Slashdot Mirror


ISP Owner Who Fought FBI Spying Freed From Gag Order

Tootech writes "So you wonder what happens when an ISP recieves a a so-called 'national security letter' from the FBI? Well, read this about an ISP owner's fight to not have to turn over everything and the sink to the FBI: 'The owner of an internet service provider who mounted a high-profile court challenge to a secret FBI records demand has finally been partially released from a 6-year-old gag order that forced him to keep his role in the case a secret from even his closest friends and family. He can now identify himself and discuss the case, although he still can't reveal what information the FBI sought. Nicholas Merrill, 37, was president of New York-based Calyx Internet Access when he received a so-called "national security letter" from the FBI in February 2004 demanding records of one of his customers and filed a lawsuit to challenge it.'"

9 of 404 comments (clear)

  1. Troubling by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Informative

    Despite the fact that the FBI later dropped its demand for the records, Merrill was prohibited from telling his fiancée, friends or family members that he had received the letter or that he was embroiled in a lawsuit challenging its legitimacy. He occasionally showed up for court hearings about the case, but sat silently in the audience with other court observers. In 2007, he was prevented from publicly accepting an award for his courage from the American Civil Liberties Union, because he was not allowed to identify himself as the plaintiff in the case.

    So much for the first amendment. I'd have posted it all to slashdot, written letters to editors, harrassed my congresscritters, and gone to jail.

    Free country, my ass. You no longer have freedom of speech.

    1. Re:Troubling by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Informative

      And yes, those acts were repealed, but it just goes to show that the 1st Amendment has taken a backseat to government interest since pretty much the beginning.

    2. Re:Troubling by spun · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, we do have an Empire. We have colonies and military bases all over the world. We have intervened in dozens of country's internal politics. We have waged wars of aggression and toppled democratically elected leaders like Salvador Allende.

      A good place to start is the wiki article on American Imperialism, which is obviously horribly slanted if you think no such article should exist because no such thing exists, but you will find a lot of people all over the world strongly believe that not only does American imperialism exist, it has killed someone they know. Even if you don't think any such thing exists, it might be enlightening to you to research just what it is that all these people are calling 'American Imperialism."

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    3. Re:Troubling by spun · · Score: 4, Informative

      The bases are not all there at the behest of current local governments, we have ongoing treaties dating back to WWII that they can not break without serious repercussions. As for colonies, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Marianna Islands, the US virgin Islands, American Samoa, are all official colonies, but I consider Iraq to be a colony, too, in that we have extracted billions of dollars in natural resources that remain unaccounted for.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    4. Re:Troubling by thoromyr · · Score: 3, Informative

      I know of at least one US military base that is officially there "at the behest of the local government". The local government has different ideas, depending on which official you ask.

      The truthful answer is a bit more complicated, going along the lines of: they don't want us to have a military base in their country, but they *do* want something else and we used that as leverage to force the military base on them.

      Saying that base is there "at the behest of the local government" is plain inaccurate. Saying that the local government permitted it under duress would be closer.

    5. Re:Troubling by The+Spoonman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, that of course excludes Coca-Cola who assassinated union leaders in Columbia, or Chevron who hired a private militia in Nigeria to fire on protesters outside their plant or DeBeers who fund private armies to protect their diamond monopolies, or...yeah, who am I kidding, facts never change the mind of a zealot...

      --
      Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
      http://www.workorspoon.com
    6. Re:Troubling by tqk · · Score: 3, Informative

      If the President of GM wants you in prison, you'll go to prison.

      Citation needed.

      Would you accept a parallel example:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit

      Not that I consider GM equiv. to UF (I like Chevy's), but the potential's always there.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    7. Re:Troubling by pugugly · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ah - Prop 8 is proof that, having voted to extend certain rights equally among all citizens and legal residents of the United States, we don't get to vote that we only meant that for people we liked.

      That being, y'know, the whole reason for the 14th amendment and all. Which our duly appointed representatives made part of the supreme law of the land.

      And Glenn Beck now wants to repeal.

      Pug

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
  2. Yeah. by TrisexualPuppy · · Score: 5, Informative

    An old buddy of mine works at the FBI. He says that these demanding letters come in all shapes and forms, are frequently quite illegitimate, and are becoming more and more widely spread.

    Basically, the FBI is doing what the MAFIAA do--they know that they're the big boys with power and money and will go against you whether you're right or wrong because nearly no one will fight.