Privacy

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
government, privacy, searches

Companies:
twitter



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

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2011 @ 1:26pm

    After that I have a whole more respect for Twitter.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 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 chronology ]

    • icon
      Hephaestus (profile), 14 Jan 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 chronology ]

  • icon
    Rose M. Welch (profile), 13 Jan 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 chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.