Johns Hopkins Demand To Professor To Remove Blog Post Was Over Totally Bogus Concerns
from the but-of-course dept
We wrote about the Dean of the Engineering School at Johns Hopkins telling cryptography expert and professor Matthew Green to remove his excellent blog post analyzing what attack vectors the NSA might be using to get around encrypted conversations. A few more details have come out, initially via Green's own Twitter feed, which were then mushed together into paragraph form via Ars Technica, which also provides some follow up information. First up, is Green's summary:So listen, I'm trying not to talk about this much because anything I say will make it worse. What I've been told is that someone on the APL [Johns Hopkins' Applied Physics Laboratory—motto: "Enhancing national security through science and technology"] side of JHU discovered my blog post and determined that it was hosting/linking to classified documents. This requires a human since I don't believe there's any automated scanner for this process. It's not clear to me whether this request originated at APL or if it came from elsewhere. All I know is that I received an e-mail this morning from the Interim Dean of the Engineering school asking me to take down the post and to desist from using the NSA logo. He also suggested I should seek counsel if I continued. In any case I made it clear that I would not shut down my non-JHU blog, but I did shut down a JHU-hosted mirror. I also removed the NSA logo. I did not remove any links or photos of NOW PUBLIC formerly classified material, because that would just be stupid.Separately, JHU put out a statement stating the following:
I'm baffled by this entire thing. I hope to never receive an e-mail like that again and I certainly believe JHU (APL) is on the wrong side of common sense and academic freedom, regardless of their obligations under the law. That said, I have no desire to cause trouble for any of the very good people at JHU so I'll keep my posts off JHU property. I have no idea if this was serious or a tempest in a teapot.
The university received information this morning that Matthew Green’s blog contained a link or links to classified material and also used the NSA logo. For that reason, we asked Professor Green to remove the Johns Hopkins-hosted mirror site for his blog.Later, JHU told Ars Technica that it had not received a government request, but rather made all of these determinations internally.
Upon further review, we note that the NSA logo has been removed and that he appears to link to material that has been published in the news media. Interim Dean Andrew Douglas will inform Professor Green that the mirror site may be restored.
Let's pick apart these arguments, because nearly all of them are completely bogus, and JHU's initial decision to send the request to Green was incredibly screwed up on a variety of levels. First off, on the question of the use of the logo. There has been some confusion over this, in part because of a silly law, 18 USC 701, which tries to bar the use of such logos for the purpose of impersonating an official from those agencies. Unfortunately, some like to interpret that as a full ban on using such logos even in reporting. But that's wrong. Green has every right to use the logo in his post.
Similarly, the links to "classified material," as Green himself notes, involved material that is clearly now in the public, having been reported on and discussed widely in a variety of news sources, starting off with the NY Times, The Guardian and Pro Publica. Of course, he does slightly overstate his case in pointing out that they're public -- as for really dumb reasons that we've discussed before the government still likes to pretend that classified info that is being widely discussed and shown in the press is still "classified."
Either way, neither of those arguments justify asking Green to take down the blog post. Green was engaged in a public debate over very important topics, and did so in a perfectly reasonable and legitimate way. That JHU sought to stifle his speech raises serious questions about the way in which JHU views free speech and basic academic freedom. Even if there were slight concerns over the logo or the links, even a very simple review of the situation, along with a principled stand on free expression should have resulted in the school choosing not to do what it did.
Of course, the real hint at what happened comes from the beginning of Green's explanation -- that the complaint came from the APL, which (as some have pointed out) is really a defense contractor rather than an academic institution. It seems likely that the APL was much more concerned about pissing off its partners and colleagues at the NSA, rather than basic concepts such as academic freedom and freedom of speech. While JHU has allowed the post to go back up since the logo is gone, that's a really weak response. JHU should admit that it screwed up royally, and was driven by the short-term economic interests of the APL, rather than the long term interests of protecting its key academics.
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: academic freedom, censorship, free speech, logos, matthew green, nsa, nsa surveillance
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Storm in a teacup
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"Seek legal counsel" "trademark logos" "classified materials"
This Dean should apply for a job at the MAFIAA. He'd fit right in and could be Chris Dodd's BFF.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Translation "I got a message about a professor's blog post, and proceeded to do no actual investigation before demanding he take it down, and threatening legal action if he didn't. ow that the media is reporting on my stupidity, I'm going to backpedal as hard as I can without admitting my actions to have been completely baseless.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So? Is there some concern that people are going to think this guy's blog is the NSA's? Because- as much as shills may not understand this concept- that's all trademark law is supposed to prevent. Not you being talked about or referenced in a way you don't like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dowhatnow?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Administrators in Love
So I don't think it's because of undue pressure on JHU admin that Green got his takedown notice. It was because university administrators, corporate CEOs and powerful people in government are all asshole buddies and look out for one another. I'm sure somebody whispered in somebody's ear, but I doubt it took any persuading.
The think about police states is, if you can get close to the power, you can do very very well. And make no mistake, the administrators at JHU want to be very close to power.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hopkins, APL and contracts
All very dumb yes, but no conspiracy to suppress the post from the internet just from Johns Hopkins associated resources.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Assuming it was successful in effectively replacing the official blog, it would not only solve problems like this one, but would (appropriately) annoy "free speech challenged" administrative wonks who see themselves as the gatekeepers of academic "freedom".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It Has All Happened Before (to PopeRatzo, #7).
Clyde W. Barrow, _Universities and the Capitalist State, Corporate Liberalism and the Reconstruction of American Higher Education, 1894-1928_, University of Wisconsin Press, 1990.
This kind of thing has all happened before. The classic example was Scott Nearing, a radical economist who, in 1915, on the covert orders of businessmen, was fired from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania for, inter alia, opposing child labor. Nearing eventually responded to academic blacklisting by "doing a Thoreau," moving to then-remote parts of Vermont, and later, Maine, where he could live off the land, and grow his own food, build his own housing, etc. Considering his publication list, he seems to have gotten on rather better, doing "bread labor," as he called it, than many conventional academics did, teaching freshmen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Nearing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Nearing# Chronological_list_of_books_and_pamphlets_by_Scott_Nearing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_and_S cott_Nearing
Of course child labor still exists, albeit in countries such as Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, and Bangladesh. Likewise, there are American businessmen who have a vested interest in importing the products of child labor-- and they pull strings. One would not be particularly surprised if a certain Johns Hopkins University dean were next to come to our attention in this connection.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What's wrong with publishing classified info
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]