> they seized domain pointers within their jurisdiction. A nearly-entirely-symbolic exercise,<p>This guy obviously has no clue about the realities of web publishing. How are ordinary users supposed to find the sites without the domain pointer? For most users, taking the domain name is the same as shutting the site down.
And here I thought the entire outrage was due to the fact that the U.S. court system really shouldn't <i>have</i> jurisdiction over generic domain names and therefore shouldn't be able to do this sort of thing, regardless of the U.S. law-compliant process they follow.
He brings out a good point: there <i>was</i> a warrant. While I'm not convinced that this is strictly... right, it does seem at least some level of due process was followed.<p>I'm not even sure there is a legal framework for shutting websites and internet infrastructure down.<p>It reminds me a little bit of Sterling's Hacker Crackdown - there is still an electronic frontier.
On issues that deserve outrage, Denninger's rants are second to none. On issues that don't, he's good at explaining why. And he's got a solid track record of discerning the difference.
Uh, what. The outrage, at least from where I'm sitting, is that these takedowns, if ICE's total cost is distributed accordingly, cost the American taxpayers millions of dollars. For something that as the author has pointed out, is largely futile.