19

I found this GitHub repository that contains collection of several different intelligence agency domain seizure pages, including FBI domain seizure.

It is meant to be used by said agencies for real seized domains, but I figured out one of my April Fools jokes on my own websites would be to include the FBI domain seizure page for just one day and display it to anyone who visits the page on April 1st for the first time.

The domain is on a national TLD outside U.S. so it's fairly obvious that FBI couldn't seize that domain (and it's a 3rd level domain, too).

However I would still make sure that I won't face any kind of jail for that if I misuse the domain seizure template for a silly April Fools joke. I would add a button to it that will be labeled as something like "Details on this seizure" or something, and clicking it will display an alert box saying "APRIL FOOLS" and redirecting back to the real website homepage.

I also figured out that just for the sake of being sure, the page would visibly include a disclaimer stating that that page isn't real and was only installed for the purpose of a one time April Fools joke and does not intend to misinterprets it as a real domain seizure, and that the artwork is licensed under Public Domain as an official U.S. government agency artwork.

Am I still in trouble if I go with that route? Is it too overboard?

bdb484
  • 58,968
  • 3
  • 129
  • 184
Polda18
  • 193
  • 1
  • 8
  • A reliable answer would require more details on your connections with the United States. Are you a U.S. citizen? Does the website belong to a company that is incorporated in the United States? – bdb484 Apr 12 '22 at 13:04
  • 1
    @bdb484 I'm not a U.S. citizen, I do not live in U.S., but my websites, despite being hosted on a local Czech server, are targetted to international audience. I have link to my websites on numerous online profiles, on my YouTube channel, on my Twitch channel, etc. Including here on Stack Exchange. – Polda18 Apr 12 '22 at 13:14
  • And no, my websites are purely just my personal blog and portfolio, they're not affiliated with anything inside U.S. by any mean. It does talk about games I play, one of them is from a U.S. company, but it's just a fan site. – Polda18 Apr 12 '22 at 13:24
  • The FBI warning page is a product of the US Government. Those (which aren't militarily classified) are generally in the public domain. – Harper - Reinstate Monica Apr 13 '22 at 08:41
  • There is a very long way between "cease and desist letter" and "land you in jail", from what you describe "land you in jail" would be a massive overreach. If it was noticed and if it was deemed unauthorised use the most I would expect would be template letter saying "Do not use this seal on your website, you are not authorised". – David258 Apr 13 '22 at 11:34
  • @David258 If I would receive a cease and desist letter for pulling this, then I would of course remove the page from my websites (right after caching a Wayback Machine copy, to preserve it at least somehow). I'm not even sure if somebody has ever done something similar before, which is using a domain seizure template for a silly April Fools joke on their websites. – Polda18 Apr 13 '22 at 12:41
  • Is April Fool's day relevant to your question? I don't believe that jurisdictions magically loosen up on one scheduled and specific day of the year. – MonkeyZeus Apr 13 '22 at 15:21
  • Of course, impersonating a police officer, I believe, *is* a crime in the US. Joking about an FBI action on one's own website may not be considered impersonation, but this type of thing is certainly worth asking about on this site anyway. Law enforcement do have special status. (Of course, it makes a substantial difference about being or not being within US jurisdiction, notwithstanding treaties and such, but for cases where people actually are under US jurisdiction...) –  Apr 13 '22 at 21:42
  • 1
    Given that the page in question also shows the German BKA sign featuring the "Bundesadler" which is protected under German law and the BKA did sue for related usage before, it would be interesting to see an answer about the legal situation in Germany. (Even though that would trigger at most a fine and not jail time AFAICT.) Sadly I don't know enough about this to give such an answer though. – Marcel Krüger Apr 14 '22 at 03:23

1 Answers1

23

I can't comment on what the legal situation would be in your home country, but as a matter of U.S. law, the hypothetical scenario you've described is not illegal.

First, because you aren't a U.S. citizen and because you aren't operating in the United States, the U.S. government probably has no jurisdiction over you, your website, or your conduct.

Even if it did, the most relevant statute, 18 U.S. Code § 1017, would not apply. The statute prohibits the "fraudulent or wrongful" use of the FBI's seal. But "fraudulent" and "wrongful" generally refer only to conduct where one uses deception or other means to obtain money, property, etc. to which they have no lawful entitlement. United States v. Enmons, 410 U.S. 396, 399 (1973).

Because you aren't using the seal to obtain anyone's property through deception, this use would not fall within the statute's proscriptions.

Even if the government sought to prosecute you, you would have a valid First Amendment defense. The First Amendment protects the right to free speech, and it does not allow statements to be criminalized merely because they are false. United States v. Alvarez, 132 S. Ct. 2537 (2012).

This outcome should be unsurprising to most U.S. observers. I think most people would agree that the U.S. obviously cannot prosecute a Hollywood producer for making a movie dramatizing the FBI's efforts to shut down the Pirate Bay, even if it displayed the FBI's seizure message on a monitor in the course of the movie, and even if it showed the seal being used on a completely fictional website.

The hypothetical you're describing is not materially different. In both cases, the seal is being used to falsely create the impression -- for entertainment purposes -- that the FBI has shut down a website. Saying false things for entertainment purposes is not a crime in the United States.

bdb484
  • 58,968
  • 3
  • 129
  • 184
  • Thank you. Just as a matter to ensure this April Fools joke will be understood, I'll include the disclaimer as stated above. This is the answer I was looking for. – Polda18 Apr 12 '22 at 15:24
  • Including something like that would definitely help undercut any suggestion that this was criminal. – bdb484 Apr 13 '22 at 00:07
  • 1
    One thing to note: I suspect the use could easily become fraudulent if it were used to solicit donations with a suggestion/implication that they would be used for some sort of defense fund (against a takedown that never happened) or in a manner to manipulate value of stocks, cryptocurrency tokens, etc. – R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE Apr 13 '22 at 00:56
  • @R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE Well, what I intend it for is simply just an April Fools joke that will be visible on homepage for just one day, with a disclaimer that is not the real thing, and it will then be available in April Fools jokes archive where it clearly serves no apparent purpose after April 1st and is included just for historic reasons. I'm not making money of my websites. – Polda18 Apr 13 '22 at 05:12
  • The film production analogy does not always hold. For example, in Germany, symbols representing the nazi regime are prohibited, but film productions are (I think explicitly) exempt. – gerrit Apr 13 '22 at 07:44
  • @gerrit Actually, games are also exempt from like 2019, which is a huge milestone, what was essentially a burden for games with historic base. For example Wolfenstein franchise (New Order, Old Blood, New Colossus) had to be produced in two different versions. Every other country would be shipped with the standard version with swastika, but Germany edition was censored. That changed with Wolfenstein Young Blood, which was the first with an exemption of the law from games. – Polda18 Apr 13 '22 at 08:46
  • @Polda18: Indeed. I think you're okay for your specific case, but I wanted to bring up the concern for readers who might be applying these principles in different contexts. – R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE Apr 13 '22 at 14:11
  • 4
    When they click on the link to pay the fee, that's when you display "April Fool!" – Barmar Apr 13 '22 at 14:30
  • I thought “impersonating a police officer” was always illegal, even as a joke? If so, then doesn’t it follow that (to paraphrase) “impersonating an official police statement” is also illegal? - assuming that there’s no initial disclaimer or obviousness that it’s not real? – Dai Apr 14 '22 at 00:44
  • @Barmar I won't include a link to "pay a fee", that would be really illegal, even if it only displayed "April Fools". April Fools jokes should follow rules set by laws. – Polda18 Apr 14 '22 at 07:31
  • @Dai There will be a disclaimer on the page, but I do get your point. If it was purely the original undedited seizure page, then that would maybe be illegal. – Polda18 Apr 14 '22 at 07:34
  • 1
    If impersonating a police officer, even as a joke, was illegal, Peter Falk, Tom Selleck, and Clint Eastwood be sitting in prison. Luckily the First Amendment protects jokes and most other false statements. – bdb484 Apr 14 '22 at 09:01