So as most of you know, I’m taking Federal Criminal Law this summer. I love it. It’s wildly interesting, and I love all of it. We’re focusing on things like the Hobbs Act and extortion and money laundering, the usual, and in those topics, things like forfeiture and seizure often come up.
That was what struck me when I read this story at WSJ about the US government along with other international agencies seizing domain names of nine websites that let users watch newly released movies online. The sites included Movie-Links.tv, Filespump.com, ZML.com, ThePirateCity.org, and many others that offered titles like Twilight: Eclipse (if you like these books or movies, I judge you – hard) and Toy Story 3 (OMG I WANT TO SEE THIS).
In whatever account of the story you read, it clearly states that the government seized some equipment and assets, but also the domain names, like I said earlier. The actual domain names.
That was the part that confused me. I’ve taken copyright law and know the DMCA like the back of my hand (I like to think in a moment of arrogance – seriously, I know it pretty well, though), as well as the Copyright Act itself, and I’ve been reading up on a crapload of federal criminal law stuff just because I find it interesting, and as far as I can tell…there’s no federal law that lets the government seize domain names.
Funds used in a money laundering scheme, sure – I just finished outlining that section for class today anyway. Other crap, sure. But domain names? As far as I can tell, there’s no basis for taking the frigging domain name.
Feel free to correct me, please. But until I see an actual citation to a statute in the code that allows for the seizure of domain names, I’m just going to keep insisting it’s non-existent.
So yeah, I’m going to go ahead and stake the claim that this is a blatant case of overreaching on the part of the executive branch, which basically just made up the remedy for the crime of streaming new releases online (which I’d never dispute was actually a crime, because, duh).
Furthermore, this was a case of abrupt seizure, as far as all the reports go. I didn’t get the highest grade in my Constitutional Law II (Individual Liberties and Freedoms) class, but I did get a damn good grade, and that was partly because I remembered what constituted a satisfaction of the requirement of procedural due process: notice and hearing. The government alleged improper conduct on the part of the website (again, duh), but there was no hearing process where the owners of the domains that were unlawfully (yeah) seized received notice and all that.
Even if what they were doing was unlawful (again, duh), the owners of the seized domain name had every right to a hearing prior to seizure. This reads exactly like an exam question my ConLaw Prof (awesome, awesome lady) would have slapped on the final that fit her Cliff Notes version of the paradigm of a due process challenge: Time 1, plaintiff had something. Time 2, it was taken away. Analyze.
God, I killed that essay. I still remember. :D
OK, that’s it. No fancy ending. Just a random thought. And if anyone remembers reading about something in the code that allows for domain seizures pertinent to the facts of this situation, please reply. I’ll put up a cartoon of a crow, and me attempting to eat it by chasing it around with a knife and fork.
Hey, you’re right. What the heck happened to “due process of the law”? Oh wait, like you said, there isn’t a law (yet).
I get what they are trying to do, this is like padlocking a crime scene, I guess. But even criminals have their “day in court” so to speak. No cease and desist order?
If the government were to seize someone’s land/house like this there would be holy heck to pay. If that is a fair analogy.
Are these US companies? If not, can they just seize a domain from a foreign company? That sets a politically difficult precedent.
If it’s a foreign company, I’d have to figure that the extraterritorial reach would be entirely dependent on whatever treaties exist between the US and that country.
Padlock on the crime scene seems like a fair assessment.
[...] ‘11 Huma reflected on her summer Federal Criminal Law class and the issue of internet piracy and due process. 3L New Law Mom found that family and life sometimes takes precedence over law school even if [...]