-
- Faxmonkey
- Adjutant
-
- Posts: 763
- Joined: 18 Jun 2008, 5:49 am
08 Jan 2011, 7:11 am
http://www.salon.com/news/wikileaks/ind ... 07/twitterAny thoughts on that ? Usual procedure, extraordinary ?
-
- danivon
- Ambassador
-
- Posts: 15994
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
08 Jan 2011, 7:57 am
Well, if you want totally free information, doesn't that also include your own? Twitter being the equivalent of shouting into a loudhailer on the street, I'm not sure that the content is protected.
-
- Faxmonkey
- Adjutant
-
- Posts: 763
- Joined: 18 Jun 2008, 5:49 am
09 Jan 2011, 12:54 am
danivon wrote:Well, if you want totally free information, doesn't that also include your own? Twitter being the equivalent of shouting into a loudhailer on the street, I'm not sure that the content is protected.
I for one am less interested in private persons business, but rather the dealings of public officals in my name. Wether everything should be public is another discussion.
I was driving especially at that gag order that barred Twitter from informing the users. That sounds a bit strange to me.
-
- danivon
- Ambassador
-
- Posts: 15994
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
09 Jan 2011, 8:05 am
Well, I know for a fact that Wikileaks has released private individuals' information. Several times the membership list of the British National Party has been given to them and they passed it on in full. It contained names and full addresses, as well as a line of comment.
Not that I didn't download it myself :-)