Homeland Security seizes over 70 domains

If you have a US based domain name and are tied to piracy, the office of Homeland Security may be on the hunt for your domain, as over 70 domains have been seized and effectively shut down for their ties to piracy.  

According to Torrentfreak.com, "Aside from the fact that domains are being seized seemingly at will, there is a very serious problem with the action against Torrent-Finder. Not only does the site not host or even link to any torrents whatsoever, it actually only returns searches through embedded iframes which display other sites that are not under the control of the Torrent-Finder owner."

While the Government is working hard to take down file sharing sites, the problem is that these websites are simply the window to the store and are not actually housing any of the information. Also for a site owner to move their content to another domain is a relatively easy task, the real targets of the Homeland Security office should be the servers housing the information, not the front end dealers.  

The problem for the Homeland Security is that the servers are not located on US soil, so there is little that can be done; the servers hosted in foreign locations are out of the jurisdiction of the office so the next best thing to do is go after the front end providers.  

Image Credit: Torrent Freak

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Daily Gaming: November 27, 2010

Next Story

A history of viruses on Linux

83 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

For those that don't know about The Department of Homeland Security...

The information below was shared on a August 6, 2009 call by Don Tang, who is an executive branch auditor and was elevated to special prosecutor. Here is some of what Don had to say on that call...

Don discovered that a Board that is privately owned and operated has seized control of Constitutional powers away from the Congress.

In 1920, The United States Shipping Board was created in the statutes.

In 1936, they amended that statute to change their name to The U.S. Maritime Commission.

They changed their name for the second time on November 25, 2002 to The Department of Homeland Security.

So, it seems pretty clear from reading the statutes that The Department of Homeland Security is an enemy operation.

Overt acts of treason are defined in the 1863 federal court case "United States v. Greathouse". That case also defines the term "domestic enemies" and distinguishes them from "rebels". Rebels represent citizens of the United States trying to get a different form of government. Domestic enemies relinquish their allegiance to the United States and align themselves with foreign powers against the United States. For example, it seems like The Department of Homeland Security has aligned itself with Iraq and Afghanistan to deplete our economic and military resources, make us anti-war, and to hold our militia hostage... to be murdered along with our military.

Domestic enemies have stolen every tax dollar collected in every form of tax since June 5, 1920. The United States Shipping Board alias The U.S. Maritime Commission alias The Department of Homeland Security is a board owned and operated privately by citizens of the United States. Here is the kicker. In a 1920 law, the citizens of the United States was actually redefined to exclude the people of the United States. The ones that they redefined and consider to be citizens of the United States are corporations, partnerships, and associations wholly owned by The United States Shipping Board.

For sake of simplicity, let's abbreviate The United States Shipping Board with TUSSB, The U.S. Maritime Commission with TUSMC, and The Department of Homeland Security with TDOHS.

According to original action in 1824 that protected the powers established by the Constitution, Chief Justice John Marshall defined the power, authority, rights, privileges, extents, exceptions, prohibitions -- everything that the Constitution created. It says in there that these pretending concurrent powers (like TUSSB alias TUSMC alias TDOHS has done acting like the U.S. government and doing things as if it is the U.S. government) actually annihilate the U.S. government.

Here is what Chief Justice John Marshall had to say in his 36-page closing opinion in this 1824 court case Gibbons v. Ogden (22 U.S. 1 @ 186-222, 9 Wheaton) and you'll know more than just about anybody about what the United States is supposed to be. See http://www.landmarkcases.org/gibbons/home.html At the tail end of his opinion, he says...

"The conclusion to which we have come depends on a chain of principles which it was necessary to preserve unbroken, and although some of them were thought nearly self-evident, the magnitude of the question, the weight of character belonging to those from whose judgment we dissent, and the argument at the bar demanded that we should assume nothing.

Powerful and ingenious minds, taking as postulates that the powers expressly granted to the government of the Union are to be contracted by construction into the narrowest possible compass and that the original powers of the States are retained if any possible construction will retain them may, by a course of well digested but refined and metaphysical reasoning founded on these premises, explain away the Constitution of our country and leave it a magnificent structure indeed to look at, but totally unfit for use. They may so entangle and perplex the understanding as to obscure principles which were before thought quite plain, and induce doubts where, if the mind were to pursue its own course, none would be perceived. In such a case, it is peculiarly necessary to recur to safe and fundamental principles to sustain those principles, and when sustained, to make them the tests of the arguments to be examined."

1st citing
Starting in 1920, we have Public 261. Read the first paragraph at least. Public 261 transfers control of our constitutional powers away from our Congress and to the the President of TUSSB. Remember, TUSSB is doing business as the United States. They call the president of their Board the President of the United States.

2nd citing
In 1936, we have Public 835. TUSSB changed their name to TUSMC.

3rd citing
On November 25, 2002, we have Public Law 107-295 and 107-296. A few things took place here, but one of them was TDOHS was established by changing the name of TUSMC to TDOHS.

This is something they've talked about doing for a while, along with several other [cough - cough] security & fairness measures -- they're clear examples of rule of law by executive decree, rather than the intended routes of legislation &/or the judicial. It also might be read as *get while the getting's good* before the Congressional changeover next year, & even then it will take some time to stop, if indeed Congress can. While this sort of thing might otherwise fly under the radar of a for-the-most-part decidedly non-tech legislative branch, the EPA & FCC are both set to take actions that will make these seizures seem almost benevolent in comparison, & *that* *Will* draw attention to stopping & reversing what many (most?) feel are both illegal & unconstitutional moves by the current gov.

Staying neutral here as best I can because this is NOT a political forum, it **might** also be a situation where it's expected such actions will be stopped if not overturned, & that doesn't matter to those responsible, because a statement will have been made that will win support (& large amounts of $) in 2 years when we again have elections.

*COUGH*
internet neutrality?

More and more "Homeland Security" reads as a slap-in-your-face-cynical fooling.

If I were American, I'd say "leave my land!" and wave my shotgun haha...
Seriously, this is not funny.

GS:mac

ironsight2000 said,
instead of going after torrents they should be going after Child Porn. its much more damaging to
society

Yeah but theirs no profit involved in doing that

I still amazes me that people think aiding criminal activity is okay, anything you do that is intended to aid criminal activity is punishable, and clearly a crime.

(and no, before someone says it... selling a gun is not aiding - unless you know they intend to commit a crime with the gun)

lt8480 said,
I still amazes me that people think aiding criminal activity is okay, anything you do that is intended to aid criminal activity is punishable, and clearly a crime.

(and no, before someone says it... selling a gun is not aiding - unless you know they intend to commit a crime with the gun)


no, dont do anything and get ripped off constantly by major cooperations by producing COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLCRAP into the world and demanding that you pay full price...

or, find a middle-way between that and piracy.

I wouldnt've have found so much music i so love, if it wasnt for piracy, i wouldnt've have find TONS of games, if it wasnt for piracy.

But hey, you rather stuck to the mainstream mumbojumbo, be my guest, but i rather see whats beyond the mainstream crap thats produced only to empty your wallet

lt8480 said,
I still amazes me that people think aiding criminal activity is okay, anything you do that is intended to aid criminal activity is punishable, and clearly a crime.

When cassette tape recorders came to market the music industry had the gov add a tax to every tape sold that went into their bank accts. The media industries then fought every type of Fair Use tooth & nail until the (C) were re-written more in their favor. SO right now it's gotten to the point where we've got the gov possibly breaking all sorts of rules & laws & things like the Separation of Powers among the branches of gov.

IF the thought of the gov appearing to do the bidding of select industries doesn't bother you, think about what happens next if or as this becomes legal precedent. Think of how many liberties might just go away, Not just *theirs* but yours & mine as well. "Minority Report" wasn't just about the flashy tech. If the gov can control what you say on-line, how long before they control what you can say off-line as well? AND that's all many sites did, was say here's how you can do something, &/or here's where you'll find whatever -- something that's always been more-or-less a sacred part of free speech.

I'm actually surprised that many of you American are taken aback by this. This has been happening to your Country since the Bush era, and there's been far worse than this happening. This isn't the ole conspiracy theory post either, take some time and do a bit of research on your Homeland Security agency and see just what it is they do. It's scary the power that certain agencies within your government hold over your citizens and how much they actually get away with.

Sethalos said,
I'm actually surprised that many of you American are taken aback by this. This has been happening to your Country since the Bush era...

If you *only* know about it from the last admin. onward thank or blame your media -- whichever you wish -- because it didn't take Homeland Security to start this sort of thing happening. ;-)

I don't want to sound like an anarchist or even hint about conspiracies, but a big part of the job of ruling has always been about controlling the people, lest they revolt. True, modern leaders aren't as likely to be executed by an angry populace, but to too many the thought of being voted or thrown out of office is as bad if not worse... At any rate you can go back to George Washington if you like, & his buying votes with alcohol [one reason he had a distillery], &/or follow the actions of administrations since.

Toorop said,
They need to shut down WikiLeaks, That website is not safe to the US.

do agree somewhat, i agree with wikileaks (and the people) wanting more information on the war in the middle-east... but releasing (or threatening to) classified and secret information regarding the war and actions, is just a goddamn security risk to ANYONE in the western world

Toorop said,
They need to shut down WikiLeaks, That website is not safe to the US.

I expect if I was involved running another country I might pay them to dig up dirt on the US for my country's internat'l political advantage -- something that can be done pretty safely since they keep their books sealed. I've no reason to think that's not actually the case.

I know why there doing this... they've obviously seen jack sparrow running downthe street selling dodgy copies of software.. hmmm pirates yaaarrrr!!!

Does anybody find it odd that the list goes like:
Product Outlet
Product Outlet
Product Outlet
torrent-finder.com
Product Outlet
Product Outlet

So, will they take down Google?
Think about it, all of these "warez" sites are really search engines.
If you type the correct query, you can actually use Google to perform the same search.

And the real question is, why is Homeland Security envolved with this? Do they not have bigger fish to fry?

TonyLock said,
So, will they take down Google?

Google is in bed with the NSA, so simply put - no, will never happen, but I see your point.

TonyLock said,
... And the real question is, why is Homeland Security envolved with this? Do they not have bigger fish to fry?

Please don't confuse alleged & true purposes -- the alleged ones are just window dressing, along the lines of the phrase: "Plausible deniability". Disregarding any political motives for the sake of argument, the one thing bureaucrats universally seek is power. The more you do, the more budget & the more people you have. The more you have of either, the more power you have in Washington or anywhere else. So: Why Homeland Security? They likely asked for & were chosen for the role by politicians because no other gov agency has ever had the right to do such a thing, & in part because their head is among the most expendable left from the 1st 2 years of the admin.

So TorrentFreak reckons that providing you do it through an external website via iframes, you should be able to link to whatever you please? Sorry, but that's total crap. If the owner doesn't want issues with handling illegal material he shouldn't link to sources that are known to host it/provide access to it through BitTorrent/whatever. Stupid little loopholes like that do annoy me.

what said,
So TorrentFreak reckons that providing you do it through an external website via iframes, you should be able to link to whatever you please? Sorry, but that's total crap. If the owner doesn't want issues with handling illegal material he shouldn't link to sources that are known to host it/provide access to it through BitTorrent/whatever. Stupid little loopholes like that do annoy me.

Their reasoning is actually the sort of loophole that hopefully keeps you & everyone else out of jail or worse. :-) You might not direct someone to the closest porn shop or the spot where known drug dealers hang out, but you might point them towards the local library. It's virtually guaranteed that library has info that could be used to break the law. You might also witness something illegal -- would that be cause to arrest you? Of course not, & neither is looking in the windows of a pawnshop in a bad neighborhood where there's more than a 50/50 chance some of that merchandise was stolen.

Welcome to the incremental deployment of 1984. Enjoy your new world, one day you will wake up and ask how we got there - slowly through measures like this, will you do something now?

linuxboynz said,
Welcome to the incremental deployment of 1984. Enjoy your new world, one day you will wake up and ask how we got there - slowly through measures like this, will you do something now?

I'm feeling the same thing... great movie '1984' btw.. I thought I was the only one watching it. Dunno where are you from but that movie gave me some ugly flashbacks of my childhood living in Romania. And sometimes it seems like the future is moving right back into the past... or is it just me!?

It looks like a lot of these domains are all product names/types, like they are selling knock off equipment/clothing/baggage... Dunno about torrent-finder though, maybe they were hosting content to ads for these domains to make a profit?

Legitimate question. Most of these sites are doing the exact same thing as Google. Just for example, search for whatever movie name, add filetype:torrent to the query, and presto, Google is now an illegal torrent indexer. No, they're not running a tracker, but neither are many of the "illegal" sites.

Xenon said,
Why didn't they go after Google? They have links to pirated stuff........

They're using google analytics in that warning page to track users, so I don't think they want to seize google.

Jen Smith said,
Legitimate question. Most of these sites are doing the exact same thing as Google. Just for example, search for whatever movie name, add filetype:torrent to the query, and presto, Google is now an illegal torrent indexer. No, they're not running a tracker, but neither are many of the "illegal" sites.

The difference is "intent", most torrent sites exist with intent to help spread illegal content, a torrent site legitimately linking to 99% legal torrents would probably not get accused (or prosecuted) for a crime. Google does not exist for an illegal sole purpose.

lt8480 said,

The difference is "intent", most torrent sites exist with intent to help spread illegal content, a torrent site legitimately linking to 99% legal torrents would probably not get accused (or prosecuted) for a crime. Google does not exist for an illegal sole purpose.


neither are torrent sites, per se.... theres tons of legal crap on them aswell, the users are what post the illegal wares... if all those torrent users switch to google to find torrents... guess what will happen, google will turn into a torrentfinder

Xenon said,
Why didn't they go after Google? They have links to pirated stuff........

Please don't give them that idea, I don't know what I'd do without Google's abilities

Xenon said,
Why didn't they go after Google? They have links to pirated stuff........

Because they aren't ready yet. Seriously, at least according to write-ups from mags like Wired. And because there isn't a lot of ironclad law behind it, & because it might be a trial balloon of sorts, & because by keeping it to lower key sites they escape notice -- no offense but Neowin isn't exactly the NY Times when it comes getting attention, & none of the mainstream news channel sites are covering it. I'm sure the legal team re: YouTube is watching what happens.

tiagosilva29 said,
iframes? They had it coming!

Oh dear, I had better take them off my site because the government gets me!

Edrick Smith said,
So basically if I have any type of site that is anti-government could they come sieze it from me?

Yeah they did this mostly because they want to take the wikileaks down and also torrent sites because of RIAA and Movie Studios...you should have told your Senator that you are against this, I think that this law is from 18.11. it is called The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA)...I don't like it at all, it gives them control over everything...

LOL... this is total BS. Why don't they go after spammers etc. Oh wait I forgot the RIAA and Movie Studios are too busy filling politicians pockets with cash.

Sadelwo said,
I think they would be more concerned with radical groups on social networking sites.

Ahhhh, but when you talk about radical groups in the US that includes not just terrorists but those leaning far right or left in the US... No matter who you went after there'd be people in the streets.

Is it just me, or have they seemingly only gone after a load of "small" sites? I don't think I've heard of a single one of the sites on the list, so what gives?

LaXu said,
Meanwhile, they seem to do nothing about the spammers working from the US...

Even though spam wasn't the direct target, some of the domains that were seized were likely used by spammers, rest happy I suppose.

Really not against taking down sites for counterfeit goods as these are almost always used by spammers and only annoy us webmasters that have to clean up their crap.

The moral of the story... don't choose a .com domain for your site

Other countries would hopefully be a little less fascist than the US.

shiny_red_cobra said,
I don't know why they care so much about pirates. I wouldn't buy anything that I pirate, they wouldn't see a penny from me anyway.

I agree, if they did such a thing to me I'd be fuming. My domain is not registered in the US so it's none of their sodding business. Not that I do anything wrong in any way shape or form anyway.

I stick to the "try and buy" philosophy. I play a game or see a movie that I like and think deserves my money, I will buy it.

But the fact is, the vast majority of mediocre movies I see, and horrible games I play wouldn't get money from me anyway, had I been unable to pirate them. They don't gain anything. And infact, they lose exposure for their product.

StevenNT said,

I agree, if they did such a thing to me I'd be fuming. My domain is not registered in the US so it's none of their sodding business. Not that I do anything wrong in any way shape or form anyway.


if its .com or .us domains, doesnt matter where you register it, final registar is in the US for those domains.

shiny_red_cobra said,
I don't know why they care so much about pirates. I wouldn't buy anything that I pirate, they wouldn't see a penny from me anyway.

"Because it's Mine & You Can't Have It" says the CEO from his yacht.

Digitalx said,
In other news 'copyright infringement' isn't related to national security.

What are you talking about? The pirates use the massive profits they make to support terror cells in all western nations. Come on this is common knowledge that Content piracy is used to fuel terrorism!

/sarcasm

bnajbert said,

What are you talking about? The pirates use the massive profits they make to support terror cells in all western nations. Come on this is common knowledge that Content piracy is used to fuel terrorism!

/sarcasm

Oh I know Somalians are next biggest sellers of Microsoft Windows next to Microsoft. lol

bnajbert said,

What are you talking about? The pirates use the massive profits they make to support terror cells in all western nations. Come on this is common knowledge that Content piracy is used to fuel terrorism!

/sarcasm

lol

Digitalx said,
In other news 'copyright infringement' isn't related to national security.

Gov seizes domains ---> Huge PR that the admin is against (C) infringing ----> good will from Industries dependent on keeping it an issue -------> campaign donations -----> admin stays in office -----> they say they make America more secure.

Simple. :-)

"The problem for the Homeland Security is that the servers are not located on US soil, so there is little that can be done; the servers hosted in foreign locations are out of the jurisdiction of the office so the next best thing to do is go after the front end providers. "

Don't worry, this admin seems to do whatever the crap it wants. This has turned out to be the nightmare admin that we worried about that would take advantage of the Patriot Act in every worst way. This wont stop them.

solardog said,
"The problem for the Homeland Security is that the servers are not located on US soil, so there is little that can be done; the servers hosted in foreign locations are out of the jurisdiction of the office so the next best thing to do is go after the front end providers. "

Don't worry, this admin seems to do whatever the crap it wants. This has turned out to be the nightmare admin that we worried about that would take advantage of the Patriot Act in every worst way. This wont stop them.

It could be worse you could have voted Bush back in

I have issues with this on MANY levels. No due process? No serving of papers? It seems even registrars like GoDaddy are unaware of what is going on.

More government out of control. And WTF is the DHS doing this for?

SoCalRox said,
I have issues with this on MANY levels. No due process? No serving of papers? It seems even registrars like GoDaddy are unaware of what is going on.

More government out of control. And WTF is the DHS doing this for?

Yup this is the kind of **** that makes governments look bad in the eyes of the peoples.

Azies said,
Wow that seems a little fascist.. o_O Piracy or no piracy, that's just flat out heavy handed.

I agree, totally over the top and fascist. I wonder if the domains are European or not as surely they don't have the jurisdiction to seize domains outside of their own country?

Azies said,
Wow that seems a little fascist.. o_O Piracy or no piracy, that's just flat out heavy handed.

I agree, where does the DHS get off going after webservers for piracy when they should be catching terrorists? The FBI should be catching pirates. Notice how they don't? Must be some new form of info trail used by terrorists to communicate. I see it now, hidden channels for communication with Osama bin from his secret bat cave. Although it's more likely in Pakistan.

Azies said,
Wow that seems a little fascist.. o_O Piracy or no piracy, that's just flat out heavy handed.

I think they are about to put down WikiLeaks too. Mark my words.

Turion said,

I agree, where does the DHS get off going after webservers for piracy when they should be catching terrorists? The FBI should be catching pirates. Notice how they don't? Must be some new form of info trail used by terrorists to communicate. I see it now, hidden channels for communication with Osama bin from his secret bat cave. Although it's more likely in Pakistan.

Im absolutely annoyed at "catching terrorists". Don't you think the chef should be cooking for hungry children in Africa then?

Turion said,

I agree, where does the DHS get off going after webservers for piracy when they should be catching terrorists? The FBI should be catching pirates. Notice how they don't? Must be some new form of info trail used by terrorists to communicate. I see it now, hidden channels for communication with Osama bin from his secret bat cave. Although it's more likely in Pakistan.
Osaka bin Laden is Batman? That just blew my mind. LOL