Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Government Firefox Mozilla The Internet

DHS Wants Mozilla To Disable Mafiaafire Plugin, Mozilla Resists 360

Davis Freeberg writes "The Department of Homeland Security is hard at work again, protecting the industry from websites that the big studios don't want you to see. This time they're targeting the Mafiaafire plugin by asking Mozilla to disable the addon at the root level. Instead of blindly complying with the government's request, Mozilla has decided to ask some tough questions instead. Unsurprisingly, when faced with legitimate concerns about the legality of their domain seizure program, the DHS has decided to clam up."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DHS Wants Mozilla To Disable Mafiaafire Plugin, Mozilla Resists

Comments Filter:
  • Knock yourselves out (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05, 2011 @06:35PM (#36042206)
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05, 2011 @06:36PM (#36042214)

    Streisand effect. Before today, I never heard of the Mafiaafire plugin... but I'm going to look into it right now.
    probably download it, even if I don't use it whatever it may be.

  • by MoonBuggy ( 611105 ) on Thursday May 05, 2011 @06:45PM (#36042302) Journal

    Absolutely. I was particularly glad to see, in the full list of questions asked [], that they question the seizure program itself, not just the dubious claims about the plug-in. The list is as follows (the source linked above is apparently a copy of the official email):

    April 19, 2011 email from Mozilla to US Department of Homeland Security Special Agent
    To help us evaluate the Department of Homeland Security's request to take-down/remove the add-on from Mozilla's websites, can you please provide the following additional information:
    1. Have any courts determined that is unlawful or illegal in any way? If so, on what basis? (Please provide any relevant rulings)
    2. Have any courts determined that the seized domains related to are unlawful, illegal or liable for infringement in any way? (please provide relevant rulings)
    3. Is Mozilla legally obligated to disable the add-on or is this request based on other reasons? If other reasons, can you please specify.
    4. Has DHS, or any copyright owners involved in this matter, taken any legal action against or the seized domains, including DMCA requests?
    5. What protections are in place for or the seized domain owners if eventually a court decides they were not unlawful?
    6. Can you please provide copies of any briefs that accompanied the affidavit considered by the court that issued the relevant seizure orders?
    7. Can you please provide a copy of the relevant seizure order upon which your request to Mozilla to take down is based?
    8. Please identify exactly what the infringements by the owners of the domains consisted of, with reference to the substantive standards of Section 106 and to any case law establishing that the actions of the seized domain owners consti tuted civil or criminal copyright infringement.
    9. Did any copyright owners furnish affidavits in connection with the domain seizures? Had any copyright owners served DMCA takedown notices on the seized
    domains or (if so please provide us with a copy)
    10. Has the Government furnished the domain owners with formal notice of the seizures, triggering the time period for a response by the owners? If so, when, and have there been any responses yet by owners?
    11. Has the Government communicated its concerns directly with If so, what response, if any, did make?

  • Re:Crazy glue (Score:4, Informative)

    by TaoPhoenix ( 980487 ) <> on Thursday May 05, 2011 @06:57PM (#36042402) Journal

    A search for addons called MAFIAAFIRE is yielding no results.

  • Re:Crazy glue (Score:5, Informative)

    by Twigmon ( 1095941 ) on Thursday May 05, 2011 @07:05PM (#36042456) Homepage

    A link to the extension from the article: []

  • Project has forked (Score:5, Informative)

    by AnotherScratchMonkey ( 592037 ) on Thursday May 05, 2011 @09:28PM (#36043666) Homepage

    There's now a fork called FireICE [] so DHS now has an additional extension to suppress.

  • by DaneM ( 810927 ) on Thursday May 05, 2011 @09:30PM (#36043684)

    Way to go, Mozilla, for standing up to these tyrants! I might just write Mozilla an email, congratulating them for it.

    As for the take-down notice itself...having never heard of the add-on before, I've just installed it. Good job, DHS guys! (Who says they don't promote freedom?)

  • by cultiv8 ( 1660093 ) on Thursday May 05, 2011 @11:27PM (#36044196) Homepage
    Good changes, too. Mod parent post up...
  • by ifiwereasculptor ( 1870574 ) on Thursday May 05, 2011 @11:42PM (#36044256)
    Yeah, that'd be really unprecedented. [] Maybe if you're a little arab-looking or you happen to have a muslim friend...
  • by sFurbo ( 1361249 ) on Friday May 06, 2011 @05:04AM (#36045350)

    I can encode any information as a rather large decimal (base 10) number, numbers can't be patented or copyrighted. In fact, I've even written a program that encodes and decodes in such a way (arbitrary bit-length & radix integer math) -- It's terribly inefficient in decimal mode; in Hexadecimal (base 16) it's blazingly fast, but it doubles the output size... You can avoid the size bloat by encoding & decoding your NUMBERS in base 2 --- Oh, wait binary numbers are what's claimed as infringing copyright. (How is this not a 1st amendment issue?)

    If I understand copyright law correctly (yeah, fat chance), numbers can be copyrighted if sufficient creativity* has been necessary to produce it. If you need, say, a book in order to produce the number, all of the creativity used in producing that book is needed to produce your number, so yes, it can be covered by copyright. I think [] covers the points of your post pretty decently.

    *Probably not the right word, but I don't know the English equivalent of the Danish "værkshøjde".

Can anyone remember when the times were not hard, and money not scarce?