Slashdot Mirror
Justice Dept. Asked For Broad Swath of IndyMedia's Visitor Records
DesScorp writes "In a case that tests whether online and independent journalism has the same protections as mainstream journalism, the Justice Department sent Indymedia a grand jury subpoena. It requires a list of all visitors on a day, and further, a gag order to Indymedia 'not to disclose the existence of this request.' CBS reports that 'Kristina Clair, a 34-year-old Linux administrator living in Philadelphia who provides free server space for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked to receive the Justice Department's subpoena,' and that 'The subpoena from US Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded "all IP traffic to and from www.indymedia.us" on June 25, 2008. It instructed Clair to "include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information," including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers' Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.' Clair is being defended by the Electronic Frontier Foundation."
I remember a Supreme Court case several years ago that dealt with the question of who is considered to be The Press. I think it involved acquiring Press credentials. The Court decided that a member of the Press is anyone who is acting in that capacity, whether full time or part time. It didn't matter if the person was employed by a large corporation, or was part of a middle school glee club.
Really? When was the last time you heard of a "liberal" judge or federal prosecutor trying to stomp on free speech?
BTW, calendar check..., Tim Morrison (the moron who started all this nonsense) was appointed to his federal post of United States Attorney under the Bush (43) administration. So you're right - a right-wing appointed tool acting they way he did... not surprising in the least. Well, OK, there was one surprise. The subpoena was so ham-handed that I rather expected to see that he'd been one of those Regent University losers, so many of whom found their way, as political favors, into positions way above their skill, knowledge and abilities. But no, Attorney Morrison actually has something on his resume, including an education at a real university. Go figure.
Posting anonymously, since I have insight into this stuff that should probably have a security clearance for (which I do not).
Major companies, internet providers, and telecommunications providers (cell networks, other wireless communications, etc) are being forced into implementing logging and retention of this data on huge scales. When I say forced, I mean under threat of pissing off the government. There are no laws saying these companies have to retain this data for years, and provide it to government agencies without warrants or subpoenas, but they're telling us to do it anyway.
These large companies are basically folding on the simple premise that they don't want to piss off the governments in the areas they operate. The US is especially good at forcing this. At least China is upfront with their monitoring - the US does all the same, but without the laws supporting them.
At current, there is the expectation that any internet provider will provide browsing logs for any subscriber they have. Without a warrant. On request. Heck, for the bigger companies, they want a web interface where they can query themselves.
Small providers get you part of the way around this, but their uplinks are becoming the targets. Large providers are fucked at this point. In my company, I'm watching them implement 15 petabyte storage solutions just to keep track of 12 months of http hits (compressed, of course).
People don't get this. This is -huge-. I never assume anything on the internet that I do is not being tracked, logged, and made available to multiple governments.
It actually says something much much louder... that they issue these requests ALL the time and they regularly get them answered.
This was fought because it went to a small, independent admin. How much do you want to bet that these requests go out to larger companies and get answered quickly and quietly without us ever hearing about it?
.
It's a long shot, but this might be the Obama administration's way of killing these kinds of subpoenas.
If BHO, the Attorney-General and the Secretary of Homeland Security decided to stop issuing these subpoenas, that would last at least 4 years and maybe eight, but that would be it. If Congress passed a law that forbade him from issuing these subpoenas pro se, he might abide by it, but the next guy might not, would be able to tie it up in the courts, and the courts might eventually let the thing pass.
However, if he sends out a subpoena to someone who isn't really doing anything wrong, who is likely to fight the case tooth and nail, and if the admin makes the demands of the subpoena so egregious that no court in their right mind would find it acceptible, he might be able to extract a ruling from the supreme court that says these subpoenas are illegal, or at least get good language for a test on their reasonableness. It's very sneaky but for a lawyerly mind it has a certain elegance. The upshot is that no president can ever again send out these kinds of subpoena, by order of the supreme court, and all the while the administration looks like a zealous investigator.
It's a long shot and a conspiracy theory, though.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Did Fox Noise cover this incident? Check their search engine. The answer is no (although they did cover a similar issue with Indymedia in 2004). Why not? Maybe, just maybe, no one except /. readers and 1st Amendment lawyer types thought it was a very interesting story. You'll notice that the link in the story is to a blog that covers 1st Amendment issues on a CBS News site, an outfit that is not exactly a darling of the right. Also, RTFA! EFF tried to discuss the issue of the gag order in a letter filed at the end of May. Given it has been 5 months with no response from DOJ, maybe Indymedia and EFF are only just now considering it safe and legal to release the story.
Not everything is a left-wing media conspiracy except to reality-challenged bozos like yourself who can't be bothered to think beyond whatever sound bite you were handed this morning.
FreeSpeech.org
While capital might be going a bit far, it should certainly be a felony in my mind to commit such obvious fraud. Fraud how? Fraud by standing on one's obvious power base and claiming authority one does not in fact have. The Justice Department ought to be held to a high standard here.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
One question that I haven't seen asked yet is why June 25, 2008? A scan of indymedia's articles didn't turn up anything earth shattering on that day or the day before. Thoughts?
there are of course a million dimensions of ideology. there's gun toting right wingers... who grow pot on their rural farms. there's gay people... who are mostly right wing in thinking (the log cabin republicans). there's very religious people... who are utterly socialist in their thinking about taking care of the community, by the community. etc., etc., etc, ad nauseum. for every issue, there is a dimension of opinions. and there's a million issues. and you could mix up make up the most seemingly contradictory impossible ideology of various opinions on various issues, and you'll probably find at least someone out there who believes that with a serious straight face
but there's not a million dimensions THAT MATTER. there's only one that matters
there is one dimension which hangs over all ideological dimensions, and is, in effect, the master dimension. we don't talk about left and right wing because we are simpletons and reductionists, we talk about left and right wing because this is an entirely real and completely dominant ideological pivot, a genuinely valuable metric to use when debating politics:
rate of change
those on the far left want change too rapidly. faster than society can adapt to and absorb. resulting in societal overheating, friction, and eventual societal break down and anarchy. those on the far right don't want change at all, or even backwards movement. which results in stasis, stultification, and impoverishment due to feeble backwardness and ignorance
so what is the most valid rate of change? society determines that, at least in a democracy, with competing parties constantly seeking out the most support from the most people by seeking the most moderate rate of change in the center possible, while straddling and waffling to keep their radical fringes reasonably happy as well. democracy is self-correcting and self-seeking on the sweet spot of rate of change for its population. you see that in the current healthcare debate
democracy works, it really does. it doesn't work from the perspective of "this is my ideology and i want everyone to agree with me", which is the usual retarded criticism of democracy from fringe idiots
but democracy DOES work from the point of view of: "this is the bell curve of ideologies out there. find me the sweet spot and make that the value system of the government in charge"
and when a government most accurately reflects the will of the people, you have met really the only metric possible for determining validity of a government. stability, legitimacy: it enables peace, tranquility, education, progress, economic growth, and everything else you value in good governance and a happy stable rich and productive society
but of course, loud, ignorant ideologues from the fringe will never see the value in such weird concepts. social stability? pffft. to them, the government is evil, corrupt, fascist, communist, corporatocracy, idiocracy, etc... zzz
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
And, just out of curiosity, what exactly *are* the right's basic right issues the left is not supporting.
Freedom of Speech? Supported by the ACLU.
Separation of Church and State? ACLU
Not being searched without probable cause? ACLU
Not being arrested without evidence? ACLU
Not allow evidence taken under false pretenses? ACLU
Not allow arrest to be maintained without trial? ACLU
Not being beaten until you confess after arrested? ACLU
The great basic right supported by the right?
The right to make a grand, impressive and ultimately doomed armed stand against an encroaching military dictatorship having done absolutely nothing to stop arrests, torture, planting evidence, unfair trials, and religious theocracy . . . after the sudden realization the dictatorial powers they supported for years it might actually apply to them and its too late to stop it.
Yeah. I'm suitably impressed.
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media