How to Spot a Pirate

Chief Nato spokesman James Appathurai is quoted in the BBC, saying it is hard to spot Somali pirates:

“There are a host of pirates, but they don’t identify themselves with eye-patches and hook hands so it isn’t immediately obvious that they are pirates.”

I think this has always been true. Pirates have never wanted to be identified early, since it makes their chase harder, but I have to think that the direction of their boat, along with machine guns, RPGs and masks, all make for a good giveaway.

Friend or foe? Black Beard never wore a patch or a hook.

Clean Water Act

I wrote to Representative Nancy Pelosi about my concern for water as it relates to security. Here is part of her reply:

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, amended in 1977, and commonly known as the Clean Water Act, established regulations for the discharge of pollutants into the waters of the United States. The act initiated pollution control programs and set water quality standards for contaminants in surface waters. In the three decades since the establishment of the Clean Water Act, court rulings and agency interpretations of federal regulation have reduced the protections afforded to our drinking waters and wetlands intended by the original Clean Water Act. HR 2421 would restore the original intent of the Clean Water Act by amending the Act’s definition of “waters of the United States” to include “intrastate” and “intermittent” water bodies, which would then extend protections to all of our nation’s waters and wetlands.

Regulations to protect the health and welfare of citizens are obviously a non-trivial responsibility. Like patching vulnerable software, I hope these changes to the words will enable better controls over pollution. I also hope more support for clean water and awareness emerges in order to push back on the notion that corporations can pollute without accountability.

Mongol Trademark Seized

More news on the Mongol motorcycle gang reveals that the US government is trying to outlaw their identity. A judge has banned anyone from wearing a trademark logo:

The judge initially issued an injunction Tuesday, but that order was limited to barring the sale or distribution of the logo. New language was added, saying the gang members and their affiliates “shall surrender for seizure all products, clothing, vehicles, motorcycles … or other materials bearing the Mongols trademark, upon presentation of a copy of this order.”

Welk said his office is drafting the protocol for such seizures. Law enforcement agencies could begin enforcing the injunction by Thursday or Friday, he said.

Observers questioned whether the injunction is constitutional.

“Here you have the government stepping in and preventing a rights holder of using the (trade) mark they legally obtained,” said attorney Douglas Mirell, who specializes in First Amendment cases.

“It strikes me as a serious potential First Amendment violation to have the government come in and attempt to, and in this case exceed, stripping lawfully obtained rights,” he added. “This is one for the record books.”

The effectiveness of this control, let alone it’s constitutionality under free speech, seems dubious. Is the argument that the trademark itself is dangerous?

Chagos Islanders Denied

The dispute over the ownership of Diego Garcia and the rest of the Chagos Archipelago is really a huge legal, human rights, security and geopolitical debate hiding in plain sight.

The United Kingdom claims it will retain control of islands that it prefers to calls its British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), while taking payments for “.io” domain registrations.

Do you have a stolen .io domain? Do you know the significance of that domain’s theft? What are you even doing on it?

BIOT appropriated the .io and the UK government ceded control to the private sector to manage and profit from what amounts to be gross human rights violations.

This domain in other words isn’t owned by the Chagos people it represents, and instead shifted into the hands of a private company called Internet Computer Bureau Ltd (ICB) formed specifically to take advantage over places like Chagos.

Mauritius aims in some sense to settle the domain issues by expanding its area over the islands as a more natural geographic power play, deprecating .io entirely.

Meanwhile the United States (directly implicated in the expulsion of Chagos islanders) has sights on keeping control of its military base (established after loss of control in Ethiopia, and the shift to satellites that made surveillance of the Middle-East easier than from the Horn of Africa highlands).

On top of all that, the simple fact remains many Chagossian diaspora who were forcibly removed decades ago sincerely want to return to their home and have sovereignty.

If you own an .io domain are you helping or hurting the Chagossian cause?

In that context, Reuters has very sad news:

Britain’s highest court ruled in favour of the British government Wednesday, blocking the return of hundreds of Chagos Island people to their homes in the south Indian Ocean after nearly 40 years of exile.

The decision by the House of Lords ends a years-long battle to secure the Chagos Islanders the right to return to their archipelago, from where they were forcibly removed in the 1960s and ’70s to make way for an American airbase on Diego Garcia.

By a ruling of 3-2, the lords backed a government appeal that argued that allowing the islanders to return could have a detrimental effect on defence and international security.

I wrote about this case in more detail back in March of 2007.


Update 2018 (ten years!): ICB sells itself for $70m to a giant US domain registrar Afilias, with no evidence any of that money or future money will go to the Chagossians.

Update 2015 (can’t believe it’s been seven years of this already!): the Chagos people have launched “The Dark Side of .io