Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Fights US Court For WikiLeaks Details

An anonymous reader writes "Micro-blogging site Twitter is opposing an order from a US court to reveal the account details of supporters of WikiLeaks. Twitter has called on Facebook and Google to reveal whether they also received similar court orders. As part of the US government's investigation into WikiLeaks, a court ordered Twitter, in mid-December, to give details of accounts owned by supporters of the whistle-blower site. Twitter has protested against the subpoena and informed the individuals whose account information has been requested, while raising the possibility that other social networking players have received similar orders."

14 of 268 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Another salvo in the war by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only country at war over the cables will be the USA — and it will not over the leaked cables, but over how they have dealt with the whole matter. The US government are starting to embarrass themselves in front of an international crowd.

  2. "Opposing"? Where does it say that? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

    TFA says nothing about how Twitter is supposedly "opposing" the court order, other than "protesting" and asking for permission from the court to notify the affected parties.

    I see nothing in there to indicate that Twitter is forming any kind of legal opposition to the order. I, for one, would be happy to see that they had. Government overreach should be resisted every time.

    Yes, I believe this is "overreach", considering that nobody in the list except Bradley Manning has been accused of any crimes, and Manning himself hasn't even been charged.

  3. Re:Ok, some clarification. by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know we are all quick to jump to the conclusion that 'oh noez teh gubment wants internet ppls infos'

    Well, they do, but I see what you're trying to say. However, you also just said, emphasis mine,

    They aren't immediately just going after random Joe for saying "I like what those guys do".

    Aren't immediately going after them? So you do know, then. The effect is to make the public at large believe that their info may be one day be subpoena'd for posting pro-Wikileaks(or any other kind of "subversive" speech) words online. There's nothing the feds can find on Twitter that they don't already know about those key players.

    Also, for the first time in my life, I think I'm kinda respecting Twitter.

  4. Re:Ok, some clarification. by rilister · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, that's great. It's just the 'bad people' that they're after: including an Icelandic MP. Considering this whole 'grand jury' process is going on in secret, why should we be confident that there's a due process behind deciding whose IP addresses are being fished out of Twitter?

    I mean, call me an ass when I'm proved wrong, but the whole point of Wikileaks is that you have a drop-box to leak documents, but it's clean hands from the other side. They don't 'conspire,' they just receive the stuff and publish it. It's pretty open what they do and how. They're just desperate to pin a crime to pin a crime on Julian and his buddies, because that Espionage Act law is looking like weak beer.

    --
    'This writing business. Pencils and what-not. Over-rated if you ask me. Silly stuff. Nothing in it' - Eeyore
  5. Didn't the US start off as the good guys? by Exclamation+mark! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Man what is happening over there in the US? Didn't you guys start off as the good guys? When did it all start to go so horribly wrong?

    --
    I'm a wanker.... and loving it!
    1. Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Man what is happening over there in the US? Didn't you guys start off as the good guys? When did it all start to go so horribly wrong?

      When we found out someone already lived here.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? by sincewhen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...and that's when it started to go horribly wrong - when you started to think you were better than others.

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
  6. No, this IS the war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, it IS the war. It just isn't about militaries fighting it out on a battlefield; it is about governments and free citizens fighting over the rights of man.

    1. Re:No, this IS the war by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it IS the war. It just isn't about militaries fighting it out on a battlefield; it is about governments and free citizens fighting over the rights of man.

      And while the "free citizens" are fighting the scarecrow, their corporate masters are tightening their fist one squeeze at the time.

      The true enemy sits in the boardroom; the lackey in the White House is simply not important.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  7. Twitter by Baseclass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have new found respect for Twitter.

    --
    ^^vv<><>BA
  8. Re:So... by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How else are you supposed to silence dissenting voices, if you can't identify them?

  9. Re:So... by Seumas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, they certainly must be going after the NYT and the WSJ, eh?

  10. Re:Another salvo in the war by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The US government are starting to embarrass themselves in front of an international crowd.

    Starting?

    The US government has been disgracing itself for decades.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  11. Re:Another salvo in the war by hawguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hey cold_fjord,

    Are you white? Born and raised in the USA? Is there no chance whatsoever that you're involved with this:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/09/giffords-shooting-political-violence-polarised

    Jared Loughner, the suspect in Saturday's shooting spree in Arizona, was not working alone. True, the rampage apparently emerged from his confused, unstable and troubled mind.

    Officials think he was not working alone - who knows, you could be that missing conspirator. Maybe just in case, you should be jailed and tortured until you admit to it. And even though they may find that he *was* working alone, better safe than sorry, right?

    I mean, why not? It's not like you're being a citizen should afford you any special rights. It's for the safety of our children, after all.