Comments on: The WikiLeaks story and criminal liability under the espionage laws

By: USHey

USHey — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 07:55:04 +0000

The internet is a medium, and everything publicly available on it is part of the media. I wonder if anyone knows whether under the Espionage Act it has to be proven that the accused intends to harm a nation, to harm that nation’s government, to harm that nation’s citizens, to help that nation’s government, or to help that nation’s citizens, which are not always the same thing. What if the accused means no harm but the leak has a negative effect? What if the leak has some negative effects and some positive effects, and how do you compare the good done to the damage done? If any damage is done, but some good is also done, to what degree does the good mitigate the damage?

By: CRR

CRR — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:11:21 +0000

I’d love it if someone used Wikileaks to ‘leak’ the documents that prove that WMD’s existed in Iraq.

Wikileaks isn’t going to kill anyone. Sending troops into Iraq under false pretenses has already killed too many to justify the action. Use Wikileaks for its intended purpose, and leak the truth, so we can believe you.

By: Dafydd

Dafydd — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:52:08 +0000

Whatever other arguments there are, the internet is definitely a part of the media.

NY Times has a website too.

By: cynicalme

cynicalme — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:54:37 +0000

The establishment is p*ssed off. The establishment should p*ss off itself. Don’t pontificate, ponder and posture — pass a law so this isn’t repeated and quit making the Wiki guys heroes.

By: RSiferd2

RSiferd2 — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 22:03:07 +0000

I would also wonder if the US would be able to do anything, considering Wikileaks isn’t based in the US on any level. From what I understand, different parts of Wikileaks are in different countries ranging from Iceland to Sweeden. I would presume that prosecution of the organization would have to be within those countries, but I may be wrong on that.