www.fear.org
Add to this that there is a bill being worked on right now in Congress that will add copyright infringement to the list of forfeiture offenses. So, copy a CD and they can take your car and your bank accout. I'll try to find that link; I think I put it over there... hmm... I think I found it when I was reading an article about work progressing on DMCA reform - to make it worse, not better. Ack. Ah, here it is: http://lwn.net/Articles/180772/* In criminal law, there is a constitutional right to counsel -- at the government's expense if the criminal defendant cannot afford a lawyer. In general, there is no such right in civil forfeiture proceedings. The "Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000" (CAFRA), for federal forfeitures, added limited provisions for counsel to indigents.
* In criminal law, the person is presumed innocent, and the government must prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Until recently, in civil forfeiture law, the property owner is presumed guilty, and must prove his innocence by a preponderance of the evidence. (This also was changed for federal forfeitures by CAFRA.)
* In criminal law, the defendant has a right to trial by jury, and can force the government to prove him guilty even if he has no defense. Civil forfeiture claimants are often denied any trial at all -- because the court grants summary judgment for the government, or dismisses the claimant's claim as a sanction for failing to comply with discovery. Claimants forced to represent themselves too often lose because they are outwitted by aggressive prosecutors.
* A number of state courts have held that there is no right to a jury trial at all in state civil forfeiture cases. And even when the claimant is given a trial, it is not like a criminal trial -- instead of the government having to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the burden of proof is on the property owner to prove his/her innocence.
Asset forfeiture was virtually unheard until recently. In 1984, Congress overhauled the federal forfeiture laws to give the government incredible advantages over property owners, and began expanding the list of offenses which could trigger forfeiture. Now there are over three hundred federal offenses which trigger forfeiture. But the most terrifying aspect of the legislative scheme in the 1984 crime bill was that it allowed the seizing police agency to keep what they seize and forfeit. This inherent conflict of interest has lead to greater and greater abuses, as forfeiture income -- and dependence on forfeiture income -- has risen. Asset forfeiture brings in close to a billion dollars a year for the federal government alone.
The second thing is this: MS is using its genuine advantage software (which you have to run to use windows update) to collect information to sue people. http://www.informationweek.com/windows/ ... =187200796
