WikiLeaks: All Our 637,000 Twitter Followers Are Subject Of The Subpoena

[Hissyspit]

From Twitter Feed:

wikileaks: WARNING all 637,000 @wikileaks followers are a target of US gov subpoena against Twitter, under section 2. B http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/07/twitter/subpoena.pdf

wikileaks: Too late to unfollow; trick used is to demand the lists, dates and IPs of all who received our twitter messages.

wikileaks: RT @dictvm: Jake, Birgitta and Rop have been given the option to object. What about the followers? Class action suit?

[Ohio Joe]

1. The link is not working for me - nt

[Hissyspit]

4. Fixed. It's a link to the PDF of the subpoena.

At Salon.com.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

2. Yep its true, here's a link from ZD NET and thats 600,000

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/us-subpoenas-wikileaks-tweets-and-why-this-could-affect-you/7610

According to Wikileaks lawyer Mark Stephens live on the BBC News a short time ago, it is believed Facebook and Google (see here) have also been contacted regarding Wikileaks members and potential whistleblowers.

Update (12:20am GMT): Mark Stephens on the BBC News also makes clear that the court order will also cover the “600,000 odd followers that Wikileaks has on Twitter“.

[Hissyspit]

6. Thanks.

Fixed it.

[TorchTheWitch]

17. it's BULLSHIT - READ the subpoena

It specifically states what members/accounts are subject to the subpoena which is a grand total of 5 to 7 considering that two people appear to use two accounts each.

[thudblunder]

19. It's NOT BULLSHIT

It is correct that only a few individuals are named in the order.

However, Part B of Attachment A covers:

'2. non-content information associated with the contents of any communication or file stored by or for the account(s), such as the source and destination email addresses and IP addresses.'

The important words are 'destination email addresses'. If somebody subpoenaed Gmail for your emails, they wouldn't just want the content of the messages, they'd want 'non-content information' like the email addresses of the person you sent those messages to. Potentially, this is the same thing.

The judge may not have understood how Twitter works and may not have intended the order to have such wide application; it'll be up to Twitter/Wikileaks to bring this to the court's attention.

[Hissyspit]

24. 2011-01-09: DOJ subpoena applicable to non-Twitter users who viewed tweets?

http://wlcentral.org/node/864

The issued subpoena ordered Twitter to provide information regarding any account either registered to or in any way associated with the following individuals or user names:

rop_g
ioerror
birgittaj
Julian Assange
Bradley Manning
Rop Gonggrijp
Birgitta Jonsdottir
Wikileaks
The information to be supplied, however, pertains to both the sources and destinations of these accounts. This is to include

records of user activity for any connections made to or from the Account, including the date, time, length, and method of connections, data transfer volume, user name, and source and destination Internet Protocol address(es).

on-content information associated with the contents of any communication or file stored by or for the account(s), such as the source and destination email addresses and IP addresses. (Source; original pdf subpoena)

Note that the requirement of turning over user names and "destination IP addresses" would range over any electronic device (like a phone or computer) receiving communications from the above named individuals. (To see the information revealed by your IP address, click here. )

As other sources have pointed out, the order implicates more than just the above named users and user accounts. The language seems to implicate every Twitter follower of each of the named accounts, which explains Wikileaks' announcement that "all 637,000 @wikileaks followers are a target".

MORE

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

3. good, put em all in jail

go ahead

[EFerrari]

13. Maybe we should just all call up the FBI and ask for appointments

to turn ourselves in.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

15. yeah, flood the swtichboard

I love it... or all go to FBI HQ and insist on being arrested

[moondust]

5. Anti-government activities.

Sometimes lead to murder.

[LaurenG]

20. Yes if those in power are threatened to be outed they sometimes murder those who would out them. nt

[sabrina 1]

7. That is scary. It seems like intimidation rather than any

kind of legitimate law enforcement activity. Just harass their followers enough and hopefully they will be afraid to support them anymore.

The answer to that would be for even people to sign on, millions more. If the DOJ has this kind of time to waste, then what did they mean when they said they didn't want to waste time prosecuting War Criminals because there was so much else to do?

And this is money being wasted also, that we supposedly don't have.

More 'change' we can believe in.

[FogerRox]

8. What if 5 million decided to follow Wikileaks on Twitter

He he he

[sabrina 1]

9. Exactly. That would take some organization. But they have

supporters all over the world, so it should not be all that difficult. There is a site that started a little while ago, it has over six million members from all over the world. They are one of the latest sites that are appearing where citizens of different countries are joining forces and 'going global' to work on progressive ideas. The PTBs went Global a long time ago, but ordinary people still focused only on their own countries. That put the people of the world at a disadvantage. Now, we are learning.

Anyhow, they put up a petition for Assange and so far it has around 700,000 signatures. I wonder if they could organize all those people into signing up to follow Wikileaks on Twitter?

[JCMach1]

10. Just added it... BRING IT ON!

[snot]

11. K&R'd

This should not be taken lightly.

All us who've looked at #Wikileaks could end up on the no-fly list, etc.

Mastercard, Visa, PayPal et al. might decide to strangle us financially like they've done to Wikileaks.

Or if you've been foolish enough to store any data you care about online, maybe it disappears.

Or maybe your internet access just gets super slow . . . .

As another commentator has pointed out, it's highly unlikely that the gummint asked for our info ONLY from Twitter; certainly, they also asked Google, Facebook, et al. But we haven't heard anything about Google or Facebook objecting; which means, they almost certainly have complied.

I TOTALLY AGREE, EVERYONE should start following #Wikileaks.

But this is no joke.

[EFerrari]

12. K&R

Never mind my PM, found it.

:kick:

[glinda]

14. Guess they built all those new prisons and jails for a reason?

[kgnu_fan]

25. .

[TorchTheWitch]

16. the subpoena says nothing of the kind

It specifically states those Twitter members subject to the subpoena and what info that Twitter may have concerning those specific members. Did anyone actually READ the subpoena??? The only people claiming that this info is wanted for all 600,000+ followers of Wikileaks on Twitter is Assange's attorney, Mark Stephens, and whoever the nitwit is that wrote those tweets. This is BULLSHIT.

READ the subpoena. It specifically states which members/accounts the subpoena covers, and it's a grand total of 5 to 7 people seeing as two of the people appear to have more than one account (birgittaj/Birgitta Jonsdottir and rop_g/Rop Gongrijp).

"The following customer or subscriber account information for each account registered to or associated with Wikileaks; rop_g, ioerror, birgittaj, Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Rop Gongrijp, Birgitta Jonsdottir for the time period November 1, 2009 to present."

[Hissyspit]

18. Here is some discussion of the issue.

My understanding of it was that Stephens considers the language vague, whether that was the intent of the subpoena or not.

WLLegal Wikileaks & the Law
@mlcalderone @gregmitch still, wording is weird bc twitter names technically not email. Both B(2) and B(3) are vague and I ? their scope.
4 hours ago

WLLegal Wikileaks & the Law
@mlcalderone @gregmitch "destination email and IP addresses" *could* mean twitter names and IPs that #Wikileaks has sent messages to
4 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

WLLegal Wikileaks & the Law
@
@GregMitch 2(B) is vague, but even if they can get info on followers, it still won't be close to amount they're getting from those named.
4 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

[Hissyspit]

22. Here's the problem:

...beyond of the more general problem of what the hell is the Obama administration doing intimidating whistleblowers and transparency advocates...

"Under B 2, the document requests 'all records and other information (…) including non-content information associated with the contents of any communication or file stored by or for the account(s), such as the source and destination email addresses and IP addresses.'"

[Kaleko]

23. Ah, I see now how that could apply to anybody following WikiLeaks on Twitter.

At first, I was stumped after reading the subpoena PDF how it could be interpreted so broadly.

Thanks for clarifying that.

[xchrom]

21. recommend