July 11, 2014
In the latest effort by American “victims of terrorism” to extract blood money from the Islamic Republic, they have filed a suit in a US court to take control of all the Internet sites in Iran that operate under the .ir domain.
The theory is that if the court will turn over ownership of .ir, then the “victims of terrorism” can auction off the sites.
Those filing the suit say they are not trying to extract money from private businesses and private citizens in Iran, but plan to use the power—if the court grants it—to threaten to shut down Iranian government websites.
Some news reports have falsely said that the US courts have already turned over ownership to those suing. But that is not correct. The suit was only filed last month and the court has taken no action beyond notifying the US-based organization that manages Internet “domain names” about the suit and ask for it to reply. That organization is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, better known as ICANN.
The suit is not against Iran, but against ICANN, demanding that it turn over control of all Internet addresses used by the Iranian government and its agencies.
It is not believed that any such suit has ever been filed before so the suit is entering entirely new legal ground.
Dozens of “victims of terrorism” have won billions of dollars in US court awards since 1996 when courts have found the Islamic Republic to have been behind terrorist attacks. Only American citizens can sue in US courts. Most of the attacks have been launched in Israel and attributed to Hamas with backing from the Islamic Republic. Most of the victims have been American Jews visiting Israel.
While the courts have ordered Iran to pay huge sums, few Iranian-owned assets have been found that the victims can seize. They recently were told that a Manhattan office building owned by Iran and believed worth more than half a billion dollars will be sold off and the proceeds divided among “victims of terrorism.” But they were also recently told they could not get their hands on thousands of priceless cuneiform clay records unearthed at Persepolis and on loan by Iran to the University of Chicago.
The latest asset suit was filed by Shurat HaDin, an Israeli legal center that has spent years chasing the Islamic Republic through Western courts. Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, the founder and head of Shurat HaDin, explained what she was trying to do.
“The right to use the Internet is worth a lot of money and is a valuable asset,” she told Arutz Sheva, an Israeli media company. “So, by freezing Internet access, we can force Iran to hand over the damages.”
She is careful to emphasize that her action will target the Iranian regime only, and not private Iranian Internet users.
“We’re not looking to shut down the Internet,” she clarifies. ”We will act against the Iranian government…. I’m not going after the Iranian people. I have no war against them.”
If she wins the suit and gains ownership of Iran’s Internet domain, lawyers will have full rights to decide who can or can’t start or renew a website under the .ir domain name. That means they will have the right to deny such applications to entities linked to the Iranian regime and other terror-linked groups, and can even shut down Iranian government websites to induce them into paying the damages owed to terror victims.
But it’s far from certain she will win. Categorizing Internet usage as a seizable asset is uncharted legal territory, as countries still struggle to define the application to the Internet of such basic laws such as libel and copyright.
ICANN was given 10 days to respond to the court. It told the Iran Times Monday that it was still “in the process of reviewing” the court documents.
ICANN could simply hand over the .ir rights and forward to Shurat HaDin whatever fees Iran pays to renew its licenses each year. Many, however, expect ICANN to assert that such Internet rights are actually held by a third party, or that Internet domains simply do not qualify as seizable assets at all.
In that case, Darshan-Leitner says, she’ll have to bring a separate action against ICANN, which would mark the start of another lengthy legal struggle.
The legal case over the tablets from Persepolis took almost a decade to resolve.
