When this kind of thing happens in the United States, there is something seriously wrong. Wrong to the point of reminding people just why we have the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
The United States has joined China and Thailand in attempting to censor Wikileaks, however the site itself goes on.
A Californian judge ruled that Dynadot, the name registrar for Wikileaks.org, should remove all traces of Wikileaks from its servers and further should “prevent the domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or any other website or server other than a blank park page, until further order of this Court.” The ruling followed an application from Bank Julius Baer, a Swiss bank named by Wikileaks as being involved in money laundering, to have documents relating to the company removed from the site.
Although Wikileaks has lost its URL, the site is hosted in Sweden, and is still up at 88.80.13.160/wiki/Wikileaks. Unfortunately for Bank Julius Baer, the legal action will probably result in more people reading the documents in question.
Something is rotten in the state of California. Even more than usual. I'm urging anyone and everyone to visit the Wikileaks site and, like responsible citizens of the world, and the Internet, come to your own conclusions.
From this article earlier, we get a brief and accurate analysis of what should be very disturbing about this.
While it's understandable that the bank might not want those documents online, or that those documents might impact current litigation, that doesn't explain why the California court ordered the entire site offline, demanded that its registrar block the transfer of the domain, force the registrar to point all visitors to a blank page and also having the registrar hand over all information on IP addresses of people who accessed the wikileaks site. All of that seems rather excessive, and of questionable legality. After all, doesn't Section 230 of the CDA provide safe harbor for the service provider?
What country, and what period in history is this? No day in court? No opportunity to move the domain registry? I want to know who this judge is, and I believe it incumbent upon concerned Internet citizens (and, indeed, U.S. citizens) to out this judge with an appallingly flawed understanding of the law.
Also being covered by Wired here.
Despite the ruling, Wikileaks continues to host the sensitive documents from servers located outside the U.S. Coincidentally, or not, the organization's hosting center in Sweden was also struck by a denial-of-service attack, after which a fire erupted in the center as well. Attempts to reach Wikileaks to obtain more information were unsuccessful.
I wonder how long before my friends in Anonymous get hold of this?
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
| Comments |
|
