US Subpoenaed All Visitor Logs From Online News Publication; Falsely Said Site Couldn't Tell Anyone

from the the-abuse-of-secrecy dept

Tue, Nov 10th 2009 6:36am — Mike Masnick

We've seen it over and over again: when the government can hide behind the veil of secrecy, it can abuse its power. That's why we're supposed to have checks and balances on power, but all too often governments figure out ways to get around that. The latest example is that US attorneys issued a subpoena to the person hosting the news website Indymedia, demanding a logfile of all visitors from a particular day and ordered the woman not to reveal the existence of the subpoena itself. Indymedia doesn't keep its logfiles, so it simply had nothing to turn over, and after realizing this, the government withdrew the request. However, the requirement to stay silent about it still was there, and the woman asked the EFF for help. With the EFF involved, the government finally backed down and admitted that there was absolutely no legal basis for demanding that the woman not talk about the subpoena, and "chose not to go to court" over the matter, despite threatening to at an earlier time.

This is hardly the first time we've heard about the government using (and abusing) procedures like national security letters to not just demand all sorts of info, but also demand that the recipient not tell anyone about it. Every once in a while we're able to hear about these situations because a group like the EFF or the ACLU pushed back and were able to get the US government to back down, but that's likely only a fraction of the situations where this has happened. In many others, we likely don't even know at all, because the recipient gave in, either because they didn't realize their legal rights, or because it just wasn't worth the fight. But when the government thinks that it can demand certain data and cloak the demand behind a related demand for secrecy, it makes it way too easy for the government to abuse the process. It basically guarantees no oversight, so why not ask for way more than the law requires, knowing that most people won't push back and no one will ever find out about it?

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: log files, secrecy, subpoena
Companies: eff, indymedia

15 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2009 @ 6:46am

Government of the people myth
This "Government of the people" is a crock and should be disbanded. In reality the United States is a Plutocracy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Call me Al, 10 Nov 2009 @ 7:00am

Sounds like extortion to me. "Give this to me now and if you tell anyone I'll be round to break your legs."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Overcast (profile), 10 Nov 2009 @ 7:58am

It's what you call "Tyranny".

It's a Government for the Government by the Government and for the Bankers by the Bankers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard Corsale, 10 Nov 2009 @ 8:04am

Re: Government of the people myth
Oligarchy actually, The same fools have run the country since JFK. The just re-brand it every 4-8 years.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stuart, 10 Nov 2009 @ 8:05am

Re:
Don't forget the Big and Small businesses and the Unions and the Lawyers. The only thing the Government dose not look after is the people. Now with the Tyranny thing. That is what you get when the government gives you everything. The "Soft Tyranny" of 10 Billion laws and regulations to make sure that everyone is in violation of at least a few to gain control over the masses.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 10 Nov 2009 @ 8:06am

Re: Re: Government of the people myth
"Oligarchy actually, The same fools have run the country since JFK. The just re-brand it every 4-8 years."

Waaaaaay before then. More like around the time the first national bank was created. People with very familiar last names (Morgans, Rothschilds, Rockefellers, etc.).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2009 @ 8:42am

The government and big corporations are working HARD every day and every night to destroy the communication structure that the Internet provides and to create a regulatory structure that hinders free speech just like they have already done with public airwaves and cableco infrastructure and the existing technology outside the Internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jjmsan (profile), 10 Nov 2009 @ 8:45am

Same people
No, they haven't. The whole there is no difference between the parties and everything is the same got us George Bush and the Iraq war. There are differences between the parties and how they run the government. If you want to hide behind the nothing I can do makes a difference fine, but that's what it is. You can go out and work on changes or you can talk about how everything is bad and nothing can be done. Personally, I prefer at least trying. That way even if I lose I can be satisified that at least I tried.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChimpBush McHitlerBurton, 10 Nov 2009 @ 10:01am

Re: Same people
Well, yeah, there is the "work on changes" attitude, but that relies on working within the confines and rules of the system, which are designed to prevent you from making any real change.

Then there is the "nothing can be done" attitude. This attitude is more realistic, in that it acknowledges the rigged system, and says in essence, "I can't change things from within the confines and rules which have been set up, so I'm just going to get together with a bunch of other people and begin to subvert the system."

This latter method actually works, because there is no rigging possible with anarchy and subversion. The riggers of systems get all hot and bothered when their control mechanisms break down.

Viva La Revolution!

(The shame is, what usually happens is that when the control mechanisms break down and subversion starts, the riggers of systems back off *just enough* to cause the subversion to wane. People get fat and lazy again, and we're back on track. They've learned not to piss people off *too* much, and just rely on a formula to do as much damage as possible, without tipping the boat over. As long as we remain blind to this, we will always get the least possible freedom that the rigging will allow.)

CBMHB
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 10 Nov 2009 @ 10:15am

Re: Re: Same people
Well said. To the point that, "There are differences between the parties and how they run the government", the logic FAIL there is that they DON'T run the government.

There is little to no choice in major elections today. When you realize that 90% or so of the money (made that up, but maybe there's a true figure out there) that BOTH parties get comes from the same sources, you begin to see the problem.

Controlling elections isn't done by rigging the votes so that one favored candidate wins. It's done by making sure that no matter WHO wins, it's your guy....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PRMan, 10 Nov 2009 @ 12:28pm

Re: Re: Re: Same people
And then getting your media buddies to polarize everyone on issues that don't matter to you as a corporation and that probably won't change a whole lot during the term anyway, because realistically the president has very little power on those issues.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CommieBlaster, 10 Nov 2009 @ 2:51pm

Obama's Communist Administration is Killing the Constitution
Look here at many examples of Obama's unrestrained abuse of the law: http://www.commieblaster.com/news/index.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jjmsan (profile), 10 Nov 2009 @ 2:51pm

Re: Re: Same people
I would agree that the system operates to prevent radical change. I would also say that preventing such change is built into the system design. Radical change that is your radical change is good from your viewpoint, but if the rules allow you(or your party)to do it they allow your opponent to do so also. You would then have a system that whiplashed back and forth between 2 poles. Since such changes tend to be of a more violent nature you have a lot of death and destruction. The current system we have in the US was an attempt to limit that by splitting the power between 2 different arms of government. The Supreme Court established its claim by a court decision(Martin vs. Malbury I think) so we have 3 separate power centers. This provides stability which I would say is the whole purpose of government. While it can be very annoying it seems to work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jamie, 10 Nov 2009 @ 3:11pm

Re: Obama's Communist Administration is Killing the Constitution
But what about Bush's? This subpoena was entered into the court record on 1/23/09. I doubt that Obama had a prosecutor take the case, got a grand jury seated and got them and a judge to allow this subpoena after being in office only 3 days. The fact is this case started under Bush, including the subpoena. It was withdrawn on 2/25/09 under Obama and AG Holder.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Overcast (profile), 11 Nov 2009 @ 6:28am

Don't let partisanship confuse you here... hehe

I'm sure - this is only ONE of many such 'requests'. By the Bush administration, the Obama administration, etc, etc, etc.

Our one-party system just does so much it's hard to hide now.

Oh wait - was it supposed to be 'two-parties' like Network News tells us? lol, not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]