So Who Else Did The Government Demand Info From In The Wikileaks Investigation?

from the and-why-didn't-they-fight-it? dept

We've already pointed out that Twitter deserves serious praise for standing up to the government's gag order on an information request for some folks associated with Wikileaks. Others noticed the same thing. As Ryan Singel at Wired noted, Twitter beta tested a spine, and that sort of response should be standard. Singel (and some of our own commenters) also pointed out that Twitter was following in the footsteps of Nicholas Merrill, the head of Calyx Internet Access. Merrill, famously, fought a gag order on a National Security Letter he received from the FBI.

Still, as we pointed out in our original post on this, it should make you wonder who else got these gagged data requests from the feds and just rolled over and handed over the info. It appears that others are wondering this as well. There's quite a bit of speculation that both Facebook and Google likely received similar court orders (with similar gags included), and of course neither company will comment. Hopefully, in the future, they'll recognize from Twitter's lead that it's not just possible to stand up to these requests, but it's also a damn good idea.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:14pm

    Actually, all this does is make me wonder how involved the people from Wikileaks are in all of this. Has Manning told them something that has lead them down this path?

    For lack of something better (and because RD will have a fit) I think there is a whole lot more to this story than is being reported.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    bwp (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:23pm

    Re:

    Why would you think that Manning has told them something that made the US Govt. make these requests and put the gag orders on the requests?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    Chargone (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:26pm

    Re:

    given that the 'story' is 'we need more information reported, and doing so is smart', that's kind of a given...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:26pm

    After that I have a whole more respect for Twitter.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:30pm

    You would think the govt would investigate those who have information leaked about them or maybe BoA since Wikileaks might have condemning info on them. But that's not going to happen, the big corporations that want their dirty work kept secret practically own the government.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:53pm

    Re: Re:

    Because FUD.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:37pm

    We'll have to wait for the next leak to find out.

    Same time next week?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:41pm

    Re: We'll have to wait for the next leak to find out.

    This week Assange is threatening Rupert Murdoch, I gather that News Inc has a story in the making that isn't very good for Julian. His response is that he has documents on Rupe, and will releases them if he does.

    Anyone else starting to get a whiff of desperation from Assange-land?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:46pm

    Re: Re: We'll have to wait for the next leak to find out.

    No, but there is a strong odor from TAMland.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 3:33pm

    I can not understand how a gag order is constitutional. Clearly the constitution states "shall make no law". It's too bad that it's so dangerous to violate the gag order and try to set the proper legal precedent

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:13pm

    There's quite a bit of speculation that both Facebook and Google likely received similar court orders (with similar gags included), and of course neither company will comment.

    And of course, unless you're Glenn Beck, a refusal to deny reasonable allegations pretty much means that you're guilty of them. Shame on both Facebook and Google.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 5:22pm

    Re: Re: Re: We'll have to wait for the next leak to find out.

    You would have to ask him (or her) if they didn't shower. Assange however it starting to stink of desperation and acting more and more like an information terrorist.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 7:59pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: We'll have to wait for the next leak to find out.

    Your smell is getting stronger, TAM. You may want to look into it. The neighbors might get upset, you know.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    The Groove Tiger (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 8:49pm

    Re:

    Of course there is more to the story! And that is why we must fight these gag orders, so we can get the whole story!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    DH's Love Child (profile), Jan 14th, 2011 @ 6:00am

    Re:

    But that's not going to happen, the big corporations that want their dirty work kept secret own the government.

    FTFY

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jan 14th, 2011 @ 8:00am

    Re:

    "I can not understand how a gag order is constitutional. Clearly the constitution states "shall make no law". It's too bad that it's so dangerous to violate the gag order and try to set the proper legal precedent"

    It can probably be fought using the first amendment.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This