
US government is entitled to all Snowden book proceeds, judge rules - mikorym
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/12/us-government-is-entitled-to-all-snowden-book-proceeds-judge-rules/
======
bcaa7f3a8bbc
If Snowden has no chance of getting any income from his book, let's boycott
the official book and download unauthorized copies from Library Genesis
instead. And perhaps, donate to the Freedom of the Press Foundation. But at
least, don't buy the official book and send money to the U.S. Government.

~~~
Paul-ish
What about the publisher, who took on legal risk publishing Snowden's book? If
they don't make money, there is no incentive to publish this sort of book in
the future.

~~~
saagarjha
Will the publisher get any of the money, even if people bought the book?

~~~
9nGQluzmnq3M
The ruling names his publishers as "parties necessary to accord relief, but
[the US Gov] has not asserted independent claims against them". So if I'm
parsing that right (IANAL), the publishers are required to remit Snowden's
share to the government, but the ruling doesn't appear to require the
publishers themselves to forfeit their own revenues/profits.

[https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-
content/uploads/2019/12/snowd...](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-
content/uploads/2019/12/snowden_book_ruling.pdf)

------
jammygit
> The judge also ruled that Snowden had breached his contractual
> responsibilities by giving speeches at the TED conference and other venues.
> Each of these speeches included slides with materials that were marked as
> classified.

There was another front page story today about a judge claiming that the wiki
claims could not be tried because they could not confirm whether the
government was indeed spying. Which is it: are the leaked documents real or
fake? Awfully convenient interpretations

~~~
robgibbons
Appropriating Snowden's revenue streams is literally the only way the
establishment can actually punish him in the foreseeable future.

Wikipedia is doing the right thing by pursuing the NSA legally, but they
really have no chance at all, because of the legal framework upon which the
NSA's power is built.

I see the connection you're pointing out, but I don't see any way anyone could
legally act upon it. (Sans maybe a Congressional act)

~~~
mikorym
I wonder if maybe one can buy the book and print it yourself or through Blurb
[1] and then just donate the amount?

[1] [https://www.blurb.com/](https://www.blurb.com/)

------
Joe-Z
Here‘s a link to donate for Snowden:

[https://edwardsnowden.com/de/donate/](https://edwardsnowden.com/de/donate/)

Also I will be downloading an illegal copy of his book today. And I’m not even
that big a fan of him.

EDIT: Removed some profanity, sorry

~~~
mikorym
> And I’m not even that big a fan of him.

We are but vessels for our claim to fame.

You can see this with Nobel prize winners, rich tycoons, great writers, and so
forth.

Often in mathematics, a thing is not named after the person who discovered it.
I think that mathematicians as a joke even made a theorem about this and then
didn't name it after the guy who pointed it out.

With Snowden, I think it was more the fact that _he was the whistleblower_.
You could argue that he just did it for this reason or that reason. But he is
now the vessel for that point in history.

~~~
me_me_me
Don't forget that he first tried to go about it the legal way. Escalate to
higher ups, where he was promptly ignored.

~~~
mikorym
I didn't know that. Did you know this before or is it in the book?

~~~
me_me_me
Haven't read the book. This is from when the story started breaking.

According to accounts he had a hardcover constitution at his desk. He used it
to back up his arguments but again 'who cares nerd, get back to your work'.

Other things that pop to my mind was that he was given some super high
clearance so he could do favors for his boss (doing their job) as they were
too lazy. And of course no one cared then, nor they cared afterwards.

Reading about this whole story popped my bubble of ignorance how government
agencies are run. They are run same as any big corporation, run by career
BSers often lazy and incompetent. But they are protected by same type of
people (naturally).

~~~
Joe-Z
>'who cares nerd, get back to your work'

That's pretty much it. The first time I really understood Snowden was when he
was on the Joe Rogan podcast (think of JRE what you will...). It really drove
home the point of the profanity* of evil. Just people going about their daily
business, not thinking too much about it.

*this doesn't seem to be the correct word here. If you're a native english speaker please tell me what's the right phrase to use here

~~~
inemesitaffia
Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil

------
robgibbons
Possibly the most important point is that they are not preventing the
publication, or even going so far as to deny its content; they are asking that
the profits be awarded to them because the subjects of the book are
confidential.

------
mantap
Better title "Judge rules Snowden signed contract to give all book proceeds to
US government".

USG is not appropriating his proceeds just because he is accused of a crime,
they have been given it by a judge because Snowden signed a contract to that
effect. If he had signed a contract to give book proceeds to Elon Musk or Katy
Perry then presumably the judge would have upheld that too.

------
woah
Is it possible to donate to Snowden?

~~~
abecedarius
I don't know the legalities for U.S. citizens, but I'd welcome suggestions for
other appropriate charities, too. I'm certainly going to donate a multiple of
the book price to _someone_.

~~~
indigochill
In the US, the EFF has been a long-time champion of freedom in the digital
age. They're probably the most Snowden-esque nonprofit you can donate to, as
they provide pro bono legal help in the defense of freedom in the digital
realm ([https://www.eff.org/pages/legal-
assistance](https://www.eff.org/pages/legal-assistance)).

There's also the Wikimedia Foundation which has of course been responsible for
the distribution of a lot of free information around the world.

------
close04
It's "nice" to see that judges immediately see a breach of contract but the
illegality of NSA's actions are swept under the rug. Truly the land of the
free to do exactly as they're told.

------
beatgammit
Why didn't his lawyers catch that? I'm sure he's had lawyers reviewing his
contracts with publishers and whatnot, so surely they must be aware of his
employment contract.

------
snowedin
Isn't Snowden's book literally his auto-biography? How exactly does it contain
classified material?

------
runninganyways
Well of course they did. This is one of those times where it's easy to see the
real law of the land is whatever the government feels like doing. It's all a
dog and pony show. What I find surprising is that Snowden didn't know that.
He's not going to win a game where his competition makes up the rules as they
go along.

~~~
jahewson
Huh? He literally signed a contract saying he would forfeit to the US
government any money from books containing classified material - and the judge
is holding him to it. It’s right there in black and white.

~~~
saagarjha
The government promised to uphold the Constitution too, but that didn’t go all
too well…

