Indymedia Seizures Initiated In Europe

daveschroeder writes "According to this Indymedia.org article and AFP report, the request to seize Indymedia servers hosted by a U.S. company in the UK (covered in this previous slashdot story) originated from government agencies in Italy and Switzerland, not the United States. Because Indymedia's hosting company, Rackspace.com, is a U.S. company, the FBI coordinated the request and accompanied UK Metropolitan Police on the seizure under the auspices of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT), an international legal treaty, but, according to an FBI spokesman, 'It is not an FBI operation. Through [MLAT], the subpoena was on behalf of a third country.'" Read on below for more.

daveschroeder continues: "Rackspace's statement reads, 'In the present matter regarding Indymedia, Rackspace Managed Hosting, a U.S. based company with offices in London, is acting in compliance with a court order pursuant to a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT), which establishes procedures for countries to assist each other in investigations such as international terrorism, kidnapping and money laundering. Rackspace responded to a Commissioner's subpoena, duly issued under Title 28, United States Code, Section 1782 in an investigation that did not arise in the United States. Rackspace is acting as a good corporate citizen and is cooperating with international law enforcement authorities. The court prohibits Rackspace from commenting further on this matter.'"

Comments

Re:What's The Censorship Issue?

[DankNinja]

wow..I like how when someone criticizes a site that happens to be left-wing, they get modded down. It seems that some moderators haven't figured out that there is no real difference between being "left-wing" or "right-wing". Both sides use the logic that the other side is automatically wrong, regardless of the situation. The MoveOn/Michael Moore zealots are no different than the Swift Boat/anti-Kerry zealots.

Re:Just like Echelon . . .

[killjoe]

If it doesn't care then it should pull out.

The fact that it hasn't pulled out indicates that it DOES care.

Personally I think the UN should be dismantled. It's main charter was t stop war and it has failed miserably in that. The fact that it can no longer stop strong countries from invading and occupying weak ones just brings the ineptitude of the UN into sharp focus.

Whoever has the guns rule. The UN with worthless if it can't counteract might of nations with lots of guns.