5 ms·
Make no mistake. The entire site blocking mechanism of this legislation was always intended to target foreign websites. The broad overreaching scope that ignore
by bittermang 15y ago
Make no mistake. The entire site blocking mechanism of this legislation was always intended to target foreign websites. The broad overreaching scope that ignores due process and the DNS provisions, the part everyone has been mad and vocal about are the products of this. But the intent has always been to stop foreign sites.
The Pirate Bay has been the slipperiest fish to tangle with. Every attempt they have made to stop or block it, including alleged manipulation and influence of Swedish courts and law have failed. Because it's a foreign website and we have no jurisdiction over it. So they crafted this law with the intent to have the ability to block Americans from viewing it within America. The way it's worded, it's able to block anything else, too.
So since the outcry and the backlash, they have shifted their narrative to explicitly spotlight those dirty evil foreign interests. But I don't believe for a second that it was never the original goal.
- nkassis 15y agoI don't get why they haven't gotten their DNS name seized by ICE yet considering it's a .org
- adestefan 15y agoBecause ICE has no jurisdiction. All of the ICE take downs are only for sites that sell physical goods (bootlegs, counterfeits, etc.) to people in the States.
- pyre 15y agoIt's called building up a precedent. It's like when a patent troll goes after a bunch of small fish (possibly setting favorable legal precedent along the way), then tries to use that momentum to go after a big fish, using the failure of all the small fish to adequately defend themselves as 'proof' that the big fish are should just give them a bunch of money. If you go after the big fish first, then a large, competent legal team may just blow you out of the water. Not only that, they may set a legal precedent (that is damaging to you) in the process.
- nitrogen 15y agoJust FYI: people usually prefix a statement with "Make no mistake" when they're about to present a disputed claim as incontrovertible fact.