What is Digg?48 Comments
- SmokeN-DC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+61to the EFF please make the docs available to the public ASAP do not let AT&T hide this
- doafhat, on 10/12/2007, -4/+40Perhaps the EFF should tell AT&T to eff off?
- YourTechSupport, on 10/12/2007, -1/+36The old man from AT&T was quoted as saying "And I would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for them meddling IT!"
- farfromsubtl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+37Digg for bringing OJ jokes back!
- johndi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26Sorry our crimes are trade secrets can you please suspend the first amendment and shut up those troublesome reporters. OK, that's my take the lawyers really said.
"AT&T's lawyers also told the court that intense press coverage surrounding the case, including Wired News' publication of Klein's statement, was revealing the company's trade secrets, "causing grave injury to AT&T."
Talk about shameless. - bastawhiz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+19WTF... OJ was *so* innocent...
- LCmidas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I am now a proud member of EFF. :D I even paid the fee... Geeks unite!
- babbling, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10They're probably not allowed to release the documents privately. AT&T are claiming that they contain trade secrets.
Hopefully the EFF will still be able to use it as evidence and won't be ordered to give the papers back to AT&T, though. - Zipko, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"unsealing the documents 'would cause AT&T great harm and potentially jeopardize AT&T's network, making it vulnerable to hackers, and worse.'"
I take the 'and worse' part to be a reference to terrorists who would use this information.
It seems every time a company is taken to court now they cry that they can't have the trial made public because the world will end. How often can terrorism be used as an excuse to protect comercial intrests before people just get sick of it and assume any reference to terrorism is just crying wolf? Which would then lead to a dangerous situionation once someone really does have a legitimate case and noone believes them. - SpriteLite, on 10/12/2007, -18/+27wait let me guess.. the patroit act makes this ok right bush?
=rolls eyes= - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Oh yeah, and your dog too!
- sourtimes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7you mean http://www.dvorak.org/blog/ ?
- Alphabet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@koshak
why don't you just google it yourself
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=government+spying+anti+war+critics&btnG=Google+Search
It's not hard to do - lollerskates, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5If the tech docs don't fit, YOU MUST ACQUIT!
- SiB57, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@sourtimes - THAT was funny.
Now we even have people other than Dvorak plugging his blog. - astroid0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5too bad the reasons werent legitimate. i dont think moitoring phone calls of reporters of antiwar groups or things of that nature wualify as legitimate. I'm sure there were some legitimate uses of course, but the law was easy enough to follow. Only totalitarian regimes would decide the cnostitution was just 'a god damned piece of paper'
- grendelwraith, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9I don't know how often can it be used to make people believe the worst president in American history is a Hero?
"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." - cazbar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6No, but he did get plenty of other people killed.
And why are we even talking about Bush here? This is about the NSA doing something they've probably been doing since before Bush was in office.
Although it is a shame that he lets it happen. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Good job EFF, I think the documents should be released to the world.
- JeffD, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5What shady circumstances? An ex-AT&T employee handed them over, its not like they broke into an AT&T office and stole them, or hacked their servers and downloaded a copy for that matter.
- CapnCornflake, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4There's a difference between the government spying for legitimate reasons, and a multi-national corperation sending all it's data through the NSA.
- brutalentropy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3why do I get the feeling that the best thing to say to that is "if I only had a brain"? If I only had a heart?
Guys, this is dire. This is serious. AT&T and the federal government are in collusion to MONITOR YOU. AT&T is trying to exploit a loophole-- a technicality-- to make this all go away. Don't let them do it. Write to your local news stations and newspapers, get them to do a story on this. Write a letter to the editor, or to your congressperson.
America belongs to the people. - valkyries, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3hey AT&T can i have my fiber to the door now? ill give u any paper for that kind of bandwidth for 30$ a month
- fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Basically "and/or worse" always refers to the sky falling.
- BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3i guess AT&T would be fools if they didn't at least give this a shot. maybe they can ask for some money too.
- Drahknon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3[edit] silly me... misread the article...
Anyway, I don't see how they can get these back. It's akin to accidentally offering privileged communications... you can't unring the bell, but you could theoretically make a motion in limine. - PantherX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Didn't anyone see My Cousin Vinny?
- lollerskates, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Oh, because Dvorak is a total genius, right?
He is the troll of the tech journalism industry. A journalistic "goatse," if you will. - miketrin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2val, if they didn't spend all their money selling out our privacy to the thugs at NSA you could have had your fiber.
- cazbar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The lawyers argued that unsealing the documents "would cause AT&T great harm and potentially jeopardize AT&T's network, making it vulnerable to hackers, and worse."
Wow. Security through obscurity. That method has such a wonderful track record. (not) - rodbibeau, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ALL HAIL EMPEROR BUSH!
seriously. Clinton didnt screw up this bad, or anywhere near the scope of Bush. And the republicans impeached him!
I hate Bush. - randomc0de, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2What needs to happen is for the documents to be "stolen" from the EFF offices and published/propagated on the net. With any luck, an EFF staffer who cares enough about justice would do this and face the possible jail time. It's a risk, but there's no reason this information should be private.
- TheAngelsOwl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Its been happening for years, the NSA has other telco companies running devices on there networks which can captures terabits of telecommunications data...
- johndi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2The former employee almost certainly broke a NDA. The morale of this story is always make copies before turning over evidence. We don't know if EFF took such precautions, and if they did they sure wouldn't be dumb enough to say they did. When dealing with large corporations you may even consider having a copy of documents in trusted hands outside of the country. Basically someone who can flaunt court orders if the evidence gets turned back over and they place a gag order on you. Of course you have to do such things before you file.
- fsnuffer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Let me get this straight - the EFF is using documents obtained under shady circumstances to further the public good by exposing the NSA. The irony is dripping here since they claim the NSA is obtaining information using just as shady justifications. I am not claiming to be on either side but take a step back, look at the case law involved, and take a cynical look on both sides. To put my stake in the ground, while most of the time I dislike the positions the ACLU takes I recognize 100% their importance in keeping both sides of any argument honest.
- cyclotron, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3George Bush did NOT kill OJ's wife!
- Mike89, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1It'd be so cool if you could ONLY view comments with -10 diggs or less (eg. -30 is less).
- ChuyMatt, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2NDAs do not cover instances where whistleblower status is in effect. your comment misleads the point.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0JeffD...what about when someone working for Apple turned over "trade secrets" and now Apple is suing the web site that published them. Where did you stand there?
TRade secrets are trade secrets and it doesn't matter how you obtain them.
(Cool. My captcha starts with att.) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1And *****...you have evidence to show that anti-war reporters were monitored like you say there were? And no, ultra-left sites like Alex Jones don't count.
- nexus123, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0In Russia government watches y...... Oh wait
- nexus123, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0In Russia the government watches yo.... oh wait
- dupswapdrop, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Documents what Documents? that was just my wish list for my birthday party, here let me clean that up for you.
- backasswards, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3This country is going to sh!t. The pretense for war in Iraq is the same sh!t we are doing now. Torture (CIA renditions), Holding prisoners without charges or trial, Spying on its own citizens, the USA PATRIOT act, and basically telling people to shut up whenever the people of this country have a problem with it. Big business is not only rolling over for the government, THEY ACTUALLY ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE WITHOUT BEING ORDERED TO!
- lagrange, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3And you probably vote Republican... some might say you got what you deserved.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5Sheesh, this story was on dvorak's blog 2 days ago!
Its a sad world when he posts news 2 days before digg gets it - filovirus, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1RAAAAAMONE, bring AT&T a bucket of Rich Vos's ear juice
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -48/+14LMAO AT&T is almost as stupid as Steve jobs.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is