Mormons The Latest To Make Their Secret Documents More Popular By Trying To Take Them Down
from the is-streisand-a-mormon? dept
A couple months ago, in discussing The Streisand Effect with a reporter, the reporter asked if I thought lawyers would one day be accused of malpractice for not informing their clients of the potential implications of demanding some content be pulled off the internet. While I doubt it will reach the point of malpractice, it certainly does make you wonder what some lawyers are thinking when there are such clear examples of what happens when you try to suppress material online. Earlier this year, the lawsuit that brought plenty of new attention to the concept of The Streisand Effect was when a Swiss bank, Julius Baer, convinced a judge to shut down the site Wikileaks for hosting some documents related to a lawsuit Julius Baer was involved in. Of course, not surprisingly, the attempt to shut down Wikileaks got those documents much more attention (and did the same for Wikileaks as well). Eventually, the judge reversed the order and Julius Baer dropped the lawsuit. But the end result showed how badly the strategy backfired on Julius Baer. Before it demanded the documents be taken down, almost no one saw the documents or even knew that the bank was involved in a case that accused of it laundering money. Afterwards, a lot more people knew about the lawsuit and had seen the documents -- and they were still online.That situation got so much publicity, you would think that anyone would think twice about going down the same path. No such luck. Last month, Scientology threatened Wikileaks for hosting Scientology documents, and this morning (as a whole bunch of folks have sent in) news is coming out that the Mormon Church is threatening Wikileaks as well, for hosting church documents. In this case, the Mormon Church isn't just going after Wikileaks, but also threatened the WikiMedia foundation and document hosting site Scribd. It went after WikiMedia because WikiNews ran an article about the document and linked to them (which is hardly copyright infringement). Scribd was apparently hosting a copy of the documents as well (since taken down). Wikileaks, however, true to its charter, is refusing to take down the documents.
While you can understand why the Church might not like it's documents being made public, it does seem ridiculous that whoever decided to start threatening everyone didn't do the most basic research to recognize what would happen as soon as they threatened sites. Given what happened with Julius Baer, it should have been abundantly clear that threatening Wikileaks would almost guarantee that the documents were both more widely seen than before and copied widely across the internet.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: documents, mormons, scientology, streisand effect, takedowns, wikileaks, wikinews
Companies: wikileads, wikimedia
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hmmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The handbook contains administrative directions to the lay leaders of the church. Virtually all members will serve as lay leaders. Go to the public website http://lds.org and search for any of the topics of interest in the handbook and you will find even more information about that topic on that website. They are not secrets.
It is a sound administrative practice to limit the distribution of administrative operating procedures to those performing the tasks. When administrative procedures change, the old handbooks are turned in and new ones issued so that people will follow the current procedures, not old ones. This practice is followed by businesses across the world and is required by standards such as ISO 9000. It is not a matter of secrecy.
A copyright also prevents the material from being used in an unauthorized manner such as using it in another work and selling it. If the copyright owner does not enforce the copyright when it is known to be violated, the copyright can later be determined to no longer be valid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Culpable Mike
Mike, you gotta wonder if there aren't some monkeys out there who will eventually come after you for having invented the Streisand Effect.
Afterall, if you hadn't coined the phrase then they couldn't be exposed to it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Culpable Mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Culpable Mike
Remember, this isn't about being mad. It's about getting even.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Culpable Mike
no, it's about getting PAID.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Culpable Mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Woe to those who go to great depths to hide their plans from the LORD, who do their work in darkness and think, "Who sees us? Who will know?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Woe to those who go to great depths to hide their plans from the LORD, who do their work in darkness and think, "Who sees us? Who will know?"
Amen!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Do you think the LORD reads the internet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WWJD?
LDS is not a christian denomination. They are on there own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD?
LDS believes in Christ, which by definition makes them Christians.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD? BZZZZZZZZT Thank you for playing
The real name of the church is
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
Now, please regail me on how a church that worships Christ, enough to have him in their name is not Christian.
It's easy - believe in Christ == Christian. Any other definition is pretty semantical.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WWJD?
perhaps if he had a lawyer way back when, he wouldn't have ended up the way he did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: WWJD?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ??
Sticks and stones, my friend, sticks and stones.
Your narrow definition of Christianity has no basis in scripture.
Christ's only requirement to be a follower (a Christian) was to believe in him, be baptized by those he gave authority to, and do good works. Everything else is the manufacture of men. I don't know about you, but I'll take my info from the real source, not some angry, self appointed minister who doesn't like what someone else believes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ??
Calling a church christian doesn't make it one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ??
Ask yourself - who came up with this definition of Christianity that keeps getting thrown about?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ??
just because the name is there doesnt mean it is. you dont even say the lord's prayer. the one he told us to pray
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Christian chruch??
but fromt he quick look i did at the wikileaks, they quickly pulled out the churches stance on some pratices that many people consider alright, but the church stance in contary to what everyone esle thinks is right, and i know when i was preaching i ran into many people that had heard of some of the doctrine that we know are true, but since they didn't understand the basics of the gospel they would be turned away from the gospel. and no it's indoctraning them. it's teaching the truth. a baby dosen't eat meat before milk.
Also from my view, i feel that it is easy to deal with a bad rep of pull documents then haveing to explane to someone who won't listen why we believe this way, but if they want to know then they are more then able to talk with any member and find out the truth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Christian chruch??
Sadly, many people need this opiate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not Christian chruch??
And to have faith is certainly a more difficult prospect than not. It takes a lot more character to believe than be cynical.
And fate, my friend, by it's very definition, is out of your control, whether you believe in a God or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Christian chruch??
Saying LDS is a christian denomination is being ingenuous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not Christian chruch??
1) The writings originated with a family that left Jerusalem just before it was destroyed. The father of that family was a prophet who was under threat of being stoned. The record consists of the writings of many subsequent prophets that lived in the America's.
2) In the 2000 years of "Christian teaching" you refer to, how much of that teaching came from men, and how much came from God/Christ? Remember - part of the doctrine you are referring to dictates that there is no more revelation. So who was in charge? Who decided what was doctrine? How can any person decide to believe it or not?
3) Most any prophet is hated for saying he had revelation. Joseph Smith was no different. But the test the Bible gives - by their fruits ye shall know them, is pretty powerful. Helping millions of people come closer to God, believe in Christ, do good works, spread the word - exactly which of these do you condem Joseph for doing?
4) The bible did not exist as "The Holy Bible" until hundreds of years after the apostles died off. So what authority did the compiler have to decide exactly what writings went in it? Who are you to say that God doesn't still reveal things to men? Why would he change policy all of the sudden?
But then this argument you post isn't about digging in and finding truth, it's a sound-bite editorial comment, with only one purpose - to emotionally drag others into your narrow and derogatory point of view. Which opinion you were taught to believe by whom?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
business as usual
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: business as usual
It's: up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, start.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: business as usual
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: business as usual
it's: up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Start!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: business as usual
Also, to give eternal life to a friend try
it's: up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, SELECT, Start!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: business as usual
How could I forget that part?!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Christ's death on the cross did not absolve all men of sin for eternity.
Christ, God, and the Holy ghost are not one and the same.
Christ, and God are the same species as man.
Note: I don't consider myself Christian, either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
(2) Even the Catholic chruch didn't beleive that Christ, God and the Holy Ghost were one in the same until after 325A.D. at the Council of Nicaea...
(3) Christ and God are exalted. With our good works we can return to live with our Father in Heaven...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To keep a hold of intellectual property rights present law demands that the holder of said rights can demonstrate that they've consistently fought to preserve those rights because they can be ruled as becoming public domain if an entity has not sufficiently sought to maintain their rights through litigation when infringement happens. So on one hand it's kind of required by law that you not permit your infringed works to gain, uncontested, a pervasive level of infringement. Look to the history of the 'escalator' for an example of this, though there are others.
As to keeping things secret and remaining honorable in intent vis a vis the comments by one Anonymous Coward and Overcast I'd ask if any of you have children? If a parent is confident they are honorably raising their children then, following the reasoning of not keeping secrets, then all interactions with them, and all goings on in the home should be items and actions which you wouldn't feel the need to keep from the world. I mean if honorable is equal to full disclosure then why do we have the moniker 'Anonymous Coward' positing the question? I think it's important that keeping something secret is sometimes requisite, whether it's to keep it sacred or to produce the best out come. The US constitution was drafted behind closed doors. Would we have the same constitution if it had been done with an open door policy? I realize we may have significant swaths of people that are not theists reading this, but one needs but look at Christ to see that secrecy in religion has been a constant. And also, if honorable work is inherently open then shouldn't we have the capacity to see into any and all meetings by any and all groups, entities, and persons that claim to be honorable? Shouldn't we then be able to eavesdrop on research activities done by any researcher? Access to their notes and to watch their labs? We certainly have the technology. Why not just have a society where anyone and everyone could spy in on anyone and everyone else ? If we're honorable we'd "have nothing to fear" because who can be honorable and still have 'secret documents'?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you tell me that there are not things that you value as sacred and don't share with others you are lying to yourself and everyone else. Aside from stirring up animosity against the mormons, this post is pointless because it leaves out the meat of the story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sensationalistic journalism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When stating that Mormons don't believe the same things about Christ as other religions it should be remembered that most other Christian religions only exist because someone did not believe the same thing that the dominant Catholic religion believed.
You can tell someone that you don't believe the same thing they do, but you cannot tell someone who honestly believes in Christ that they are not Christian because they don't believe it Him exactly the same way you do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Read this book: Mormons and secret stuff
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Read this book: Mormons and secret stuff
Name one faith that didn't come about without some violent opposition, and hence a violent defense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Read this book: Mormons and secret stuff
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The three things I listed are three things that ALL Christian denominations agree on that the LDS Church does not. These are not minor quibbles, but major doctrinal differences.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
(2) Even the Catholic chruch didn't beleive that Christ, God and the Holy Ghost were one in the same until after 325A.D. at the Council of Nicaea...
(3) Christ and God are exalted. With our good works we can return to live with our Father in Heaven...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It was his resurrection that gave us the gift of immortality - or to have our spirit and body reunited forever in an uncorruptable state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I assure you it wasn't Christ or his apostles. Now I don't know about you, but I'll directly to the source for my doctrine, thank you very much.
Believe what you like, but none of the original apostles ever said they believed those things - are they then not Christians?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Church has good reason and every right not to publish its Handbook
I have, at times, been authorized to consult The Handbook of Instructions. But even if it should remain on the Internet I will not read it now, because I no longer have that authorization. It certainly contains nothing of a conspiratorial nature, or evil, or of any kind of threat to the public that might justify violating its copyright for any supposed "public good."
Unlike most religions, The Church of Jesus Christ has no paid ministry. Its local leaders are lay members who have families and occupations. They do not ask to serve nor even plan to serve; rather, they are called to serve. They typically serve less than a decade. The Handbook of Instructions is a guide to leaders who come to their positions with no prior training. It is distributed to them to ensure that Church policies and procedures are uniform around the world. (By the way, only a few brief chapters pertaining to particular programs are available at Distribution Services.)
Unlike most other churches, we also do not decide which congregation we attend: we attend the ward in whose boundaries we reside. This obviously establishes a need for uniformity of policy and procedure. (You can learn the place and meeting times of your nearest congregation by selecting the link "worship with us" at mormon.org and entering your address.)
Any members of the Church who has a question about doctrine or policy can ask his bishop, who can consult the Handbook. However, leaders are encouraged to prayerfully adapt these guidelines to particular needs and circumstances.
If the Handbook were published, it could tempt some members to take a legalistic approach to policies and procedures and try to see just how close they could come to "crossing the line." Publication could also tempt some members who have more time on their hands than their leaders to make a hobby of knowing the handbook "better" than them, which could undermining their efforts to prayerfully adapt policies to particular circumstances.
The Church has every right to control distribution of its Handbook of Instructions. Copyright protects not just the right to publish, but also the right not to publish.
hthalljr'gmail'com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It has the word duck in it's name.
It may even swim and have some characteristics of a duck.
But why would it want to be called a duck?
Maybe ducks are more widely accepted and well-regarded in the fowl community.
We're all in the same pond, so let's not worry about our duckiness.
Life is about love.
Quack quack.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Real Reason
No joke, masterbation is against the rules and you can be "disfellowshipped" for it but there's no reference to it in any official church guidebook except for the one that was leaked. Pretty crazy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Real Reason
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Real Reason
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Real Reason
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm LDS.
Mormons are Christian, though. I'm not sure how the definition of "Christian" became so complex over the years. Last I checked, a disciple of Christ was a Christian. Who are you to judge the LDS methods of going about that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
THE SECRET COMPUTERS JUST OUTSIDE
they have MORE info on all of us then the NSA, FBI, CIA all put together!! EVERY YEAR, their little guys waling the streets are gathering data from every county, every state, and placing it in their data base!! And Joseph Smith could NOT READ NOR WRITE!! YET in 1831 he `read' GOLDEN TABLETS
that no one else could read!Then they disappeared!!Ask any school of Divinity across the U.S and they will tell you, there are TWO major "Cults" in the U.S.! The Mormons and the Baptists!! Just research the subject! NO DOGMA TO BACK UP THEIR TEACHINGS!! They are b.s.!
And YES they are in high places within the FBI and CIA!!
Frightening! They are really `spooky'! I have been "inside"
and know it to be the truth!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then post their books on the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I do so by the same authority Joseph Smith judged all existing religious traditions and judged that they were doing it wrong. None-at-all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I'm curious why you think I was saying that not being Christian was such a bad thing.
Who is the figure with that authority? President Bush? The Pope? Your stake leadership? Whoever the old white guy is that replaced Hinckley? The truth is that you can take or leave what I say, but you're deceiving people, intentionally or not, when you represent the LDS church as "Christian" knowing that it's not in the conventional sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The deception, as I see it, is someone trying to insinuate that a God fearing, and Christ based church is somehow not to be thought of as such because they do not share your exact beliefs.
Reserving the title "Christian" for yourself based on a man made, and flawed definition goes against all that Christ taught.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Cool
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
couldn't help but wonder when it says "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." if they really meant it. Hive Radical makes a good point, why did they keep the doors in Philly locked? A reporter should have been allowed in to comment on the proceedings if they were meaning it the way we take it today. I can't for the water-filled life of me see that the press, or tabloids in most cases, or some random individual with crafty search skills being allowed to print whatever they want without regards to privacy of the individuals involved. If the documents are printed on public access, then fair game. But reporting what a secret military agency is doing, where a witness in a trial works and who his family is are not freedoms of the press covered by the Constitution. James Madison is rolling over in his grave. Think about what the words and meaning of those words meant to them back then. Apply them to what they mean to us today, and understand that people and organizations with hidden motives have stretched the aim of these sacred lines of text. The issue here is not relious or not. It is whether said organization has the right to have the information taken down. If the Constitution is a living document, then stop killing the meaning of the words. If it isn't a living document,then start following the meaning of the words. Either way, this pond of ours is being taken over with algae......
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recN um=144
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Nothing secret here.
http://www.venganza.org/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Flying Spaghetti Monster
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Flying Spaghetti Monster
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Flying Spaghetti Monster
Ok, thank you sharing your opinion.
FSM is satire, but you knew that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's funny that when I read this the first time I thought it said, "You are clearly a mormon..." which didn't make any sense. Thankfully,I read it again and, in fact, it still doesn't make any sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Umm... Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious but getting the facts and doing research is the opposite of belief. Why would they bother doing it this time?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Secret Mormon Documnets
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Que lastima
Es una lastima lo que se discute en este foro. No estamos juzgando correctamente si los mormones creen en Dios o no, se trata de un documento interesante como el "Manual General de Instrucciones" que deberian tener todas las iglesias y que gracias a Wikipedia esta disponible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Bible has been accepted as the word of God, but I don't think you can go as far as to say it has been verified or substantiated. There are many, many verified inaccuracies in the Bible - such as a world-wide flood that never occurred. And it's common knowledge that Christians ignore sections of the Bible that don't apply today. Homosexuality is still a big no-no because the old testament says so, but the Bible's support of slavery and the death sentence for infedility is ignored by today's believers.
I won't insult you or your beliefs. Your faith is perfectly fine with me. But don't paint the Bible as a perfect document to argue that Mormonism is a cult... it's not. It may contain the words or God, but the editors were still men.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
medicines for any missionaries.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the Mob
The Mob launders money through the Church. Tippetts, an employee of the Church, has worked with a Mob fronted businessman (Allen Z Wolfson) in his last two positions.
http://www.linkedin.com/in/nathantippetts
I have discovered that the Church/Elders get 10% of the money, or over $1 billion a year. I have posted some of this information at mormonlaywers.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]