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.'"
Nicholas Merrill for President... of Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc!!!!
Who's with me?
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
We don't have an "empire" and free speech has always been something that can be curtailed for an ongoing criminal investigation. National Security really doesn't have anything to do with it. When I was in the ISP business I learned that it's illegal in New York State to tell one of your customers that he's the subject of a electronic surveillance warrant. Are you going to claim that's an infringement on free speech?
This law isn't troubling because the ISP owner can't tell the public about the NSL. It's troubling because he can't even tell his own lawyer. If the law is found to be unconstitutional that will be the reason why.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Ah, I wish I still had mod points.
It reminds me of a story about a Canadian who refused to cooperate with the FBI and had the FBI officer argue with him until he was blue in the face that the man had to cooperate with them and it was illegal to do otherwise.
To be fair though the FBI can just put a request through proper channels and the RCMP can go get whatever they needed. It is illegal to be uncooperative with the RCMP in Canada. Its funny how often the FBI thinks they can just do whatever they want and bypass all of the regs though.
Unfortunately, there's no way to know with these "gag orders" in place. Even if some piece of information is needed for national security reasons, it should be subject to speedy judicial review after the fact -- otherwise, there is no mechanism to identify abuse.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/03/10/LIBRARIES.TMP
"In Santa Cruz, where library officials are trying to stir up patrons about the Patriot Act, chief librarian Anne Turner has found a more subtle way to sidestep the gag order, if she ever faces one.
"At each board meeting I tell them we have not been served by any (search warrants)," she said. "In any months that I don't tell them that, they'll know."
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
So your buddy is allowed to talk about them with people outside of the bureau (presuming you don't work for them too), but those that receive them aren't?
Yes, we were discussing policy. He can talk about policy all day long but by no means is he allowed to talk to me about specific cases.
free speech has always been something that can be curtailed for an ongoing criminal investigation.
Yes, but there was always judicial oversight -- if a law enforcement agency wanted your records, they had to go to a judge and have a warrant issued. These letters need no warrant, despite the fact that the Constitution says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
TFA is, as I said, quite troubling. The fourth amendment has lost all meaning, as well as the first, which reads "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech".
When I was in the ISP business I learned that it's illegal in New York State to tell one of your customers that he's the subject of a electronic surveillance warrant. Are you going to claim that's an infringement on free speech?
No, because that looks like a judge has to issue a warrant. No judge's warrant is required for the FBI. From TFA:With an NSL, the FBI does not need to seek a court order to obtain such records, nor does it need to prove just cause. An FBI field agent simply needs to draft an NSL stating the information being sought is "relevant" to a national security investigation...
The gag orders raise the possibility for extensive abuse of NSLs, under the cover of secrecy. Indeed, in 2007, a Justice Department Inspector General audit found that the FBI, which issued almost 200,000 NSLs between 2003 and 2006, had abused its authority and misused NSLs.
Free Martian Whores!
Personally, I haven't really believed there is freedom of speech in the United States ever since I heard about free speech zones.
I first heard about free speech zones in an article about how protesters against G.W. Bush were directed to free speech zones that were far enough away from where Bush would be passing that he, his supporters, and other onlookers would not be able to hear them. Apparently, free speech zones predate G.W. Bush's government, though.
I'm not sure how useful free speech is if you can only exercise it where nobody who doesn't already agree with you will hear it.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Read the article:
"In Merrill's case, although the letter's gag order "was totally clear that they were saying that I couldn't speak to a lawyer" about it, he immediately contacted his personal attorney, and together they went to the ACLU in New York, which agreed to represent him. "My gut feeling is I'm an American," Merrill said, in an interview with Threat Level on Tuesday. "I always have a right to an attorney. There's no such thing as you can't talk to your attorney."
This guy wasn't allowed to defend himself with a professional lawyer.
Clearly that is NULL according to both US and NY Constitutions.
And Supreme Court ruling (see the movie Gideon's Trumpet).
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Those obstruction of justice laws also violate the First Amendment. Any judge that rules otherwise is failing in their duty to uphold the Constitution.
The 2nd amendment also codifies an absolute, personal, right of Americans to own any arms (but not munitions).
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Here's what you do when you get one of these letters:
1) Deny that you have any of the records they are looking for.
2) Make sure that data (which you do have) is seriously protected.
3) They have no way to get the data from you now without either:
a. arresting you for not complying - in which case their secrecy is blown, so they won't do that
b. getting a court ordered warrant - in which case their secrecy is blown, so they won't do that
c. Getting all sneaky and stealing the data - see #2
d. Totally screwing you over and destroying your life - in which case their secrecy is blown because once your life is destroyed, you have nothing to lose by revealing the letter, so they won't do that
4) Dance
you CANNOT undo that. sorry. no letter can undo that.
this quote was GOLD!
"My gut feeling is I'm an American," Merrill said, in an interview with Threat Level on Tuesday. "I always have a right to an attorney. There's no such thing as you can't talk to your attorney."
if there's a fund for this guy, I'd be happy to donate some cash to him. he seems like a GOOD GUY!
I honestly don't know what I'd do if I got one of these illegal letters (yes, I consider this illegal to DENY me my right to an attorney. YOU, mr. government, have all you want; I deserve at least ONE.
this is HUGE. people have created revolutions on less than this!
"sorry, but we have the right to lock you up and fuck you over and you can't even defend yourself".
BULLSHIT!
just push enough people and eventually one will 'flip out' and make the news. maybe then it will get some deserved attention.
this 'law' is SO WRONG on so many levels.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Heck, these guys make me nostalgic for Nixon.
Nixon appointed Daniel Patrick Moynihan as his secretary of Health and Human Services, and he let Moynihan promote some very progressive policies, like the guaranteed annual income, and a health policy that was better than Obama's.
Ralph Nader said that on domestic policy, Nixon was better than the Clinton Administration.
you mean a show trial? How about "Special Administrative Measures" where you just disappear, never to be heard from again (except for some faint screaming from a Pakistani prison!
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
On second thought: the first amendment infringement seems to be a second order effect. In other words, it's not that NSLs in and of themselves infringe on the first amendment. But what they are designed to do is to make it impossible to even have a public discussion about NSLs.
With wiretaps, you can go to historical cases where the court records have been unsealed and discuss their appropriateness in public. I believe this holds true even for grand juries. In other words, it is possible to have a public discussion about whether a specific wiretap or grand jury development was appropriate at some later point in time. With NSLs, that's impossible, if you believe what they say. Public discourse about NSLs is basically impossible at that point, unless you disobey the instructions in them and the laws associated with them. And that's a first amendment issue.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
A lot of reporters have stood their ground on sources. An even larger number have sold out to the authorities and worked sub rosa for them, spreading disinfo or gathering intel, etc. It's a well mixed bag. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/ARCHIVE/ciamedia.html
Thought experiment: what if the Government removes its monopoly on force, either in the name of deregulation or because the government wants to outsource that part of its work?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
At our library conference, the legal folks said that removing the "we have not been served with a NSL" sign would count as a violation of the gag order.
>A fine is different from 5 years in jail when you have a family to support.
My mom and all her friends did that in Poland in the early 1980's. She was eventually kidnapped from in front of our house, interrogated, beaten black and blue and sent to a special prison in Goldap Poland http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=Goldap+Poland+prison&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Actually my aunt, my moms sister who was also arrested around the same time got the worst of the beatings with full fists of heir missing from her head.
My mom also took me to this riot http://www.lubin82.pl/index_eng.html
She did what she had to do to stop tyranny and oppression.
Eventually the gov realized it would be much easier to just let all political activists emigrate where ever they wanted to. We came to Canada while her other friends ended up in the places like the USA and South Africa.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/canary.txt
rsync.net has been doing that for quite a while now.
Sounds like "the local government permitted it as part of a quid-pro-quo" would be even closer.
Unless you're referring to South Korea, in which case they could hardly get what they want from the US _without_ a military base.
RSync.net, the online backup company, has been using a "warrant canary" for many years now:
Every week they update a special page with a PGP-signed dated article stating something like this:
http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/canary.txt
The current message is here:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
2010-08-09
No warrants have ever been served to rsync.net, or rsync.net principals or employees.
No searches or seizures of any kind have ever been performed on rsync.net assets,
including:
ALL San Diego locations
ALL Denver locations
ALL Zurich locations
ALL Hong Kong locations
(from www.NewYorkTimes.com)
In Crackdown on Energy Use, China to Shut 2,000 Factories
By closing some steel mills, cement works and other energy-intensive factories, the government said it hoped to improve energy efficiency.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFMYFymBzwoLX1vgGwRAsgCAJ9HU6xDNuJot7PlS39/zGAfGEed+gCffWrJ
ltsbJAqoiTwyWbKFuP+UOt8=
=reux
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Terje
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"