Just a reminder: this isn't a crazy overreach by "Homeland Security". DHS is a very new cabinet department formed, like a beaurocratic Voltron, from a smorgasbord of peripherally-related agencies. One of those agencies was Customs/ICE, which for logical and historical reasons hosts federal anti-counterfeiting enforcement. DHS "acquires" Customs and bam, finds itself in the IP enforcement business.
You could, but this has been part of ICE's charter for a long time. I'm only making the point that this isn't some crazy RIAA subversion of the Department of Homeland Security. Homeland Security sounds scary, like, "the US Government thinks the RIAA's IP claims are vital to national security!".
So you're saying that you think it would be perfectly reasonable if the FDA or agriculture department happened to be tasked with enforcing music piracy prevention ?
Joking aside, I guess this is part of the problem with naming departments cutesy Orwellian names like "Homeland Security".
I think it's not an indication that the government thinks the RIAA's problems are homeland security concerns, and would prefer not to be baited into discussing anything else I think about it.
Fair enough, though I look forward to the day when there is just one governmental department and it's called the "Vanquishers of Evil" for the sake of clarity.
While no one ever claimed it, tptacek was correct in assuming people were thinking it. Or, at least, a person was thinking it.
I'm really glad to see a possible explanation for why Homeland Security would be cracking down on music blogs. While I don't agree with the DoHSs actions, I now have a foothold in understanding the situation. It may or may not be correct, but as a fairly logical interpretation of the scenario, it'll suffice.
I'm disappointed to see your fairly dramatic response (though I like the elipses and poetic linebreaks :) ) and 'yummyfajitas's pat response earn collectively more upvotes for delivering far less information (no offense).
To me, jurisdictional questions around the particular authority claimed by ICE to censor the web are interesting only in relation to the larger political decision to censor the web.
Tptacek focuses on only the first question and righteously refuses to look at the latter question. He "prefer not to be baited into discussing" the substantial question here. What I consider an important and disturbing development: the US government effectively taking up the authority to censor websites sans any conviction of web master for anything (sure they "file a lawsuit" but they do NOT have to actually convict or even serve the webmaster in question. It's the effective negation of free speech whatever the ostensible argument).
I thus think the various responses are appropriate. I've disagreed with Yummy on plenty of other issues but he decodes the misdirection in the GP well here.
Tptacek doesn't have to look at the latter question. He simply made a useful point that this has nothing to do with the department of homeland security (and by inference the excessive laws passed as part of the war on terror) but instead another department that is administratively connected.
Of course the US government is acting badly here, and if someone is making a strawman argument it is right to call it out as misdirection, but to my mind, tptacek was simply providing a useful fact.
I suppose this is teaching people about intellectual property...
...how some intellectual property, that owned by large corporations, is so important that other intellectual property should be confiscated by fiat to protect it!
He provided a useful piece of background on the thread. I was about to post a comment about "oh look, they overreached with the too-wide anti-terror laws and are using them on music pirate, quelle surprise," so it is useful to know that, except in name and org chart, this has nothing to do with homeland security (and any of the laws associated with the war on terror.)
The C in ICE is Customs, which has been charged with stopping counterfeit goods produced abroad from entering the USA, such as knockoff Rolex watches and Prada Handbags. Counterfeit goods have been charged with "reducing the desire" to own original goods, much like pirated music has been charged with reducing the desire to actually buy the CD.
If anything, ICE is probably the only department that administratively is capable of combatting piracy, since they have been doing it for so long under their own banner. They now get to do it under the Homeland Security banner.
Let me get this straight. A division of the Department of Homeland Security is shutting down hip-hop blogs to help out the RIAA and you don't see it as a crazy overreach?
I was about to post a comment about "oh look, they overreached with the too-wide anti-terror laws and are using them on music pirate, quelle surprise," so it was useful to know that, except in name and org chart, this has nothing to do with homeland security (and any of the laws associated with the war on terror.) It's a crazy overreach and some Americans need to sort it out, but in some useful senses it has nothing to do with "homeland security".
Comments
Just a reminder: this isn't a crazy overreach by "Homeland Security". DHS is a very new cabinet department formed, like a beaurocratic Voltron, from a smorgasbord of peripherally-related agencies. One of those agencies was Customs/ICE, which for logical and historical reasons hosts federal anti-counterfeiting enforcement. DHS "acquires" Customs and bam, finds itself in the IP enforcement business.
So we should be thinking about this as a crazy overreach by Customs/ICE rather than a crazy overreach of Homeland Security?
You could, but this has been part of ICE's charter for a long time. I'm only making the point that this isn't some crazy RIAA subversion of the Department of Homeland Security. Homeland Security sounds scary, like, "the US Government thinks the RIAA's IP claims are vital to national security!".
No, they don't.
So you're saying that you think it would be perfectly reasonable if the FDA or agriculture department happened to be tasked with enforcing music piracy prevention ?
Joking aside, I guess this is part of the problem with naming departments cutesy Orwellian names like "Homeland Security".
I think it's not an indication that the government thinks the RIAA's problems are homeland security concerns, and would prefer not to be baited into discussing anything else I think about it.
Fair enough, though I look forward to the day when there is just one governmental department and it's called the "Vanquishers of Evil" for the sake of clarity.
Evildoers, if you want to be precise.
Who,
... on this deep thread,
... that you started,
... ever claimed this?
While no one ever claimed it, tptacek was correct in assuming people were thinking it. Or, at least, a person was thinking it.
I'm really glad to see a possible explanation for why Homeland Security would be cracking down on music blogs. While I don't agree with the DoHSs actions, I now have a foothold in understanding the situation. It may or may not be correct, but as a fairly logical interpretation of the scenario, it'll suffice.
I'm disappointed to see your fairly dramatic response (though I like the elipses and poetic linebreaks :) ) and 'yummyfajitas's pat response earn collectively more upvotes for delivering far less information (no offense).
To me, jurisdictional questions around the particular authority claimed by ICE to censor the web are interesting only in relation to the larger political decision to censor the web.
Tptacek focuses on only the first question and righteously refuses to look at the latter question. He "prefer not to be baited into discussing" the substantial question here. What I consider an important and disturbing development: the US government effectively taking up the authority to censor websites sans any conviction of web master for anything (sure they "file a lawsuit" but they do NOT have to actually convict or even serve the webmaster in question. It's the effective negation of free speech whatever the ostensible argument).
I thus think the various responses are appropriate. I've disagreed with Yummy on plenty of other issues but he decodes the misdirection in the GP well here.
Tptacek doesn't have to look at the latter question. He simply made a useful point that this has nothing to do with the department of homeland security (and by inference the excessive laws passed as part of the war on terror) but instead another department that is administratively connected.
Of course the US government is acting badly here, and if someone is making a strawman argument it is right to call it out as misdirection, but to my mind, tptacek was simply providing a useful fact.
You found me out. It's all part of my evil plot to make HN'ers care about intellectual property. Curse you!
I suppose this is teaching people about intellectual property...
...how some intellectual property, that owned by large corporations, is so important that other intellectual property should be confiscated by fiat to protect it!
... Nobody!
So you started this conversation with yourself because... ???
He provided a useful piece of background on the thread. I was about to post a comment about "oh look, they overreached with the too-wide anti-terror laws and are using them on music pirate, quelle surprise," so it is useful to know that, except in name and org chart, this has nothing to do with homeland security (and any of the laws associated with the war on terror.)
I don't think prior restraint of domestic publication has been part of ICE's charter for a long time.
ICE's charter was to stop music piracy?
The C in ICE is Customs, which has been charged with stopping counterfeit goods produced abroad from entering the USA, such as knockoff Rolex watches and Prada Handbags. Counterfeit goods have been charged with "reducing the desire" to own original goods, much like pirated music has been charged with reducing the desire to actually buy the CD.
If anything, ICE is probably the only department that administratively is capable of combatting piracy, since they have been doing it for so long under their own banner. They now get to do it under the Homeland Security banner.
Hmm,
The first part of your statement actually points towards "crazy overreach".
But you could interpret this action using all permutations of the imaginable adjectives and nouns:
And I'd be against all of them!Let me get this straight. A division of the Department of Homeland Security is shutting down hip-hop blogs to help out the RIAA and you don't see it as a crazy overreach?
I was about to post a comment about "oh look, they overreached with the too-wide anti-terror laws and are using them on music pirate, quelle surprise," so it was useful to know that, except in name and org chart, this has nothing to do with homeland security (and any of the laws associated with the war on terror.) It's a crazy overreach and some Americans need to sort it out, but in some useful senses it has nothing to do with "homeland security".
I can understand the bureaucratic / historical reasons you outline for DHS involvement in anti-counterfeiting.
What I don't understand is why / how someone has re-classified good old fashioned copyright infringement as "counterfeiting."
This sort of stuff used to be an FBI matter. What is the justification for changing that, I wonder?