According to a press release, A lawyer representing a “group of American victims of terror and family members of those who have been injured or killed in attacks sponsored by the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran) have moved to attach and seize the ccTLD domain registry of Iran, .Ir
“The families, who hold unsatisfied American federal court judgments amounting to more than a billion dollars against the Iranian government seek to own all the “top-level domain” (TLD) names provided by the US to Iran including the .ir TLD, the ایران TLD and all Internet Protocol (IP) addresses being utilized by the Iranian government and its agencies.”
“The court papers have been served on Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)”
The families are represented in this unprecedented civil action by attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of Tel-Aviv, Israel and Robert Tolchin of New York.
Darshan-Leitner said: “This is the first time that terror victims have moved to seize the domain names, IPs and internet licenses of terrorism sponsoring states like Iran and are attempting to satisfy their court judgments.
The Iranians must be shown that there is a steep price to be paid for their sponsorship of terrorism. In business & legal terms it is quite simple – we are owed money, and these assets are currency worth money. ”
“In cases brought in the US by the terror victim plaintiff/judgment holders against Iran, the districts courts have repeatedly ruled that the suicide bombing and shooting attacks perpetrated by the Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorist organizations in Israel were funded by the Islamic regime through MOIS.
“However, although the families have received compensatory and punitive damage judgments against the defendants, Iran has refused to satisfy the court awards.”
“Iran has been designated by the Department of State as an outlaw nation that provides material support and resources to terrorist groups worldwide since 1996.
“Under an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (28 U.S.C. § 1610(g)), legislated to assist terror victims to collect judgments against foreign states abrogates Iran’s sovereign immunity for claims arising from acts of terrorism and subjects to attachment “the property of a foreign state… and the property of an agency or instrumentality of such a state, including property that is a separate juridical entity or is an interest held directly or indirectly in a separate juridical entity.”
According to Baruch Ben-Haim whose son Shlomo was severely injured in a 1995 terrorist bombing of an Israeli bus: “It’s not right that the US government would provide these licenses to Iran while it is refusing to pay off the judgments handed down against it for funding global terrorism. The federal court awards given to our families must be satisfied.”
Darshan-Leitner said, “For years the Iranian government has refused to pay its judgments, thumbing its nose at these terror victims and the American court system. Our clients continue to suffer from the suicide bombing that Iran financed in Jerusalem nearly seventeen years ago. It is not our intention to shut down Iran’s internet usage, but we want what is rightfully due. If by seizing any funds earned from these licenses and contractual rights we can satisfy the judgments, we will have served our clients.”
We remain committed to helping these American families satisfy their judgments.”
This is a huge story. Maybe the most important ICANN-related story in years.
This Is Huge Mistake From ICANN and Court .
It is Ideal For Iran Regime .They Want to limit his Peoples And It’s a good excuse for them to expand internet filtering.
Pacer doesn’t have the pleadings yet, at least that I could find. I will pull them as soon as I can and send them your way.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_dOI5puxRA9M3hweE9Eel9mVTQ/edit?usp=sharing
This is the filing
This Is Huge Mistake From ICANN and Court .
It is Ideal For Iran Regime .They Want to limit his Peoples And It’s a good excuse for them to expand internet filtering.
A can of worms where each worm has his own can of worms. But isn’t IANA responsible for CC domains?
Thing is, Iran is yesterday’s bad guy. Now we have new guys to be afraid of.
Bret
Thanks but all and all I would rather just get merry.christmas if your in the gift giving mood
This would be absurd if it weren’t real. If I undertand correctly what they’re seeking, then I’d consider this legal action to be profoundly hypocritical and reprehensible.
Do we really want to set a precedent that would legitimize forcibly shutting down all websites of another nation’s citizens?
Iranians already live with guns pointed to their heads — guns belonging to foreign nations, to say nothing of their own regime. Should they not be allowed to communicate online?
While we’re at it, why not gather up all their books and burn them too?
Imagine the outcry if a foreign nation — say China or Russia — achieved a position of international dominance and decided to confiscate or obliterate all .COM websites, built by private citizens, on account of disagreement with the U.S. government? It’s far-fetched — but only because the USA hasn’t had to deal with more powerful nations that control our internet access. Ethically speaking, it would seem to be analogous, though. Just a reversal of roles.
Vile.
They aren’t seeking to close down the websites, they are seeking to take ownership of the Iranian domain extension (as property seized to pay the debt they state is owed to them by way of a US court decision based on the view that the Iranian domain extension is a license issued by an American agency and is therefor subject to such a seizure)
In effect, they want to take ownership of the registry and lay claim to any and all monies generated by providing registration of domain names under the Iranian extension.
Once ICANN is no longer American owned and becomes an International organisation such a step will be denied…and is one of the reasons why ICANN needs to become an international based organization to protect the interests of the world at large (assuming it can be set up to work without being dominated by any particular group…good luck with that)
The questions are this…
1) Is the license subject to such a seizure?
2) Are those seeking possession capable of maintaining the registry providing equivalent or superior service?
…If either of those questions are NO, then the seizure should not be valid.
The point comes down to the legal obligations that ICANN requires for the extension to be maintained under their currently allowed setup.
@janedoe,
I see what you mean. However, consider this sentence: “The Iranians must be shown that there is a steep price to be paid for their sponsorship of terrorism.”
Who must be shown? The Iranian government? No, “the Iranians”.
How good would customer service be for Iranian registrants be if the explicit goal of registry seizure is to “show the Iranians” and make them pay a “steep price”?
Clearly the motivation is NOT financial. It’s vengeance. And vengeance doesn’t make for good customer service.
Whether or not the litigants would completely shut down Iranian websites or not, they would clearly not be benevolent overseers.
To vengeance I should add political arm-twisting.
The said IRANIANS…just as when speaking about the government of the USA people of other countries say THE AMERICANS…or for the government of Canada…THE CANADIANS…or for…what ever country you care to name.
If Iran is generating money from the registration of Iranian domain names then that is what these people are after and the “punishment” they see themselves implementing.
After reviewing a handful of articles available on this issue…
1) The case has already been heard and found in favor of those seeking to take possession and seize the extension.
2) ICANN has a period of time (10 days?) to dispute this decision in court, if they fail to do so, then they will be required to hand over the Iranian extension.
…
If ICANN fails to dispute the decision then EVERYTHING ICANN stands for is a joke and no domain name extension is safe while ICANN is seen as a purely American entity, the entire internet as it stands is at risk of fragmenting. So ICANN will dispute the finding.
However, even if ICANN fails to dispute the decision, Iran could take it to the International Courts and that will play merry hell.
…
There is one very basic issue that this brings to light…
No individual, corporation or country who relies on the Internet can consider the Internet as safe while in the hands of a single countries control…so either the various bodies that effectively “run” the internet need to become international bodies…or the internet runs the risk of “net neutrality” going completely out the window as it fragments to high hell and back.
If this decision is allowed to stand…it is going to have a bit of blowback.
I certainly don’t trust the parties involved not to take advantage of the situation to “punish” people so on this front I agree with you
This Is Huge Mistake From ICANN and Court .
It is Ideal For Iran Regime .They Want to limit his Peoples And It’s a good excuse for them to expand internet filtering.
Wishful thinking on the part of the lawyers. My bet is that it will never happen.
On a side note, during my high school years I worked for a family who came to the U.S. from Iran and started a restaurant. From that experience, I got to know and dated a woman from Iran, sat with her family and relatives over many dinners… all were great people who were more Western in their thinking than might be imagined, because of how they were brought up in Iran… on American television shows like ‘Dallas’. I still know them to this day, and while a small number have moved back to Iran, they have Facebook pages that allow them to keep in touch.
Because of the friendships I made, the whole ‘Iran is evil’ train of thought is puzzling to me. Many countries, including those in the West, could be considered ‘evil’ given their actions around the world. But I suppose we have to create these countries to fear, so we can keep our profitable military machine (and the companies that ‘clean up’ afterward) moving.
Of course there are ‘bad’ Iranians… but then again, there are ‘bad’ Americans as well. No country has a monopoly on that sort of thing. But thinking that they do is just fearful BS that unfortunately many buy into. It’s good to keep the masses scared and in control…
I agree with much of what you say. However, the seizure of an asset in satisfaction of a civil judgment is not a moral issue. If a bank forecloses on your mortgage and your house is sold at public auction, it is not because you are a “bad person”, it is merely because a court has determined there is a judgment to be satisfied.
This Is Huge Mistake From ICANN and Court .
It is Ideal For Iran Regime .They Want to limit his Peoples And It’s a good excuse for them to expand internet filtering.
This will once again bring to public awareness the issue of a centralized authority for governing the Internet and domain names.
Quite a volatile issue to arise when ICANN’s future is being debated. Will be quite interesting to see how ICANN handles.
Ironic too that those with a political agenda at work in this litigation would stand to benefit most from continued U.S. control of ICANN, yet their suit is likely to give impetus to international oversight …
First, it is a good thing that domains and and entire registry are considered assets. Second, I was 10 when the Iran Hostage Crisis happened, and while I firmly believe the Iranian government is rogue, I do not believe its people are. After all, look what the government did to publicly suppress populist voices in the wake of clear election “irregularities” in 2009. Clearly, the people do not support such radical positions by their government. Three, seizing the .ir registry would be, in my opinion, the digital equivalent of cutting out someone’s tongue to satisfy a debt. I have no doubt such a seizure will never come to pass. It would destroy confidence in the entire name assignment system, if you ask me.
This Is Huge Mistake From ICANN and Court .
It is Ideal For Iran Regime .They Want to limit his Peoples And It’s a good excuse for them to expand internet filtering.
So there are judgements.
There have been cases, judges and or juries reached their verdicts and judgements have been issued
The only question now is how to those holding the judgement collect them from the government of IRAN
This Is Huge Mistake From ICANN and Court .
It is Ideal For Iran Regime .They Want to limit his Peoples And It’s a good excuse for them to expand internet filtering.
This lawsuit might give Congress a reason to rethink the permanent handover of IANA to ICANN. Until now, it has been a few right-wing legislators who have argued that the US is not going to like giving up control of the internet. If this story gets traction, it will be cover for other legislators to join them. And Martin Lotter, give it a rest.