In an article published today by the Washington Post, concerning the Kentucky seizure of 141 domain names, the article quotes Michael Collins of the Internet Commerce Association.
“””””Michael Collins, executive director of the Internet Commerce Association, a trade group representing domain name investors and online advertisers. Collins said entire prospect of using the Internet — not only for commerce but for free speech — is at risk if one government or state decides they can freely seize domain names.
“What’s to keep Iran or China from doing the same thing? Yet, even China – which tries very hard to control the Internet its citizens use – hasn’t tried to do what Kentucky is trying to do here,” Collins said.””””””
The article goes on the discuss the merits of the case and also quotes Bret Fausett, a attorney who is on the ICA advisory board.
Please check the article out.
“Collins said entire prospect of using the Internet — not only for commerce but for free speech — is at risk…”
Freedom of speech is one thing; advertising the services or products of another is entirely different. If the advertisements go against laws or morals or ethics merely for the purpose of profit through PPC or other means, then that’s not protected by the first amendment. It would be irresponsible and damaging to the protections the First Amendment grants all of us to use that shield to such ends.
Ken
“””Freedom of speech is one thing; advertising the services or products of another is entirely different.”””
I disagree.
Freedom of speech has been held to extend to advertising, promoting and marketing.
That is true, but it (advertising) has never been given the same broad protections that the First Amendment has enjoyed when it comes to an individuals right to speak out. When the two are associated in that way it only serves to further weaken our individual right to speech, only to the benefit of profit in the free market system. Our First Amendment has no price tag and it should never be associated with the right to earn money.
Ken
Let’s just leave it at this.
No good can or will come from allowing any jurisdiction in the world to seize any domain of it choice, on any basis it wants to invoke.
So any valid legal argument which will nullify this action I am fine with.
I will concede that for the moment for what is just for all domain owners.
But know that in the end the court system is based on monetary stature and all the proof of rights in the world will not convince a court of jurisdiction to weigh what’s just unless one can afford the costs. We have direct experience with that and that is why I am firmly against such associations or entanglements of rights with money.
No Government should have the right to take away property without going trough the legal proces first.
Every person SHOULD have the RIGHT to prove it’s point – that is called FREEDOM and America was founded that way – troughout history the people of America fought wars against Slavery (Evil).
What is happening right now is a bunch of idiots in the Government using their Government post to for their personal Interest (gain) which is in many ways nothing new since troughout history individulas comited many crimes in the name of the Government.
The duty of the Government Officials is to SERVE the Nation and not act as a CRIMINAL