Slashdot Mirror
Could Slashdot (Or Other Private Entity) Sue a Spy Agency Like GCHQ Or NSA?
Nerval's Lobster writes "When the GCHQ agency (Britain's equivalent of the National Security Agency) reportedly decided to infiltrate the IT network of Belgian telecommunications firm Belgacom, it relied on a sophisticated version of a man-in-the-middle attack, in which it directed its targets' computers to fake, malware-riddled versions of Slashdot and LinkedIn. If the attack could be proven without a doubt, would the GCHQ—or any similar spy agency engaging in the same sort of behavior—be liable for violating trademarks or copyrights, since a key part of its attack would necessitate the appropriation of intellectual property such as logos and content? We asked someone from the Electronic Frontier Foundation about that, and received a somewhat dispiriting answer. "From a trademark perspective, if a company uses another company's marks/logos to deceive, there may be a trademark claim," said Corynne McSherry, the EFF's Intellectual Property Director. "But it's complicated a bit by two problems: (1) the fact that while there may be confusion, it's not necessarily related to the actual purchase of any goods and services; and (2) multiple TM laws are in play here—for example UK trademark law may have different exceptions and limitations." McSherry also addressed other issues, including governments' doctrine of sovereign immunity."
And magically drugs appear inside your house plus pictures of you fondling kids.
Laws only apply to little people. Go back to shoveling dirt you peasants, and leave your governmental overlords in peace.
If you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about
Betteridge's law wins again!
The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
I really think you will get a better answer from your attorney than you will get from Slashdot. But for the sake of discussion -- why is a trademark claim the first thing that comes to mind? To my non-lawyer mind, impersonating someone's business sounds like fraud, which I believe is actionable in civil court.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
I hate to say it, but APK was right. I'm sorry I called you deranged kook. I hope the public indecency charges get dropped, although it was your own damn fault. Be more discreet, dude!
Isn't it just illegal for an organisation to hack another and serve malware to its customers?
Why do we need to look at the technicalities of trademarks to make this behaviour illegal?
Sure, they could try to sue and there are lots of lawyers that would gladly take the money. Err, I mean case.
But, no. On top of all sorts of protections that specifically protect governments and their agencies. there is also the matter of secrecy for purposes of "national security". This blanket will be the final line of defense against any suit the makes it through the other defenses. When left with no other option, the government will simply say; 'it's a matter of national security(national secrets act) and it's not open for discussion at all. In fact, simply discussing it makes you a felon subject to prosecution and imprisonment or even death!'.
So, yes, you can sue. But you WILL lose. You CANNOT win.
Can the courts (especially the supreme court) be trusted to do the right thing?
RIAA + Vs NSA
Let the battle commence!
You can bring suit against anyone you want for anything you want.
But you'd never win.
Any progress you made in court would immediately be crushed under a shroud of "National Security".
You'd have to prove that not only was your traffic modified by a third party, but that third party was the GCHQ/NSA/etc and not a rogue ISP, or bug in the web server.
Good luck with that.
Duh,
You can sue anyone. Anyone can sue in the western world. The real question is can /. win a lawsuit?
.. But it would go nowhere. Some suit would show up and speak the magic words "state secrets" and the case would go away.
In the US, you need to show that you have been harmed - by having your trademarks infringed, or whatever. Whether you have been harmed by the GHCQ/NSA is secret and may not be revealed. If you or someone else happens to find out about it, you may not reveal it. So you are out of luck and the government is outside the reach of the law.
Hmmm... "Good luck with that" is the first answer that comes to mind.
On the other hand, one potential legal solution who go something like this:
- Get Belgacom on your side ; /. site by GCHQ ;
- Find the person(s) at Belgacom who have been infected through the fake
- Sue GCHQ and the UK government in Belgian and UK courts - yes, I think there are some jurisdictions that will hear cases even if their protagonists are out-of-country and Belgium may be one (some Rwanda genocide cases were tried in Belgium if I remember correctly) ;
- Get the case thrown out of court repeatedly all the way to the local equivalent of the Supreme Court ;
- Appeal all the way to the European Court of Human Rights (which is, according to the EU Charter, one step above local Supreme Court);
- Profit! Well, only if the European Court of Human Rights decide that, yes, there is a clear violation of due process and invasion of privacy, etc... Which, in that particular case, seems pretty much open-and-shut at this point.
In other words: this is definitely a case the European EFF should take on immediately, on behalf of /. and the person (and corporations! Belgacom was, after all, the subjectaffected - it will take years and stupendous amounts of money, but, heck that's why Kickstarter is for (I would send money immediately to such a project!).
Try suing in different jurisdictions at the same time - the French governement - in that particular case, is begging for someone to come and kick its butt, Germany also sounds like a prime candidate, as well as some of the Scandinavian countries.
The interesting side of this case is that it could result in a binding ECHR court decision that would force all European governements - not just the UK - to rein in and place GCHQ and others (DGSE anyone?). It would probably take years and a lot more money and a lot more suing to make them all apply this ruliong in their respective jurisdictions, but it would be money well spent (IMHO).
Please don't quote me on this - IANAL even though I play one on /. ;-)
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
If you have the means, then you should act out of principle. Anything else and you'll hate yourself for it and lose credibility with your readers.
It's a bit hard to get your readers to believe in your causes, if you don't believe in them enough to do anything about them.
In the United States, anybody can sue anybody else for anything, regardless of merit, and have a reasonable chance of winning. It only takes time and money.
... it could be accomplished by suing, say the GCHQ (for at least Trademark infringement, if nothing else) in not the UK, but another country. This could be accomplished if one could show that those in another country accessed Slashdot and received the honey trap instead. For this purpose, it is even possible that the Channel Islands, or the Isle of Man would suffice (as these are technically not within the UK, but instead Crown Dependencies). Instead, another country (such as Iceland or the Faroe Islands) that would likely to have traffic routed via the UK could be used.
This would allow for one to sidestep the issue of sovereign immunity. However, in order to collect on the judgement, it would be necessary to determine that the UK Government owned assets within that country. However, it is my recollection that the UK Government does have a number of foreign assets.
For the very simply fact that the federal government is not the sovereign of the US. The federal government derives its power from the Constitution which is a social contract between the people of the US. Therefore it is the people which are sovereign; and we throw them in jail all the time.
However, Google, M$, Yahoo they all have the resources to sue a government agency.
"In the United States, the federal government has sovereign immunity and may not be sued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit. The United States has waived sovereign immunity to a limited extent, mainly through the Federal Tort Claims Act, which waives the immunity if a tortious act of a federal employee causes damage, and the Tucker Act, which waives the immunity over claims arising out of contracts to which the federal government is a party."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity#United_States)\
Did you REALLY think there would be another answer?
-Styopa
Its hard to use the law against those who enforce the law, if they say that they cannot legally know about themselves breaking the law.
Using their name and their logos to present their own website is definitely trademark infringement and fraud. It's the definition of it. Giving people virus's is illegal cracking. Domestic surveillance breaks the fourth amendment. Assassinating American citizens with drone strikes and without a trial is murder.
Good luck getting law enforcement to arrest themselves, when they are required by law not to learn anything about the case.
If you have money give it a go, but know you are taking a stand, not that you will win.
The government has a duty to respect the privacy of it's citizens, and you can can certainly sue the government under the human rights act to uphold that law (and if need be, take the case to the european court of human rights, and if they rule against the government they can, through treaty, fine the member state.) Actions with respect to the security of the state are traditionally exempt from such protections, and that could be used as a defence by the government, but to do so they'd have to justify their actions and isn't that the point here?
(I'm not a lawyer, but I have glanced at first year UK/European law textbooks from time to time)
http://scherbius2014.de
+ disconnected from telecom network like ENIGMA
+ Blowfish
+ can't be attacked by quantum computer because only symmetric ciphers used
+ can be used with any means of telecomunication from carrier pigeon to shortwave radio
- no english translation yet
has anyone heard from APK lately?
Just sayin'...
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Off the top of my head, instead of intellectual property, tortious interference with business relationships and activity. They are reducing trust in the Slashdot brand and its activities online. See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
See, they have secret laws which say what they're doing is legal.
The government would essentially have to consent to being sued, which they won't.
As long as the position of the government is "what we do is legal, and even where we might skirt around the law, it's still legal. And we don't care about the rights of citizens of other countries." -- they can do anything they like and call it legal.
I figure your lawsuit would last about 20 minutes before it got tossed out, or the government basically said "we don't care, we're not showing up, too bad". Short of some pretty heavy diplomatic pressure (still likely to do nothing), my guess is you have absolutely zero recourse.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
A better choice might be to sue those well known private companies that helped the agencies do this, the enablers so to speak. Make it annoying enough and these companies may think twice about co-operating so freely next time.
but you won't win. That whole "If the attack could be proven without a doubt" assumption doesn't exist. At least in the USA, they'll just claim all evidence falls under the state secrets privilege, and the case will be immediately thrown out.
I think it is obvious to all following the Snowden revelations that these spy agencies do not play by the law, anyones law - as can be seen with all the data sharing agreements to circumvent their respective nations laws. Any small group of individuals causing the spy agencies grief will have their life investigated inside out exactly like what happened to the engineers in this Belgacom case. Small step from there to "neutralize" or coerce the threat though many different means. The only way that these agencies will be reined in and subjected to national laws is if there is a massive public outrage forcing a lot of politicians to put a leash on the rabid attack dog (without getting bitten themselves for trying to do it). So far none of that looks to be happening or that it even will happen... police states here we come.
Suing an entity that gets the entirety of it's money from the people.
Where do you think they'll get the money from to pay a loss?
"including governments' doctrine of sovereign immunity."
Just sue the contractors they doubtless used. Keep suing contractors until the governments pool of patsy's and thugs dries up and they are forced to get their own hands dirty. At least it will make them work for their police state.
Anymous Cowards.
Presumably the fake version of the site had ads on it. Were you denied revenue by their counterfeiting, or were you not? You probably need to have a captured page at the time of the counterfeiting, to check ad tags and see exactly who financially benefitted.
shit smells fucking weird
Lily Tomlin Said: "We don't care, we don't have to...we're the phone company."
Similarly: "We don't care. We don't have to... we're the GCHQ."
This is due to their complicity with the NSA so it's hard to argue that they should be compensated for losses unless they had complete assurance that "no one would find out." In which case, the NSA failed to live up to their end of the bargain.
I'd like to say "I told you so!" to all those people out there who responded with doubt that the NSA's activities will undermine the value of US products and services, but it's out there now. Cisco is down 10% and falling.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
... means never having to say you're sorry. Well, at least in theory. When I saw the headline my first reaction was that this would be a classic example of what sovereign immunity was meant to cover. As in many other things the remedy for this kind of conduct won't be found in the law, but in commerce and politics. You may not be able to get a court to direct a government agency to do the right thing, but pressure applied from the right places within the government itself (e.g. from the legislature against the executive) or the economy (anything from consumer boycotts to trade negotiations) is often the best (and only) answer.
In 2006, the Center for Constitutional Rights sued the federal government asking a federal court for an injunction to stop warrantless wiretapping and naming George W. Bush, the head of the NSA and the heads of other intelligence agencies as defendants. The case was dismissed in June of 2013 when the court agreed with the precedent set in two other cases, which basically said that Americans don’t even have the right to sue their government over its surveillance program, unless they can prove that their communications were intercepted. In other words, you can't sue unless you can demonstrate irreparable personal harm from the spying program. Of course the NSA is never going to hand-over that information voluntarily.
This Sig does not Exist.
You'd have a better shot building an asteroid rail gun out past Mars to shoot at the inner solar system with then sue those people like that.
Of course you can. But since we have a mafia government, don't be surprised when you get whacked.
"the amount of tyranny you will put up with is the exact amount you will live under" --George Washington
Yeah sure.. um no
Isn't it time slashdot implemented ssl? Perhaps a self signed key that is widely publicised ahead of time. Also, sue them in US Federal court for violation of US laws. This type of thing happens all the time.
While I'm sure the Corporate Parents of slashdot and linked in are in all sorts of rage and feeling dirty and used, think of the users. As a user of both, I'm certainly displeased.
A virtual protest may be asynchronous, but could go on for quite some time. It could be one more thing encouraging the less corrupt elements to help reign in such abuses.
for the law to apply, it must apply to ALL in equal measure.
Just from the summary, I can say that the law certainly has been broken. The Computer Misuse Act specifically forbids unauthorised interception of network signals - as has clearly happened here. It also specifically forbids unauthorised manipulation of computer code - as has clearly happened here. I could write a list, but I'll leave that exercise for the guys and legals at Dice. Hint: write the informations against the Corporate Director at GCHQ and against the Minister responsible (who not only *had* to have knowledge of the activity (IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE UNDER THE LAW), he *had* to have authorised it!).
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
Long answer: hahahhahahahahahhahahahahaah ahahahhahaahahahahhahahah ahahahahaahh,*takes deep breath* hahahahahahaahahahah no.
Furthermore, in accordance with [redacted], you will have to pay $BIGNUM.
If you think this is in error, please contact [redacted].
Try those in the UK legal system. They are absolutely horrible laws, since you can even sue someone and win if they have only stated facts. Just because you actively did something to make them look less good, not by slander or falsely claiming they did something illegal, you're committing a crime.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
There's a pretty clear copyright claim here. Every poster owns the copyright to their posts, and there is no license granted to anyone but Dice.
Of course, to pursue such action we'd have to have a government that obeyed the rule of law. But that is not the case.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
If they used a proxy serve up the malware and to deliver the images, logos, comments, etc. then you have a very weak case and end up with interesting unintended consequences if you win.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
When you obtain a Patent or Trademark, you automatically give the government a free and perpetual license to use those patents and trademarks as much as it wants.
Suggesting otherwise is like suggesting the man who feeds you is not himself allowed to eat his own food.
my router just infringed upon slashdot's trademark.
Why stop there? Why not hold them liable for computer fraud? It is not acceptable to distribute malware.
Does the written and/or implied constitutional principle of "we the people" negate governments assumed sovereign immunity? Just because they claim it doesn't mean it's so...
But that way leads to madness.
We're Serfs, not Citizens.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Trolling = "best you've got": Try disprove points on hosts http://start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&catid=26:64bit-security-software&Itemid=74 enumerated in that link instead (since you've FAILED @ THAT numerous times as have ALL LIKE YOU, lol)....
* Good luck - you'd need more than that though (more like a miracle).
(Utterly hilarious: It's fairly obvious due to your immature "not-man" online "reaction" that I've gotten the best of you SO MANY TIMES here, that this is the only thing you're left with: Off-Topic immature illogical ad hominem attack attempts that FAIL miserably (hence your "pure AC" post, when you most likely have a Registered 'Luser" account here)).
APK
P.S.=> As to the rest of your b.s.? Quit projecting your OWN issues & legal hassles - You're the immature "kook" & I would not DOUBT you've been charged with public indecency either...
... apk
/. trolls 'ate their words' vs. apk on hosts again http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4422297&cid=45389951
He now works for Raytheon as a Cyber Defense Expert and bags 300k dollars a year plus a table dancer. In a year or so he will leak all the HOST file secrets of USG.
Lately people like me and General Dempsey have been working against the Saudi menace. Not easy when you are up against people named Feinstein or Cohen. But it's doable.
Pound them time and again. Point out the truth about the Saudi nasties. Get help from the Russkies. Bonus points if you can make the Russkies launch a few missiles agains the Sunni menace. I would immedialtey open a bottle of champaing if the Russkies did.
Sooner or later the Saudis need to be hit or they will grow nastier and nastier. I hope they realize their threats against Russia. For them it's a matter of a few klicks on a keyboard to demonstrate what little value their shite-god has.
Also, point out that quite a few Jews live in Iran and happily so. How many Jews are allowed to live in Saudi-Arabia ? I guess the number is ZERO.
Make it a propaganda blitz. Don't attack software. Attack the Jewish crap memes on message boards like these. The facts are on Iran's side and the wickedness is on the side of Israel and their partner Saudi-Tyrannistan. Now SD, block my IP address, you muppets.
FACTS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi_movement
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/30-04-2013/124461-usa_chechnya-0/
http://www.meforum.org/744/how-chechnya-became-a-breeding-ground-for-terror
One day the stupid Americans will wake up and realize they live under the Sharia law they have imported from the fast-breeding Sunnis of their Imperium. Cheers !
They abuse their power and change laws to the way they see fit.
Didn't like the fact a someone was found not guilty? ABOLISH DOUBLE JEOPARDY!
Oh I do not know - looks like a routine baby step these days, see The US Using Prism To Engage In Commercial Espionage Against Germany And Others
On October 28, 2013, the Company entered into a new Credit Agreement, which provides for a $50 million term loan facility and a revolving loan facility of $200 million, with both facilities maturing in October 2018. Borrowings under the Credit Agreement bear interest at the Company's option, at a LIBOR rate or base rate plus a margin. The margin ranges from 1.75% to 2.50% on LIBOR loans and 0.75% to 1.50% on base rate loans, determined by the Company's most recent consolidated leverage ratio. Interest rates and covenants in the new Credit Agreement are consistent with the previous Credit Agreement. Quarterly payments of principal are required on the term loan facility, commencing March 31, 2014. The facilities may be prepaid at any time without penalty and payments on the term loan facility result in a permanent reduction. The Company borrowed $65 million under the new Credit Agreement to repay in full all outstanding indebtedness under the previous Credit Agreement, which was terminated upon repayment.
Dice Holdings, Inc
And why does it include a bunch of healthcare brokers?
IMO there are different rights at stake here. Indeed there is intellectual property, but I suspect CGHQ would argue spying has its root into the people right to security (they spy on us for our own good, right?). The latter is likely to trump the former. But perhaps the idea that spying on us is for our security can be debunked?
Or any other disinfornation troll on here who plays apologist for the Obama administration / NSA. There are many.
No, you can't sue the government.
Because if you could, we could shut down NSA wiretapping in a heartbeat by bringing a massive class action suit against them, where every victim of a crime that could have been prevented by NSA surveillance between 2005 and 2013 would be a member of the class.
If you ever watch "Person of Interest" that's exactly the kind of crimes I'm talking about -- the "irrelevant list" of criminals that are ignored because they don't touch national security.
What the hell good is a police state if we still have violent crime in our everyday lives? The government should be held accountable for not enforcing the law if they have the ready means to do so.
And yes, this is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, because of course that kind of society would be *monstrous* without real reform of many areas of law. But the fastest path to reform is when rich, powerful people (and their children) are arrested with the same frequency as poor, powerless people. Wealth and power provide the means to hide from traditional law enforcement, but not from the kind of data mining that the NSA is (theoretically) doing.
Remember some countries still believe in assassination, and some have close ties with organized crime who have a tendency to kill embarrassing problems such as this.
Slashdot has undisclosed billionaire sugar daddies.
For once, we can thank McDonalds - purveyors of the finest of sludge-burgers and kiddy-fondling clowns - for doing the hard work on this one. They spent much of the 1990s and around a million quid of their own hard earned (well; paid for by a million sludge-burgers) money sueing the shit out of "the MacDonalds Two" for mis-using MacLogos on posters complaining about Mac-Sludge-Burger's encouraging the maltreatment of their farmer's animals. Nothing to do with the reputation damage (Mac-Slime were doing an excellent job of that themselves, via their Public Relations Disaster Department), it was the mis-use of trademarks that was the core of the case.
Thanks to MacSlime, you don't need to have sales (or loss of sales) in a trademark infringement case.
Oh, Mac-Idiots won the case. After spending a million sludge-burgers worth of landshark fees, they got an award of ... I forget ; it was one of a pound, a penny, or a peppercorn. some good payback.
Oh, and some literally priceless PR.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Why'd you avoid my challenge to you troll -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4445851&cid=45424702 ?
* Is it since it "shuts your mouth" - Easily, every single time & you have to RUN, Forrest?
ANSWER = Yes - Absolutely, no questions asked
APK
P.S.=> I also LOVE seeing that from you "pure ac" posting & trolling worms who OBVIOUSLY aren't able to disprove my points on custom hosts value to end-users of them for added speed, security, reliability & even anonymity (to an extent) + SUPERIORITY to browser addons also? Yes)
Face it - you fail vs. me always/every time & you know it, I know it, as does anyone reading with 1/2 a brain too!
... apk
You FAIL & ran vs. my challenge to you-> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4445851&cid=45443957
* :)
You're reduced to running + trolling off topic - since you doubtless KNOW I'm going to throw that challenge YOUR way & whenever I do I get to see you run like scared jack rabbits from it, every single time - lmao!
(However - I suspect that's the "WHY" of why you post as trolling me: Since you KNOW I'm going to sweep the floor with your sorry behind IF you post using your "registered 'luser'" account, as I doubtless have before MANY TIMES here on /. - possibly elsewhere online as well!)
THUS - So you troll as ac (real 'brainwork' that (not)) - reduced to the ONLY THING YOU KNOW - being a worthless troll, lol!
APK
P.S.=> A "not man" like YOU boggles the mind - Just how reprehensible little trolling worms like you can LIVE with themselves, I will truly, NEVER understand - can't you debate a subject based on actual factual points vs. trolling...
... apk