Techdirt. Stories filed under "protest"

Montreal Student Arrested For Posting Photo Of Anti-Police Graffiti To Instagram

Tim Cushing — Tue, 9 Apr 2013 00:10:50 PDT

UPDATE: A commenter below has provided a link to coverage of this story by the Globe and Mail which includes more details than the CBC story linked in this post. Apparently, Pawluck had previously posted other photos of anti-police graffiti as well. This additional information doesn't make the actions of the police department any less egregious, but it does explain why they might have an interest in questioning her. In addition, she was also arrested several times during the Montreal demonstrations. Again, this doesn't excuse any overreactions, but it does at least explain why she may have been questioned at length. Her history with the police department makes this investigation about more than one uploaded photo.

If anyone needed any more evidence that police departments are casting a wide surveillance net over social media networks, here's one more story to add to the woeful deluge.

On Wednesday night, news broke that a 20-year-old “supporter of the student movement,” Jennifer Pawluck was arrested in Montreal for posting a picture to Instagram that she took of a graffiti wheat paste illustration that showed Montreal’s police commander Ian Lafrenière with a bloody bullethole in his forehead. According to the CBC, the image was thrown up on a brick wall in the Hochelaga-Maisonneuve neighborhood. And Jennifer Pawluck—not that this even matters—didn’t even draw the anti-cop graphic in the first place.

Further details at CBC's site indicate that the Montreal police are actively monitoring Instagram, or more likely, its new best friend, Facebook.

Jennifer Pawluck was picked up by Montreal police at her home Wednesday, questioned for several hours and then released on a promise to appear in court.

So, this wasn't a case of Pawluck shooting photos of graffiti and being approached by an officer. This would be a posted photo being spotted online and traced back to Pawluck. The surveillance aspect is disturbing enough, but the Montreal police went even further, accusing Pawluck of "criminal harassment against a high-ranking Montreal police officer." All over a photo of artwork she didn't create (or apply to a wall).

The picture depicts Montreal police commander Ian Lafrenière with a bullet hole in his head. Lafrenière was a bit of a lightning rod during last year's riots in Montreal due to his position as head of the Communications Division. While the image is violent and could be perceived as threatening, posting a photo of the graffiti on Instagram is hardly "harassment" in and of itself. As the Vice article points out, there have been plenty of other photos of this particular artwork uploaded to Instagram.

The police (unsurprisingly) have been less than forthcoming as to why Pawluck needed to be questioned for "several hours" about this photo. Here's what the department did have to say:

Spokesman Const. Dany Richer said the concern extends beyond just the posting of the photo, but said he could not go into further details.

“There are circumstances that surrounded the publication of this image, circumstances that we can’t reveal because it is still under investigation,” he said.

This statement is suitably vague with a hint of menace. There may be some "circumstances" surrounding Pawluck's participation in last year's demonstrations. There may also be some "circumstances" surrounding the original artwork, as I would imagine the police are very interested in finding the creator and questioning him or her for several hours. But I cannot see there being "circumstances" surrounding the upload of a photo to a social media site, at least not to the extent that someone gets detained and questioned for several hours and released only with the promise that they will appear in court, all without being charged with any criminal wrongdoing.

She has not been formally charged, but is scheduled to appear in court on April 17.

No charges, and yet the police have prohibited her from contacting Lafrenière (can't imagine why she would want to -- and she states she never has) or coming within one kilometer of the Montreal Police HQ.

This last part is enlightening. It strongly suggests the police department fears the general population, or at least those who photograph (or create) anti-police artwork. There's no other reason the police would need to file a restraining order (so to speak) against a student whose "weapon" is a cell phone with a camera. Unfortunately for Pawluck, the "restraining order" isn't mutually restrictive. I would imagine this won't be her last run-in with Montreal law enforcement. They seem unusually interested in shutting down expression they don't like, and are apparently willing to try to intimidate people into compliance.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Anonymous Launches White House Petition Saying DDoS Should Be Recognized As A Valid Form Of Protest

Mike Masnick — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:39:00 PST

A few years back, we had an interesting discussion over whether or not distributed denial of service attacks (DDoS) could be seen as a valid form of protest -- the modern equivalent of a "sit-in." There are significant similarities between a DDoS and a sit-in. And, we've seen at least one lawyer make the claim that his client was exercising his First Amendment rights when DDoSing a local city government. Law enforcement, of course, wants to take it to the other extreme, seeing DDoS attacks as being a form of hacking, or even a type of terrorist attack.

Slashdot points out that some members of Anonymous have set up a We the People petition on the White House's website, asking the government to recognize DDoS as a valid form of protest.

With the advance in internet techonology, comes new grounds for protesting. Distributed denial-of-service (DDoS), is not any form of hacking in any way. It is the equivalent of repeatedly hitting the refresh button on a webpage. It is, in that way, no different than any "occupy" protest. Instead of a group of people standing outside a building to occupy the area, they are having their computer occupy a website to slow (or deny) service of that particular website for a short time.

(Random aside before I get into the larger discussion: you would think that people posting a petition to the White House would spend at least a little more time proofreading what they write, or getting more input before posting it. While the intent is clear, the typos and grammatical structure of the petition is atrocious.)

It seems unlikely that this petition will get the necessary 25,000 votes. Or that the White House will even care if it does. The problem, as always, is that much of this depends on where you sit as well as your knowledge of technology. You can make a reasonable argument for why a DDoS is just the modern equivalent of a sit-in. But you can also make a reasonable argument for why a DDoS is like hacking a site.

But here's the larger point: When you have to petition the government to get them to tell you what form of protest is "okay," you've probably already lost the battle. And that's part of the larger problem here. It seems clear to me that many of the DDoS attacks done by Anonymous are, quite clearly, done for the purpose of expression. They are trying to make a statement, and it sometimes works (though, it frequently backfires). I'm sympathetic to the claim that it's the modern equivalent of a sit-in, and find it troubling that the government is arguing it's something much, much worse. At the same time, I often think Anonymous' rush to DDoS undermines its larger efforts at times, and simply reinforces in the minds of some that Anonymous is made up of bratty, destructive kids. But, having to ask the government to say your form of expression is legitimate expression suggests that the government has already won.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Wearing V For Vendetta Guy Fawkes Masks Declared Illegal In Dubai

Glyn Moody — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 11:14:00 PST

The evolution of the V for Vendetta Guy Fawkes mask from a clever element in a comic book and film to a meme and a global symbol of online and offline resistance has been quite remarkable. A highlight of that trend was earlier this year when MPs in the Polish parliament donned the masks in protest against ACTA, spurred on by massive street demonstrations against the treaty that had recently been held across Poland.

But if the mask has become a way of empowering and uniting protesters, aligning them with other movements around the world, it also becomes an obvious badge of dissent and rebellion, marking them out as a likely enemy of established power structures. It was thus probably only a matter of time before simply wearing a Guy Fawkes mask became grounds enough for the police to move in, as here:

Police officials in Dubai have warned against wearing a mask that symbolises opposition to state authority during any celebrations connected to National Day and declared it illegal.

Any person found wearing Guy Fawkes masks, also known as "Vendetta masks", risks police questioning as any object or action deemed to be instigating unrest or insulting the UAE is illegal, police officials said.

Of course, this simply strengthens the credentials of anyone wearing such a mask, whether in Dubai or elsewhere. And that, in turn, will encourage others around the world to adopt it as a symbol of protest, probably prompting more governments to declare it as "illegal", which will boost its iconic power yet further.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Apparently Stripping Nude To Protest TSA Search Is Protected By The First Amendment

Mike Masnick — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:35:00 PDT

A few months ago, you may have heard about John Brennan, who was going through Portland International Airport, and felt that the TSA screening procedures were the equivalent of harassing him. In response, to protest, he stripped naked... and was promptly arrested for disorderly conduct and indecent exposure. However, a court has now acquitted Brennan by saying that the stripping was an act of public protest, and thus protected by the First Amendment. The judge pointed out that there's already state precedent in Oregon that anti-nudity laws "do not apply in cases of protest."

"It is the speech itself that the state is seeking to punish, and that it cannot do," Circuit Judge David Rees said.

The DA who prosecuted the case is complaining that now anyone arrested for indecent exposure can just claim that it's a protest.

Deputy District Attorney Joel Petersen argued that Brennan only spoke of a protest minutes later. Petersen urged the judge to recognize that distinction, "otherwise any other person who is ever naked will be able to state after the fact" that it was done in protest.

Of course, this now raises the troubling (or appealing, depending on your nature) idea that stripping at the front of the TSA line may become more popular. That said, if you're now... er... itching to disrobe in front of the TSA, it's worth noting that this ruling is specific to Oregon, and who knows how other states might deal with the same issue.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Russia Plans Internet Censorship Bill (For The Children!); Russian Wikipedia Blacks Out In Protest

Mike Masnick — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:25:00 PDT

Over in Russia, they're preparing some new internet legislation that would censor the internet using the typical bogeymen. The claim from supporters is that the law is to block access to information on drugs, suicide and child porn -- all to protect the children. The way it works is with a giant blacklist, that I'm sure won't be abused at all (yes, that's sarcasm). We're talking about a country that has abused copyright law to go after critics and which has a bit of a... er... reputation for government officials abusing power to get what they want. In fact, some are already pointing out that the wording in the bill is really vague, such that it can be used to block any site dubbed as an "extremist" site.

And it's not just the human-reviewed blacklist that's at issue. The bill will also require "a special automatic system that will block websites containing 'prohibited' information.'" Because I'm sure that'll work even better...

We've noted other Russian legislation in the past, but this bill seems to go a hell of a lot further in creating a massive censorship tool for the Russian government.

The Russian Wikipedia is blacking out its site in protest, reminding many of the SOPA blackouts of Wikipedia in the US, though it's also worth noting that the Italian Wikipedia did a similar blackout even before the big SOPA blackout. It's good to see people speaking out and realizing that they don't have to just accept it when a government sweeps away their rights online. Who knows if this will have much of an impact, but getting more attention on the issue is a good start.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Protestors Give USTR 'Corporate Power Tool Award'; Replace Toilet Paper In Hotel With TPP-TP

Mike Masnick — Mon, 14 May 2012 07:13:00 PDT

Ron Kirk may believe that he's getting away with something in negotiating the TPP agreement without the public knowing what he's doing, but sooner or later he has to realize that the public isn't going to take it. With the recent TPP negotiations in Dallas, there was (of course) a corporate-sponsored "welcome gala." However, it appears that some protestors infiltrated the event and were able to announce that the USTR Ron Kirk and the other US negotiators had won the 2012 Corporate Power Tool Award. A protestor by the name of David Goodwin commandeered the microphone at the event and announced that he was Git Haversall, of the "Texas Corporate Power Partnership", and was giving the award to Ron Kirk because "The TPP agreement is shaping up to be a fantastic way for us to maximize profits, regardless of what the public of this nation—or any other nation—thinks is right."
The protestors actually came very close to giving the plaque to Kirk himself, but security got in the way at the last second. Somewhere around that point, a bunch of protestors apparently started dancing around and chanting "TPP! TPP! TPP!" You can see much of this in the video below:

Apparently the protestors also successfully replaced much of the toilet paper in the public bathrooms in the hotel with special TP-TPP:

I'm generally of mixed opinions on these kinds of protests. However, seeing as we're dealing with Ron Kirk, who seems to go out of his way to avoid the public concerning TPP and only listen to corporate interests, any method of making it clear to him that the public is unhappy seems worthwhile.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Copyright Lobby Tries To 'Hire' Demonstrators, Since The Public Refuses To Rally In Support Of ACTA

Mike Masnick — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 04:00:00 PDT

I recently gave a talk at the Innovate/Activate conference, where I discussed where the copyright lobby had been super successful, and where it seemed some of their weaknesses were. One thing I pointed out was that they had completely lost the hearts and minds of the public -- and no matter how hard they tried, they were unable to muster up any kind of public or grassroots support. As an example, I showed a photo of the massive street protests against ACTA in Poland, and questioned what a pro-ACTA demonstration might look like. Well, bizarrely, it appears that some in the Copyright Lobby had decided to try to put on a pro-ACTA demonstration... but they needed to hire people to act as ACTA supporters. Of course, when you seem to think -- as the industry often appears to -- that the only motivating factor possible in the world is monetary exchange, perhaps this isn't that surprising.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

CISPA Sponsor Mike Rogers Says Protests Are Mere 'Turbulence' On Landing

Mike Masnick — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 12:18:00 PDT

It appears that Congress still doesn't get it. Rep. Mike Rogers, the sponsor of the bad CISPA bill that puts your privacy at risk, really doesn't seem particularly concerned about the protests that have been happening online this week. He referred to them as being "like turbulence on the way down to landing" for the bill. He also said that he fully expects the bill to easily pass next week when its brought to the floor.

What really comes through in the article -- which mostly talks about how Rogers has been supposedly working with Google to change some of the language in the bill to make it more acceptable -- is how little concern Rogers has for the public. Instead, most of the article just talks about how he's been working with tech companies to make sure they're okay with the bill. And while that's a start, it's no surprise that lots of tech companies would be okay with CISPA, because it grants them broad immunity if they happen to hand over all sorts of private info to the government.

But to then call the protests mere "turbulence" is pretty damned insulting to the actual people this will impact the most: the public, whose privacy may be violated. While we appreciate Rogers' willingness to amend the bill, it seems clear that there are still major problems with it, and Rogers does not seem to be actually listening to the privacy concerns of the public -- just the various tech companies.

In the meantime, the protests continue, and if Rogers thinks they're mere "turbulence" then it appears that not enough people are speaking out. The folks at Fight for the Future have put together an excellent page to make it easier to speak out, over at CongressTMI.org. At the very least, is it that difficult for Congress to present a real reason why this bill is needed? Bogus stories of planes falling from the sky or evil Chinese hackers really aren't cutting it. Perhaps Congress should talk to some of the experts who note that Congress doesn't understand the tech enough to regulate it properly. As privacy expert Jim Harper notes:

"Congress has no particular capacity or knowledge of how to do cybersecurity," Harper says. "It's not a choice between two different versions in the House and two different versions in the Senate. The question is still open: is Congress capable of doing any good here?"

Unfortunately, in the mad dash to pass these bills (which appear to be much more about who gets to control multi-billion dollar "cybersecurity budgets" than anything else), no one in Congress seems willing to address the basic question of what problem this really solves.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

DailyDirt: Together We Can Stop SOPA

Michael Ho — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:00:00 PST

Usually, this DailyDirt post provides some relief from the regular topics here on Techdirt. Not today. SOPA & PIPA need to be defeated, and the organizations behind these bills won't stop. So we won't either. Here are just a few more sites that will help you learn about why SOPA & PIPA are just plain bad for everyone -- and each can show you to how to contact your elected representatives for political action.

Several tech companies have put together StopTheWall.us to help everyone learn about the facts on SOPA. Stop the Great Firewall of America! [url]
The EFF helps defend your digital rights online. Help them help you! [url]
American Censorship Day is today! Spread the word and help defeat the bills on January 24th. Fight for the Future! [url]
To discover other sites related to innovation, check out some of these StumbleUpon links. [url]

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

UK PC Gaming Site Rock, Paper, Shotgun To Join SOPA Protest By Going Dark Tomorrow

Tim Cushing — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:19:15 PST

Venerated PC gaming site Rock, Paper, Shotgun has announced that it will be joining the anti-SOPA blackout tomorrow, taking its site down at 9:00 am GMT.

From 9am tomorrow morning, Rock, Paper, Shotgun will be blacked out in protest against SOPA and PIPA. The site will be gone, but for a single black page explaining why we're doing this. And then Thursday morning we'll be back.

Of particular note is the fact that RPS is a UK-based site, but one that recognizes that the threat SOPA and PIPA pose to the internet as we know it expands past national boundaries, much like the internet itself, a fact that seems lost on the legislators behind it.

At RPS we genuinely believe in the astonishing wonder of the internet. An unpredictable, utterly remarkable endeavour of humanity, it has radically changed the world in the 16 or so years that it’s been a part of the average person’s life, and the many years before that when it was going unnoticed. It has challenged everything, shaken entire industries, and created hundreds of thousands of new ones...

SOPA and PIPA seek to destroy all of this, rendering the internet a system controlled by the State and large corporations. The incredible freedom will be taken away, replaced with a system controlled by those with the most money. After a year when the internet has been the foundation of radical changes throughout the world, from those able to network themselves to overthrow their oppressive regimes, to those who have made a mockery of super-injunctions, the incredible means of supporting previously unknown projects through Kickstarter and the like, to the many wonderful pieces of art that have flourished, after that year, and after the year before it, and the one before that, how can anyone sit back and not fight for this precious, precious thing...

No, neither Congress nor the Senate will care that RPS is down, but the hundreds of thousands of people who visit RPS every day will. And they can pass that message on. This matters.

A tremendous statement from Rock, Paper, Shotgun, boiling down these bills to the underlying motive behind them: protecting favored industries. To see our representatives willing to throw in with their corporate benefactors despite worldwide protest is to see the hollow, hypocritical facade of a corrupted system disintegrate before your eyes.

RPS should also be commended for its outstanding coverage on SOPA/PIPA. A constantly updated page displaying for/against statements from ESA members (Entertainment Software Association) concerning SOPA has gathered some remarkable information, especially considering the ESA has chosen (much like the BSA did before distancing itself from the legislation) to put its support behind SOPA without consulting its members. Due to RPS's persistance, NVIDIA, Good Old Games, Red 5 (Firefall), Frozenbyte (Trine), Runic Games (Torchlight) and Notch (Minecraft) have all issued statements expressing their opposition to SOPA. Red 5 has gone one further by joining in the protest blackout:

Red 5 Studios is joining Reddit in protest of SOPA by going dark on January 18. We will be taking down our website, community site and Firefall beta for 24 hours on the 18th. We are extremely disappointed in this misguided legislation. We are also ashamed of the ESA for supporting a bill which is clearly not in the best interests of gamers or the game industry. This bill, and it’s sister bill, Protect IP, will shut down live streaming, shout casting, user generated content and have a chilling effect on game innovation and social media.

Most of all, it hurts the smaller game companies, who will not have the legal resources or lobbying presence to protect themselves from unwarranted shutdown. We issue a call to all our industry peers, including developers, publishers and game press, to join us in letting the ESA know they do not represent our views on this issue, and strongly oppose SOPA and PIPA.

Notch and his fellow Minecrafters are also mulling their options and planning on joining the blackout, with updates delivered via Notch's Twitter feed.

As RPS points out, the beneficiaries of this legislation and their representatives (who often seem to forget are supposed to be our representatives) won't care. But it should, at the very least, make it clear that opposition to this bill is not limited to a few hundred noisy pirates and a handful of apologists. If this legislation continues to be pushed through, it will be crystal clear who our "representatives" actually represent and no amount of spin will be able to turn that around.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Musician Peter Gabriel Comes Out Against SOPA/PIPA; Website Will Go Dark

Mike Masnick — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:26:08 PST

We keep hearing how the "artists" that the entertainment industry gatekeepers say they're "protecting" are not at all pleased about SOPA and PIPA. For example, we've already seen Ashton Kutcher come out against the bill. The latest is that famed musician Peter Gabriel has said that his own website will go dark in protest tomorrow:

“This year is going to be a very crucial year for the fate of digital rights and freedoms on the internet. We strongly support the campaign against both the Protect IP Act and the Stop Online Piracy Act. For that reason our websites will be down from 05.00 GMT for 24 hours in support of the campaign.

Please check out http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_internet/ if you want to read more/sign the petition.

Thank you.”

Peter Gabriel

It's been really sickening to see our usual critics (some of whom are admitted lobbyists in favor of the bills) insist that anyone against the bills is "in favor of piracy." Clearly, many people from all over the place -- including those who make their living in the "entertainment business" are against the bills. Or are we going to hear that Peter Gabriel just wants free stuff, too?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Google To Use Home Page To Protest PIPA Tomorrow

Mike Masnick — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:32:42 PST

Following the news that Reddit, Wikipedia, and a bunch of other sites will be going dark to protest PIPA (and, to a lesser extent, SOPA) tomorrow, Google has now announced that it will use its home page to express its dislike of the bill. Google has not made clear exactly how it will protest. It won't "go dark" like those other sites, but it appears that it will post some sort of link, and will highlight ways for people to contact their elected officials in protest over the bill. With both Google and Wikipedia pushing people to call Congress... you might want to assume that Congress is going to get a few phone calls tomorrow.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Protest In The Age Of YouTube... And The Long Term Consequences Of Focusing On 'Enforcement' To Deal With Moral Panics

Mike Masnick — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:12:00 PST

By now, I expect that many of you have heard or seen the reports of police in riot gear pepper spraying students at UC Davis late last week. If you haven't seen one of the many, many videos of the incident out there, this one is particularly popular and has a pretty good view of the police officer walking up and down the line of peaceful protesters with their arms locked, spraying them heavily with pepper spray: However, there appear to be dozens of other videos capturing the same thing from a variety of different angles. I just watched about a half dozen of them, and each one provides a little more insight or perspective into what happened. None of them make the police look good. This and other recent incidents of police pepper spraying protesters raise a few different issues (regardless of what you think of what people are protesting for). Let's discuss two of them quickly.

First, it's fascinating to see how protest is changing in the age of YouTube. In the past, photographs often captured iconic moments in similar situations. Or, in some cases, merely the stories of what happened. And while there can be something powerful and moving about a still photograph, the video of these latest incidents really lets you see the details, and I find such videos to be much more powerful in showing the full extent of what's happening. It makes it that much harder to cover things up or try to explain away the actions of the police. We've talked about why the right to record police is an important right for Americans, but in situations like this, it also shows not just the value of recording what the police are doing, but also the power of bringing millions of people around the world right into the situation of what happened.

Related to that is the fact that such a large percentage of people these days now carry handheld video cameras, often in their mobile phones. That we don't just get one angle on these stories, but coverage from pretty much every perspective, is really quite an incredible experience.

The other issue worth discussing is the long term unintended consequences of regulatory and legal battles against vague bogeymen without a thought to what happens. If you want to read a really fascinating opinion piece on what happened at Davis, you should read what Bob Ostertag had to say. Ostertag, among other things, is a professor of Technocultural Studies and Music at UC Davis, and his discussion is really fascinating -- directly calling out the administration for its bogus defense of the pepper spraying (and comparing it to a similar situation that was handled quite peacefully at Columbia). He goes on to highlight other ridiculous overreactions first within the UC system (at nearby Berkeley) and then elsewhere in the country, such as the pepper spraying of an 84-year-old woman in Seattle.

One of the key points he uses to summarize all this is the following:

Last week, former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper published an essay arguing that the current epidemic of police brutality is a reflection of the militarization (his word, not mine) of our urban police forces, the result of years of the "war on drugs" and the "war on terror." Stamper was chief of police during the World Trade Organization protests in Seattle in 1999, and is not a voice that can be easily dismissed.

Stamper's article is also a fascinating, yet disturbing read. He points to his own failings in 1999, but also how much worse things have become. He also points to some ideas for turning things around -- creating radically different police forces, with civilian involvement.

Part of me wonders if these two issues converge. The ability of people to so widely document the abuses -- and horrify the watching public -- will hopefully lead people to seek out the sorts of "radical" solutions Stamper suggests (and, yes, I do recognize the ridiculousness of suggesting that police work closely with civilians is considered "radical"). But part of me wonders about the likelihood that things just get worse. We see this elsewhere, where "law enforcement" or the government through declaration or regulation declares "war" on something, rather than trying to understand and deal with the underlying issues. It never helps solve the problem, and oftentimes serves to make it that much worse. But oftentimes it seems like once the moral panics and the "war on..." announcements have been made, politicians and law enforcement become totally committed, unable to back down, even as their "solution" makes things worse.

It's stories like these that should make us wary of jumping on any sort of moral panic that doesn't involve a true look at the underlying causes, and how to fix them, but rather seeks solely a stricter "enforcement" solution. What we see, over and over again, is that that level of "enforcement" becomes a weapon that is used more and more regularly and more and more indiscriminately. Even as some amount of transparency hopefully counteracts some of it, people get so committed that the situation moves far away from solving problems, and just creates more and more new ones.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Is Telling People To Visit A Certain Website A Denial Of Service Attack?

Mike Masnick — Thu, 20 May 2010 21:53:13 PDT

iamtheky sends in the story of a UC San Diego Professor, Ricardo Dominguez, whose focus of research is "electronic civil disobedience," (for which he received tenure and a fellowship from his university), but who is now potentially facing discipline or even criminal charges from the university for staging a "virtual sit-in" to protest budget cuts. It certainly raises questions about the line between telling people to visit a website and a hack attack to take down a website. It's difficult to see how just telling people to go to a website should ever qualify as any kind of attack, but the University is said to be contemplating criminal charges.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Best-Selling Swedish Author Torrents Her Own Audio Book To Protest Pirate Bay Ruling

Mike Masnick — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:58:16 PDT

We've already seen that plenty of content creators use The Pirate Bay for legitimate distribution and promotion purposes, and now Dan writes in to alert us that a best-selling author in Sweden, Unni Drougge, is so annoyed by The Pirate Bay verdict, that she made an audiobook version of her best-selling recent novel and put up a torrent via The Pirate Bay, along with a "manifesto" in support of free file sharing. Apparently, this is getting her plenty of attention, as her book has jumped to the top of the audiobooks list (what were people saying, that the top downloaded lists never include authorized content?).

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Protests Against The Authors Guild For Forcing Amazon To Disable Kindle TTS

Mike Masnick — Fri, 3 Apr 2009 15:23:53 PDT

We were surprised and disappointed when Amazon gave in to the Authors Guild's baseless claim that the TTS somehow violated its copyrights. It looks like a lot of others are disappointed as well. A group is now organizing a protest against the Authors Guild for trying to determine whether or not Amazon was allowed to innovate. As the EFF notes, "The publishing industry shouldn't have veto power over new technology." If you're in New York City, you should look into the details of the protest on Tuesday.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

UK Online Protest Finds Success In Just 48 Hours

Blaise Alleyne — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:56:14 PST

Using social networking tools to organize political protests is nothing new or surprising, but online protests have been growing increasingly efficient, especially on Facebook. In Canada, for example, a group protesting copyright legislation caught the attention of federal parliament last summer, and another opposing strict restrictions on young drivers had the Ontario Premier considering Facebook consultations in the fall.

The latest story comes from the UK where, in a mere 48 hours, a campaign run through Facebook and TheyWorkForYou.com by mysociety.org helped stop legislation that would have exempted MPs' expenses from the Freedom of Information Act (via the Search Engine). Thousands of emails were sent in the two day period, reaching 90% of MPs, before the opposition parties turned and the government backed down. It's not so much the scale that's worth noting, but the sheer speed at which the campaign was successful. The legislation was scrapped before most snail mail would have had time to arrive. Now, the online protest likely wasn't the only factor, but it played an important role in spreading the message. It seems to be getting a lot harder to sneak stuff through the legislature (though that doesn't stop people from trying) when it only takes a couple days to build an opposition.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Using Amazon To Protest Products You Don't Like

Mike Masnick — Tue, 9 Dec 2008 14:48:00 PST

The main thing that kicked off all the negative attention over EA's use of SecuROM DRM in Spore was the avalanche of negative reviews on Amazon. It seems consumers are beginning to recognize that such a rush of negative reviews is an effective way to protest and garner attention. The latest product getting the same treatment appears to be TurboTax from Intuit, where people are protesting a big price increase from last year. Any bets on whether or not a "glitch" will cause Amazon to delete the reviews, as has happened with previous waves of negative comments?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Grad Student Uses Twitter To Get Released From Egyptian Prison

Mike Masnick — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:39:00 PDT

Recently, Tim wrote about how aspects of Twitter could represent the future of news, and it appears that may be happening faster than some people expected. In a story that must absolutely thrill any PR person working for Twitter, a UC Berkeley grad student who was filming protests in Egypt was able to alert his friends to the fact he was arrested by Egyptian police through a message on Twitter. This resulted in a coordinated effort to get him released, which eventually involved the US State Department. You get the feeling that this story will move into PR legend like the story of the guy who self-diagnosed a heart attack using Google.

Still, it is a rather remarkable example of how Twitter can be quite useful. While there are plenty of people (myself included at one point) who wrote off the service as being rather useless, it's been evolving in very interesting ways. For those who embrace it, it can become a rather useful quick and easy public messaging and conversation tool. While, James Karl Buck could have sent a text message to a friend, the simplicity and public nature of Twitter allowed him to alert a lot of people nearly instantly to the situation he was in -- and they responded. Not only did they reach out to get help, they also quickly responded to James on Twitter, providing advice on how to deal with the fact that he was arrested. Still, what's not entirely clear in this whole story is how he was able to continue to use his mobile phone while under arrest. While the lesson some may learn from this is that arresting officers will quickly take people's mobile phones away, that doesn't lessen the impact of a service like Twitter and its ability to spread a message to a lot of friends and acquaintances extremely quickly.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story