http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/08/judge-says-domain-name-loss-is-not-a-substantial-hardship.ars
lol wut. I would think they would be pretty cheesed if someone hacked uscourts.gov and replaced it with a page saying "domain name loss is not a substantial hardship" and their sole presence isn't on the net. Of course, the argument then comes "if it's not a substantial hardship and you don't need it for evidence, why, pray tell, did you seize it in the first place?"
tl;dr version: Judge argues it would be reasonable to seize the amazon.com name since amazon.ca and amazon.co.uk and other related domains would still be up!
--
assert(!hotterThan(foo, "Hot Nymphomaniacal Lesbian Mind-Controlling Dominatrix Fairy Doctors with glasses"))