Skip to main content

View Diary: Wikileaks Under Attack: California Court Wipes Out of Existence (262 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Can't file w/o known clients (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    clyde, Mogolori, xynz, Annalize5, Ice Blue, shigeru

    The big problem seems to be that nobody can find the owners of, so the plaintiff named the registrar - who is in the Northern District - and got a default judgement because the registrar didn't care and wikileaks didn't answer the suit.

    Muckraker has the filings up:

    U.S. Court Shuts Down Whistleblower Site
    By Paul Kiel - February 18, 2008, 1:54PM
    Update: Just spoke with Steve Aftergood of the Project on Government Secrecy, who offered a clue. "My hunch is that the action was dictated by the practical options. [The judge and Julius Baer] don't know who is or who the responsible parties are upon whom a court order could be served. What they did know was the U.S. based internet service provider." So they got the ISP to shut the site down. "If they had known who to serve the order to – who represents Wikileaks --, then they might have chosen a more targeted action." Nevertheless, he thought the judge's move was "extraordinary," based as it was on the bank's contention that these were legally protected documents.
    Update: Here's the judge's order. And here's the motion for injunction filed by Julius Baer..

    So, the judge got an unopposed motion, and granted the relief sought. (Given that a similar injunction was handed down against an Apple Computer rumor site, the judge didn't have much choice without an opposing brief from wikileaks.)

    My guess is that wikileaks could get the order reversed (or at least modified) if they contacted the ACLU / EFF folks and authorized representation - but lawyers need clients before they can fight.

    •  well done! the internets to the rescue (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      _ the next distraction >> *

      by rhfactor on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 04:14:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Good post (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      that points out the rank and intentional incompetance/corruption displayed here.

      Filing against the provider is exactly the equivalent of filing against the state of nevada to target a corporation incorporated in nevada. Its corrupt bullshit on its face. A competant judge would have told these hack lawyers to go back to the drawing board and get the information from the isp or at the very least provide documentation that they had informed the owners of the website if they wished to protect them.

      And where are all of you oh so brave law loving Kossack lawyers? We always hear you wax poetic about subclause b of paragraph c of this or that but you never seem to step up?

      This is freedom of the press and the rule of law folks. If you really do care about those things, show us.

      I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever TJ

      by cdreid on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:28:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  For all the rethugs' and corporations' whining (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and crying about "trial lawyers" clogging up the system and impeding business, the biggest waste of the legal system is all the bogus lawsuits brought by corporations and the wealthy against the bulk of the rest of us.

        To say nothing of the battalions of corporate attorneys who spent countless billions figuring out ways to get around tax laws and violate the spirit, if not the letter of other laws.

        "Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions." U.S.Grant

        by shigeru on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:35:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site