Printable View
It looks like the guy exhanged links with a site and he checked everything out and it looke fine. Later they changed the site so he was linking to a site with child porn.
http://www.gfy.com/showthread.php?t=686460
DirectNic did violate some privacy laws though http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=18587
Mark
Thanks for that Mark.
It always pays to know who you're doing business with.
Perhaps more so in this business than most.
That is so true Randy. There wasn't much info when I orginally posted this. But now I am really pissed off at DirectNic they should not be policing domains no matter what. This is very scary that one day all your domains could just be shut off without any court order or anything.
Mark
And those clowns at GFY just don't see any problem with it at all! The members of GFY are a HUGE reason for all of our problems.
Mark,
Directnic should be policing the content on the domains, especially when something is reported to them, when their company could come under investigation from the Feds. Just as any hosting company will investigate content hosted by them.
Just like you or i can refuse to let an affiliate to promote our sites, Directnic has the right to refuse someone to use their service, even after they have paid for the domain.
You mean to tell me Mark that if someone reported one of your affiliates to you for having kiddy porn on one of their domains, you wouldnt do anything about it?
In fact, even last year i remember there being some threads on GWW where reports of CP came up, and guess what, the posters were told to do the following..
1) Report it to the feds.
2) Report it to the host.
3) Report it to the registrar.
4) Report it to ASACP.
I like how this entire industry can turn at the flip of a coin, all it takes is for some moron to shout 'freedom of speech' and everyone gets their panties in a wad.
Fact of the matter is this, DirectNic have every right to ask their clients for whatever they want, its part of the agreement we all agree to when purchasing a domain (not just at DirectNic BTW).
Ive used DirectNic as a registrar for many years, and ill continue to use them for many more, this shows me, as one of their existing clients, they are looking out for their continued long-term business, and in the process, mine.
Regards,
Lee
I'm going to disagree with you here. Gay TGP's could learn a thing or two about how straight TGP's police their trades.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
Dont ask me why but i looked at the site that was linked too. Now im normally one of the people who say dont accuse people of cp just on the basis of having young looking models, but site had very very young looking models. One photo had a kid (wearing shorts) looking at a naked chic on the streets. I was told that having kids on porn site even if clothed, was very close to the mark. Some of the girls look well under 18 by Europeon standards.
If i i supplied their hosting or billing or anything else, id demand to see model age verifcation or cease working with them.
Why should directnic or anyone else take crazy risks like that?
Exactly, yet the domain registrars arent allowed to do the same thing? LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by marcjacob
If i dont supply IDs to my host when they ask for them, my account gets closed, if i dont supply IDs to my processor when they ask for them, my account gets closed down.
If DirectNic wants to see any of the IDs for the models im using their service to rent my domains from, they can do.
Regards,
Lee
Lee, not that great at writing (as you can all tell lol) but yes, that was my point. Anyone helping to keep a site up that believes they have underage models, needs to ask questions.
Were in a risky business in many ways. We sell sex content. We have to be prepared to proove our models age if asked to by companys we do business with, or not do business with those companies. I think so anyway.
Indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by marcjacob
All anyone on GWW has to do to see DirectNics side of this is go back to last year when we were discussing the ages of the Mike18 models, nobody batted an eyelid when CCBill terminated their account for having questionable content on their site.
I think the problem is that for so many years the industry has been, for all intents and purposes, a free-for-all, now that it is starting to mature and people are starting to question those practices of others, in an effort to protect their own businesses, people are starting to become worried because maybe, just maybe, they are going to have to start paying attention to who/what they are promoting.
Oh and for the record, i ask potential advertisers on GWW to show me model IDs all the time, the only ones that bitch about it are the ones that dont have them. If they dont have a model ID when asked, they dont get to use GWW as a marketing vehicle for their sites, services, or products. Thats *me* protecting *my* business.
Regards,
Lee
I think they have the right not to show you those ids though Lee, they could have other reasons for that (not revealing the models details and so on).
They absolutely DO have the right not to show me the ids.Quote:
Originally Posted by marcjacob
If they dont though, they dont get to advertise on GWW.
Regards,
Lee
Orginally I thought what DirectNic did was good, I don't want cp on the internet anymore than anyone else. But aftering thinking about this more they basically took down this guys entire network without any court order or anything. How would you feel if they brought down your entire network because someone thought one of your sites had underage models? It also seems like a good way to sabotage someone. Trade links with them and then change your page so it has cp on it and then report it to Directnic then they bring your entire network down and lock your domains and you couldn't do a single thing about it and it would be tied up in court. Your program and sites would basically be screwed. DirectNic has been solid for us but this issue really has me concerned. We have enough to worry about in this industry and now we have to worry about our register bringing down our network. There is also the issue or privacy, Directnic wanted to see id's which is a huge privacy issue. The guy supplied id's but then was completly taken down. Lets say you agree with what Directnic did what happens if they overreacted and this guy is innocent? His domains were down for a week and he lost affiliates, members etc. It just seems like this issue should not be in the hands of the register, call me crazy. Since when do registers police domains? I hope we get more insite on this issue and some answers.
Mark
What if, what if, what if.Quote:
Originally Posted by IntenseCash.com
This is a simple of case of the registrar asking for documentation, the guy not having (or not wanting) to give it to them.
If he didnt have the docs, he's stupid.
If he had the docs and didnt want to show them to DirectNic, he's stupid.
Its been proven (i think) that there was in fact child porn (or at the very least pseudo child porn) on the domains the guy owned.
Mark again, what if one of your affiliates is reported to you for having suspected child porn on one of his sites where your banner displays, what do YOU do?
1) Nothing.
2) Report to the Feds.
3) Investigate and ask for IDs.
Regards,
Lee
You're right and I agree with all of these options. Also, I wouldn't want to be forced to work with a company I didn't want to do business with or that I thought was a liability.. unfortunately this isn't happening with DirectNic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Directnic has locked the domain, forcing the site to stay under their service, instead of allowing them to switch to another registrar. So in fact, Directnic is forcing liability upon themselves by continuing to serve the domain.
If Directnic would have just sent the guy their demands and consequences if they didn't meet the demands, that would be fine. And if every other registrar they went to demanded the same thing, that would be GREAT! But locking a domain is something, if this catches on, that could be very detrimental to legitimate adult businesses and asking for ID's is overstepping the boundaries. If Directnic would have given them notice and just dumped them out of suspicion I'd be fine with that, but the way they are doing it is wrong. You see what I'm saying?
#2 ofcoarse I would report it to the feds and I would report it to the ASACP. I would not ask for id's because I am not the FBI, a lawyer or judge. It is not my place to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Mark
Actually, they arent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirt
By locking the domain/s DirectNic enabled several things to happen (or not to happen as the case may be).
1) They made it impossible for the 'owner' of the domain name to 'change'.
2) They made it possible for the WHOIS information to remain the same.
3) They made it possible for the domain owner to still have basic control of the domain.
4) They stopped any potential transfer of the domain away from them, thus making it easier to track for any potential Federal investigation.
You have said on GWW in the past that 'naming' these CP distributors can alert them to the fact they might be getting a visit from the Feds and starting to change their information, host, etc.
Directic took a step in making sure this couldnt happen, they did the right thing by locking the domain because it now means should the Feds need to track this domain owner down, they can do a lot more easier than if he had been able to transfer the domain to another registrar and throw 'privacy' protection on the domain.
Regards,
Lee
Would you terminate the affiliate? That is your place to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by IntenseCash.com
Regards,
Lee
Yes ofcoarse the affiliate would be terminated that is my job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
FYI: FBI doesn't track down child pornographers based on whois information supplied for the domains they register, and child pornographers do not provide valid whois data.
They track them down by actively monitoring the sites that they run, forensically examining logs on the servers the sites are hosted on, and installing taps on their internet connection.
Registrars locking a domain name does nothing but tip people off, after which, they may get rid of all of the logs, evidence, change their connection, and abandon their sites.
If they're actively molesting children and taking pictures of it, they may then move and/or "dispose of" the children, which happens more often than any of us want to think about. The FBI's NUMBER ONE concern in child pornography cases, is to FIND the CHILDREN that are being abused, and save them from further abuse, and provide them with the help that they need.
Sometimes leaving a site live for a period of time, and not tipping their hat, is what it takes to do that.
Arbitrary actions like this by private companies can, in my opinion, severally interfere with active investigations by law enforcement, that said companies would have no idea were even taking place, and could potentially cost children their lives.
Child pornography, abuse, and exploitation is a SERIOUS, often times life and death issue, and it should be left to professionals who have dedicated their lives to putting a stop to it.
So what you are saying, is that without any investigation and without any evidence, you would just arbitrarily terminate an affiliate, you wouldnt even give them a chance to prove to you they werent promoting CP, you wouldnt even ask them for model IDs, you would just go right ahead and report them to ASACP and the FBI?Quote:
Originally Posted by IntenseCash.com
I just want to make sure we're clear on this, because quite frankly, id take being given a chance at proving a mistake had been made (like DirectNic did) then just shutting an affiliates account down without any warning or chance for them to prove they were doing nothing wrong.
Regards,
Lee
You are correct they dont, they do however track down the HOST and the PROCESSOR for those sites based on the WHOIS information, if that WHOIS information was able to be changed, the Feds wouldnt have access to that information.Quote:
Originally Posted by JustMe
Regards,
Lee
Their whois history is the same, wether they change it today or move to a new host.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Directnic still has their payment history, whois history, etc.
Starting to lock domains puts pressure on all of the industry. Imagine if 40 of my affiliates domains get locked and I have to provide ID's for all the models they promote. Inadvertantly my business is affected, as are all the affiliates, and we are ALL forced to do something illegal to appease a registrar, or suffer loss of income. I'm in Australia.. it's illegal for me to give model ID's to non governmental agencies. It's just a big can of worms the way they've done it. If they hadn't locked the domain I'd be absolutely fine with it.
Actually, they don't. Let me just say that they have databases they keep that are independent from the ones that change dynamically like the public version of whois does.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
This is all the sort of thing that your average person has no idea about, and doesn't need to have any idea about. They're tools used by law enforcement at the highest levels to save lives. The fact that your average person, or even large corporations, have no idea how investigations are conducted, or what tools are actually available, is just another great reason why they shouldn't get involved, and leave things to the proper authorities.
Squirt, therein lays the confusion, DirectNic DIDNT ask for full model ID, the drama queens on GFY twisted that, they asked for a copy of the models id showing the models photo and date of birth, they never asked for anything other than that, no SSI, no address, no other personally identifyable information, just a picture and date of birth, exactly what we all asked for with the Mike18 stuff, yourself included.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirt
Regards,
Lee
Yes I know. It's just that we all are being forced into a murky area. I don't know the legalities of showing an ID, even that's redacted. I would do it to save affiliates, or myself, but I'm sure it's illegal and I could see getting tagged by the government for that and telling us we should have known better or taken it to court or something along those lines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
I'm a very "by the book" kind of guy.. I want to know right from wrong and know exactly what my boundaries are ( even if I bend them :) I know it's part of our industry, etc. etc. but the liability on producers, if someone doesn't state clearly what it is, is potentially phenominal. Imagine all the scenarios.
At least if they didn't lock the domain the content producers wouldn't be forced into this position.
The most worrying thing in all of this to me is this..
The original poster of this stuff on GFY HAS been linking to illegal content (underage stuff) and HAS even stated that he doesnt have docs for the stuff he hosts and HAS been linking to pseudo CP.
Yet people are still defending him.
DirectNic did the industry a service by allowing this guys sites and info to be scrutinized, thanks to their actions we have uncovered yet another individual using questionable content, linking to illegal sites and more.
Its individuals like this guy that tars us all with the same brush, yet here we are stuck on the fact that his registrar had a complaint he was either hosting, or linking to child porn on his domain WHICH HE WAS and asked for IDs before canning his domains, which they ultimately did because they had CP on them.
Regards,
Lee
I, for one, made it very clear time and again that I have in no way been defending him, or his sites. From what I've been reading, the vast majority of people haven't been either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
What I have been speaking about, is the a policy of a registrar, which has broad implications that go far beyond simply this particular incident, or even this particular industry.
Freezing domains and how this can potential affect my business, and other legitimate businesses, is my issue, not this person and his CP links.
My worry is that locking domains can lead to being a very good thing, or it can lead to being a very bad thing, for the industry. With no guidelines, or concrete laws to protect us, no checks and balances, any registrar can ask any domain to provide the same, or more, or just start cancelling domains left and right, domains that have been around for years. We have no protection against the unreasonable.
Ofcoarse I would investigate it and make a decision based on my findings that is my job. But in 10 years of doing this I have never had to ask for 2257 documents from a webmaster. Usually it is pretty clean cut if they are hosting a porn site etc. I am fine with contacting the fbi, host etc but what Directnic was wrong and they went over the line they never should have. Why alert the webmaster in anyway? They should of left everything be and contacted the proper authorities and make sure an investigation is done in a timely matter. This way the webmaster is not alerted and probably easier to find and the proper people can do the invesigation like it always has been. So you are saying if Google or some very large company somehow was linking to a cp site somehow the register should go in and lock their domain and shut their entire network down? NO they report it to the authorities to let them handle it and probably remove the link.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
As for whois infomation who cares if they change it. You think if someone puts up an illegal site they actually put real whois info? Lets say they do put real whois info and change it who cares all the registers maintain a history or whois infomation on every domain. Plus they have payment information so I think with that information brought to an agency that should be handling this could take care of the site in the proper way.
Maybe Directnic will actually respond to what they did today but there has been no response. I think that is very bad they were at least defending themselves but now they aren't. All I know if they screwed up big time and webmasters will be moving away from them. I know a webmaster transferring over 800 domains away from them because of what they did. I am not condoning cp in anyway but usually this matter in not handled by the register unless they get some sort of court order or a cease and desist.
Some webmasters think what happened is normal but why have we never heard about it until now? Why suddenly is the register taking place of the authorities?
Mark
Okay, how would you investigate it?Quote:
Originally Posted by IntenseCash.com
How would you determine if the content in question was, or was not cp?
Regards,
Lee
Mark has investigated affiliates before, like with Mike18 that he promotes... he asked for ID's and even posted them here I believe when we were all discussing the legality of that site. I think we got the model release form too. But again, you're getting off topic Lee. The freezing of domains by the registrar is the issue we're all concerned about here, the cp site is the catalyst, not the main issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Squirt,Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirt
You seem to be under the misconception that one of the things being discussed is seperate of the other, they arent.
I'll let you in to a secret...
Before an affiliate gets terminated.. Their account gets put 'on hold' (or locked to make sure funds dont get released).
This is no different to what DirectNic did, they put the account on hold whilst investigating a report of child porn (which it was) then since then terminated the domain, which they have to do under law in order to not be guilty of aiding and abetting child porn transactions.
Im sure some of the keyboard lawyers on GFY have spun the hell out of this so they very well may be arguing over something else over there.
At the end of the day, a child porn site has been closed down, this isnt about doing the 'legal' thing, its about doing the RIGHT thing. Not to mention, we dont even know if DirectNic were in touch with any law enforcement agencies, right now all we know is what has been said by a proven child pornographer.
Again, its a sad state of affairs when a child pornographers site is closed down and everyone bitches about the method used to get it done, just be happy that there is one less child porn site on the web.
I for one am glad his site was shut down and access to his domain/s was taken away.
Regards,
Lee
k, here's my 2 cents.
CCBill terminating a site for a compliance (or perceived compliance) issue is a no brainer. CCBill is responsible to the cardmember association and can be subject to gigantic fines if they violate the (sometimes byzantine) regulations. Further, Visa's regulations do, in fact, have leeway in them that allows for actions to be taken based on "appearance" or "impression" rather than fact. Additionally, CCBill has a close ongoing relationship with its websites as the payment processor.
DirectNIC is almost completely removed from the process. They are essentially a "vendor" of domain names, and nothing in ICANN regs, as far as I know, provides for termination or suspension of domain names for any reason whatsoever without due process, so DirectNIC does not have a "higher entity" that can fine it or otherwise cause it problems.
Further, DirectNIC *may* have an obligation to investigate and terminate domains on which illegal activity is taking place... but it is also in a position of liability. If it terminates or suspends a domain without just cause and fair warning, regardless of the terms of service, it potentially exposes itself to liability for losses, yet I don't think it has any liability for continuing to host for a questionable domain unless it has reason to *know* (not suspect) there is a problem, and even in these cases, I would think that if the content is simply being linked rather than hosted on the domain in question, it would first want to take the reasonable step of saying "here's the problem, please remove the offending link" in the same way that ccbill does when it finds a violation.
DirectNIC, based on the TOS posted, does not, in my opinion, have the right to demand IDs, and if it suspends services based on lack of IDs provided (particularly when providing ID info to a non-government entity is a criminal violation in California) then it is probably financially liable for the losses incurred.
I haven't actually visited, but am relying on others' descriptions of the linked site in question. Based on that, there were other ways this could have been resolved. The way DirectNIC handled the situation, even given the rather obvious nature of the problem with the linked site, in my opinion gives rise to substantial liability on DirectNIC's side.
Of course I'm no lawyer and I could be full of shit. But it makes sense based on what I know.
Oh and one other thing that hasnt been mentioned yet..
This isnt just a potential criminal case here, this could also end up as a civil case had DirectNic not taken any action.
Kind of like what happened here not so long ago....
http://news.com.com/Suit+accuses+Goo...3-6069014.html
Regards,
Lee
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Lee I am NOT talking about a CP site. I'm NOT talking about GFY. You keep spinning everything to this agenda about CP and GFY! Yeah everything is related in the universe we get that.
I'm talking about something very specific, registrars putting domains on hold and the specific implications that can have on the legitimate people in our industry as there are no safeguards to keep registrars from going amuk and demanding to much, or demanding things that put us in a legally liable position. Pretty simple.
Enough time wasted
Why would you even think that is going to happen?Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirt
Can you name a single instance where any registrar, anywhere has put a domain on hold for the reasons you are concerned about?
Im guessing, using your flawed logic, we should all be worried about martians landing and abducting all of us every Wednesday, afterall planes fly every other Wednesday so it is only reasonable to ASSume that sometime in the future, Martians may start abducting people on Wednesdays also, even though we have no proof that it has ever, or will ever happen as yet.
Being concerned about something that has never happened doesnt really get anyone anywhere, lets just stick to what we know, DirectNic successfully took down a child porn site, thats great for the industry as a whole.
Regards,
Lee
Here is the Free Speech Coalition's View Of The Matter......
http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/F....asp?coid=1014
There was some clear-cut cp on that site itself. It's just karma.