See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Indymedia Server Takedown
Source:
www.eff.org
URL Source: http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Indymedia/
Published: Aug 2, 2005
Author: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Post Date: 2005-11-22 08:54:29 by h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t
Keywords: Indymedia, Takedown, Server
Views: 17
Comments: 1
Indymedia Server Takedown Updated August 2005 » EFF press release about unsealed documents Aug 2, 2005 On Thursday, October 7, 2004, more than 20 Independent Media Center (IMC) websites and other Internet services were taken offline pursuant to a Commissioner's Subpoena. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is representing the interests of Indymedia, a global collective of independent media organizations and thousands of journalists offering grassroots, non-corporate coverage of news events. In addition, EFF is working in cooperation with lawyers who represent particular Independent Media Centers all around the world. (Note: The "Commissioner" was a U.S. Attorney appointed by an American federal Judge, pursuant to an American law which allowed for that procedure in a case like this.) The Litigation Initially, the disappearance of the Indymedia servers was shrouded in secrecy, with no one willing to provide an explanation. On October 20, 2004, EFF filed a motion to unseal the Indymedia documents in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. In the motion, EFF attorneys argued that "the public and the press have a clear and compelling interest in discovering under what authority the government was able to unilaterally prevent Internet publishers from exercising their First Amendment rights." EFF argued further that secret court orders circumvent due process, undermine confidence in the judicial system, and deny those affected by the order any way to challenge it. (snip) The Nantes Dispute On Wednesday, September 22, 2004, the FBI contacted Rackspace regarding some images and material hosted on the Ahimsa servers by the Nantes Independent Media Center. According to Rackspace, the FBI alleged that a particular article on the website http://nantes.indymedia.org contained personal information and threats regarding two Swiss undercover police officers. Immediately upon receipt of the inquiry through Rackspace, the Ahimsa systems administrator reviewed the article on the Nantes server, and determined that it contained neither threats nor names or address information, finding only photographs of the officers disguised as anti-globalization protesters. Nevertheless, the Swiss request was conveyed to the Nantes IMC webmasters, who then digitally masked the faces of the officers in the photos. (snip) (Rackspace Managed Hosting is, according to the press release, a San Antonio-based internet hosting service. It also had a location in London, England, at which at least some of its servers were physically located.) "Silencing Indymedia with a secret order is no different than censoring any other news website, whether it's USA Today or your local paper," said Kevin Bankston, EFF attorney and Equal Justice Works/Bruce J. Ennis Fellow. "If the government is allowed to ignore the Constitution in this case, then every news publisher should be wondering, 'Will I be silenced next?'" http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Indymedia / The parts in italics are comments from this poster. As nearly as I can tell, what happened was that the public prosecutor in Bologna, Italy requested a subpoena of something relating to certain Indymedia websites. This request was conveyed to our federal authorities in San Antonio, Texas, because that was the home of Rackspace, the web hosting service for the sites. Our federal authorities sealed the whole matter and our federal law provided for the judge to appoint a "Commissioner" to handle the matter. The origin of the whole thing appears to have been that two Swiss undercover police officers claimed that a website associated with Indymedia (and with Rackspace) had displayed the officers' personal info, pictures of them, and threats. According to this press release, those claims turned out to be false. Incidentally, the two Swiss undercover officers were said to have disguised themselves as anti-globalization protestors. Notice how our own federal government placed secrecy orders on this whole thing. So how many other court proceedings do our laws now make SECRET? It was the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a leading civil liberties organization which seeks to protect rights in the digital world, which obtained the unsealing of what is in this press release. A worthy organization, if you ask me.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t (#0)
Quite interesting isnt this? Agents provocateur?
Incidentally, the two Swiss undercover officers were said to have disguised themselves as anti-globalization protestors.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest