it should still work. Right? BlockAid DNS and Telecomix DNS don't remove domains taken down by ICE. But how long until port 53 to BlockAid and Telecomix is blocked in the US? Anyway, most people won't change their nameservers and Reddit would loose most of its revenue if the domain reddit.com was taken down, and to prevent it they would need to monitor/censor the user-generated content, and they can't afford it. Bottom line: SOPA would make Reddit too expensive to run to be profitable.

wmf 15y ago
I think ICANN still has the power to censor .es domains. Technically this is true, but it would cause a revolt that would just end up destroying ICANN.
- dextorious 15y ago
  """Technically this is true, but it would cause a revolt that would just end up destroying ICANN.""" Yes, because American's are so rebellious that any attempt to suppress their liberties coughpatriotactcough results in a revolt... Actually, 99% of American rebelliousness is in merely quoting the constitution and the 4 amendments in a world and a political and law system that has render most of those obsolete in practice... For example, the "right to bear arms" meant something WHEN people could use those to overturn their government --now, it's just an excuse for people to get guns to "protect their property" against robberies and such.
  - wmf 15y ago
    If ICANN starts breaking non-US domains, I have a feeling it's not Americans who would revolt.

wmf 15y ago

Under SOPA, a name server that accurately mirrors the zones for that domain is illegal. http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/12/15/stopping-sopas-anti-circumvention.html http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/12/15/stopping-s...

frisco 15y ago
Ok, so it could be considered illegal in the US -- but it's not in the US, nor has anything to do with the US. If someone is running an accurate name server outside the US, with no ties to the US, that does no business with the US, the US can say it's "illegal" all they want but it's still there.
- masklinn 15y ago
  > If someone is running an accurate name server outside the US, with no ties to the US, that does no business with the US, the US can say it's "illegal" all they want but it's still there. Yes.
- weinzierl 15y ago
  We've been through this in Germany. When the Zugangserschwerungsgesetz passed Blogs and Forums were full with tutorials about how you can change the name server in various operating systems. The Zugangserschwerungsgesetz was never implemented so we don't know how many people would have actually used an alternative resolver.

weinzierl 15y ago

As far as I understand it, they can force every DNS provider under US-jurisdiction (usually the ISP, for instance Comcast, but also OpenDNS and Google) to remove or alter DNS records. This works for .com the same as for .es, but of course it doesn't prevent you from using a name server outside the US. At least that is how the "Zugangserschwerungsgesetz" in Germany works and I think SOPA will be similar in this respect, but I might be wrong..

morsch 15y ago
> At least that is how the "Zugangserschwerungsgesetz" in Germany works Worked. It was never really applied and it's been repealed since.
- weinzierl 15y ago
  That's true, it was never applied and it was revoked on 1 December 2011. Nevertheless it was valid law for almost two years.
jannes 15y ago
At least that is how the "Zugangserschwerungsgesetz" in Germany works and I think SOPA will be similar in this respect, but I might be wrong.. No, that's how the Zugangserschwerungsgesetz (access hindrance law) was supposed to work. But it didn't pass and the governemt abandoned it after a public debate. Edit: ok, it turns out I'm misinformed. The law passed somehow after it was already dead, so it was never applied. Germany was lucky that somehow it was achieved to make this law subject of public debate. Maybe Americans should copy the strategies that were used by German activists back in 2008 :) But on the other hand, I think that it would be a lot more difficult to achieve this in the American media environment. America's media was asleep when the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq, it will also be asleep this time.
- weinzierl 15y ago
  It did pass indeed and was signed on February 2010, so it was valid law until it's revocation on 1 December 2011. Additionally all of the larger ISPs implemented the necessary technical infrastructure. It is true that the law was never applied, but still it was valid law.