Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Is this a serious post? The government can exact capricious petty revenge on your business, so it's not the business's fault for exercising cowardice?

It would be unbelievably easy to rightfully Godwin your perspective on this issue, but I won't do it.

The United States is a nation predicated on a set of inviolate rights that are supposedly protected by the charter document of the nation itself. Among these rights are the right to hold property, conduct affairs freely, and speak freely. The courts have repeatedly defined rights that are derivative of our constitutionally-protected ones, and that among these are the ability to conduct business free from the threat of arbitrary governmental coercion( e.g. absent of a "chilling effect" ), with obvious exceptions made where the business has committed a crime.

PayPal, Amazon, et. al. Have not broken the law by providing services to Wikileaks, and are, therefore, not in danger of retribution by the government specified in the US Constitution. The salient point here may be that the government we have is possibly NOT the government specified by the US Constitution, and these companies ARE in danger of capricious revenge by the government. And if this is the case, we as a nation are living under the thumb of a truly illegitimate government - and we have bigger issues to worry about than the cowardice of companies.

But whether or not we exist in a nation of arbitrarily exacted State power, nothing changes the fact that Amazon and PayPal are corporate cowards, in the absence of an actual, honest-to-god court order. To say they should be held harmless is, well, an "interesting" perspective.




>PayPal, Amazon, et. al. Have not broken the law by providing services to Wikileaks

I would be surprised if it's not illegal to aid in the dissemination of classified material. Nevertheless, its certainly illegal to aid an abet terrorists. Seeing as the government owns the monopoly on defining who is a terrorist, it's not a stretch at all to see there might be actual legal consequences down the road for these companies.

This may not be "right", but this isn't Amazon's or Paypal's fight to have. I don't blame them one bit. This is Wikileak's problem to deal with--It comes with the territory.


Nope. While they may have a case against the original leaker, once it's out, classified information is out in the United States (not so in the UK, with the Official Secrets Act) and further disclosure is at least nominally protected by the Constitution.


No, the legal ramifications only come into play when the government officially declares something a terrorist organization. In the USA, this would be done by the State Department, which has yet to issue such a proclamation. All this folding by American companies until Wikileaks is actually branded such is (depending on your POV) pure cowardice or generous cooperation with the present interests of government.

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_or...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: