Indymedia Server Seized By UK Police, Again

timbrown writes with word that "On 22 January 2009, Kent Police seized an Indymedia server hosted by Manchester-based colocation facility UK Grid and run by the alternative news platform Indymedia UK. The server was taken in relation to comments on an article regarding the convictions in the recent Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) trial. Seven activists were sentenced to a total of 50 years in prison." The complete story is worth reading; timbrown continues: "I'm posting this as a concerned UK administrator who hosts a number of sites. The message appears to be clear: the UK establishment does not want political content, legitimate or otherwise, hosted from these shores. The message has been noted, however free speech must be supported even where it may not be agreeable."

Comments

Re:so much for

[MichaelSmith]

Which just leaves the single point of failure. The domain name. Once the authorities yank that, the distributed server network behind it goes away...at least for a while.

You can tunnel to an IP address. You can also get domain names from different countries for your front end.

Police regarded it as a threat to the trial judge.

[Hozza]

I know everyone is going to jump up and down about the right to free speech, but that isn't really the topic here.

The police regarded the comment as an implicit threat to the trial judge, which would not come under "free speech" laws in many (most?) countries.

They seized a *mirror* of the main server (the main site is still up a running just fine), in order to try to trace the original poster, and requested that the comment was removed from the site, which it has been.

The main issue I see here is one of oversight, who's there to check that the police only look for forensics on the original poster, and don't start a fishing expedition on the seized server?

Re:Freedom of the press?

[netzhappen]

You have read that indymedia removed the personal data (as a part of their privacy policy) _BEFORE_ the police took their server? So there was no need to seizure. And they KNOW that no IPs are logged and that this was just a mirror with no usefull data on it. So yes, freedom of press was violated as the cops took a needed tool (server) and damaged the infrastructure of indymedia.

Re:Freedom of the press?

[bone_idol]

If you read the article you'd have seen that the personal details were removed by an Indymedia moderator as soon as they were aware of them.

Indymedia UK privacy policy does not condone publishing personal details

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/privacy.html#Personal_Information

Indymedias policy of not logging IP addresses is well known to the Police.

Its difficult to see what reason they could have for pulling this machine, other than low level harrasssment.

Re:Freedom of the press?

[Anonymous Coward]

Indymedia, in the UK or elsewhere, is not just a collection of private adresses. An open publishing platform, it is mostly used by grassroots movements, individuals and smaller NGOs, reporting about demonstrations, actions and protests from the perspective of those involved. It also contains all sorts of rants, sometimes political, sometimes not, sometimes clever, sometimes hard to understand. Most Indymedia collectives are trying to get posters to stick to reports about political practice. But having the open publishing ethos at the heart of the project, other types of posting are often left on the newswire. However, the posting of details about third parties is discouraged and, like in this case, removed.
Indymedia is not the type of journalism we know from the mass media. The content is produced by a wide range of people. Some are used to the framework of corporate journalism (which includes, in the best case, professional standards of quality journalism, but also the constraints of a commercial project). Others are DIY journalists, people who are learning by doing and creating their own standards. Because contributors to indymedia don't need to worry about whether a story will sell or not, they can cover issues that would otherwise go completely unnoticed. In this way, Indymedia fullfills an important function for a society, no?

ps sorry for posting as coward, don't usually post to slashdot.

Your freedom stops when you hit my nose

[afc_wimbledon]

From the details available, it appears this may relate to information that could be used to threaten the judge in the SHAC trial, the trial of some pretty unpleasant and violent people http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7837064.stm.

Re:Your freedom stops when you hit my nose

[h4rm0ny]

So if you're the police and you want to seize some organization's computers and / or logs, just post a death threat on their site. I'm not saying that's what happened in this instance, just pointing out a vulnerability. In the UK, it's been established that the police have had members go undercover in protest movements to encourage violence and act extreme in order to justify a crack down. There was a case late last year when a reputable reporter recognized a police officer she had talked to in amongst the protestors at an anti-war demonstration trying to incite people to breach police lines and physically harass officers. Taking such methods online is a natural step.

Re:Your freedom stops when you hit my nose

[commodore64_love]

>>>it appears this may relate to information that could be used to threaten the judge in the SHAC trial, the trial of some pretty unpleasant and violent people

This organization is ALSO unpleasant and violent, but the U.S. still allows its website to exist: http://www.kkk.bz/ http://www.kkk.com/ - "Is the election of Obama shocking to us? Not at all! ...The president elect now stands as a symbol to our people throughout this nation that change is indeed coming. What will it mean for those who are being disenfranchised from the very nation purchased by the blood of their forefathers? It could mean an awakening of our spirit and blood. Every time the television shows an image of Obama it will be a reminder that our people have lost power in this country. ...The betrayal will stare them in the face each time they watch the news and see little black children playing in the rose garden."

Disgusting.

But every person has the right to exercise their OWN mouth and offer-up their opinions, no matter how offensive. We should punish those individuals who commit violence, but the non-violent persons should remain free. "No man has a right to harm another. And that is all that the government should restrain him." - Founder of the Democratic Party, Thomas Jefferson

Re:Your freedom stops when you hit my nose

[xappax]

Maybe that's why UK Indymedia quickly deleted the personal information that was posted - before the police were even aware of it.

The reason the server was seized is because Indymedia refuses to surveil its contributors to the degree the cops would like. And apparently that makes any of their hardware fair game.

Re:Your freedom stops when you hit my nose

[h4rm0ny]

There was a case late last year when a reputable reporter recognized a police officer she had talked to in amongst the protestors at an anti-war demonstration trying to incite people to breach police lines and physically harass officers.

That's a very serious allegation. Could you post a reputable source?

The original article from the Daily Mail has now expired but you can find an account of the incident in numerous places if you search for it. The reporter was Yasmin Whittaker-Khan who writes for the Daily Mail, one of the UK's largest papers. The story was here and the incident took place on the 15th June '08 during protests against George Bush. The reporter recognised a particularly loud and agitating protestor who was trying to get people to charge the police lines, trying to get people chanting "kill the pigs" and in one instance showed a protestor how to decouple the police barricade and got him to help throw it at an officer. She had actually talked to him at a press function where he had been representing them on some subject (I forget what). She confronted him, he admitted who he was. The officer's name was "Chris Dreyfus." If you want to know how reputable this story is, a UK MP wrote to the police about this. The MP's letter is here and contains further details.

I have more anecdotal and second-hand evidence from people, but this is the only established source I can provide in the UK (there are plenty of incidents verified in other countries also). However, it's pretty clear from the above that this takes place and it is a very serious matter.

Re:Freedom of the press?

[serialdogma]

Judges aren't elected in England, they are appointed. Also activist judges don't really exist in the UK, if a judge makes a ruling that is incompatible with law, and gets overturned on appeal then the judge could find their job on the cutting board, and if they had a conflict of interest that they didn't declare they could be tried.

Re:Freedom of the press?

[professionalfurryele]

The ALF - Animal Liberation Front, a terrorist group that uses everything from arson to blackmail to murder nominally to end animal cruelty. Actually they are just a bunch of idiots who hate business people and scientists for their sucesses.

SHAC - Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, high ranking members of SHAC have ties to the ALF.

SPEAK - A derivative of SPEAC, Stop Primate Experimentation at Cambridge. Another front for the ALF dedicated to attacking the University of Oxford and preventing vital research.

PETA - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. A group whose leader has ties to the ALF and which has funnelled funds to known ALF members.

BUAV - British Union for the Abolition of Visection. An actual animal rights group. Engages in non-violent protest, often aids companies that want to ensure that their products are not the result of animal cruelty. A legitimate protest group

I happen to disagree with. The first four are all basically the same group, with PETA, SPEAK and SHAC acting as funding fronts for the ALF. The latter are by and large good people I disagree with.