
Tech journalists troubled by Assange computer intrusion charge - howard941
https://cpj.org/blog/2019/06/tech-journalists-troubled-assange-CFAA-charge.php
======
swanny160
Was Assange in the US at the time of the hacking? What has bothered me most is
that he is a non-citizen, a journalist, being dragged across the world to face
US Law

~~~
onion2k
In the age of the Internet the physical location of where a crime took place
is complicated. If I sit in front of a computer in a foreign country,
preferably one that doesn't have extradition treaties with the US, and steal
money/secrets/dank memes from American citizens I don't think many people
would suggest I should be allowed to get away with that based on where I
happen to be at the time.

It may or may not be the case for Assange depending on the facts of the case
and on your own opinion, but treating the location of the crime as "where the
server is" does seem like a sensible way to deal with the problem.

~~~
switch007
Following your hypothetical, which countries don't have laws for theft?

Yes, the person should be allowed to get away with it, because the sovereignty
of that country is important.

Should every country apply their laws globally, or just the US...?

~~~
cm2187
He is being extradited precisely because what he did is also a crime under UK
law. You typically can’t be extradited if the offense you committed isn’t a
crime locally (like homosexuality).

~~~
kace91
I'm not sure that's entirely fair, as it doesn't address the posible disparity
of sentencing for an existing crime.

A specific action punishable by a year in prison in my home country might be
punished with a decade in another; the conditions of my home country's prison
might not be the same as in a foreign country, etc.

If I had to serve a one year sentence where I live for something I consider
moral I wouldn't be too bothered (not that I'd welcome it of course), but
serving a year in an American prison is a terrifying thought.

------
duxup
The including of the espionage act is a reasonable concern.

The question about helping someone hack the laptop in question (even if not
successful) was a clear crossing of a boundary that I would expect most
journalists would not cross.

~~~
soulofmischief
So, did you know that in the US you can face _years_ in prison for just
telling someone, "I can't help you commit check fraud, but Google _____ if
you're interested in learning how others do it"?

Do you agree with this practice?

~~~
colechristensen
How about if you're talking to someone fuming about a local politician and
he's talking about making an explosive and you say "I can't help you make a
bomb but Google _____ if you're interested in learning how others do it"

If the person goes and then tries it, yes, I agree you share in the
responsibility for their actions. It was reasonable for you to believe the
intent was serious and you provided essential guidance to making it a reality.

There's that word "just" again. "just telling someone" adds deceptive
misdirection. The context of who you tell and how and why are all important.

~~~
threatofrain
> but Google _____ if you're interested in learning how others do it.

> ...and you provided essential guidance to making it a reality.

That's called essential guidance? Man, I guess I could be an educator and
mentor, providing essential guidance on software. I guess people are serious
when they say software is Google-fu.

~~~
Krasnol
Considering how the internet is full of questions that could be solved by
googling them, you could make the argument that it's essential.

It becomes even more essential if you provide them with the proper search
terms that would give them better results. Interpreting what "better search
terms" is, is something a good lawyer should be able to manage.

------
ImGunter
As they should be it's concering that reporting the truth can get you arrested
and have this much bullshit be brought up against you the government always
gets bad when anything negative comes out about them it's disgusting, imo this
is more of a freedom of the press issue rather than an espionage issue.

------
harry8
Is there anyone who believes the various branches of the military, nsa, cia
etc. are subject to the same law interpreted the same way and would face
prosecution for doing exactly what is accused here? I really don't and that's
the thing that bothers me the most. Giving up equality before the law is huge.
It's really quite revolutionary, no? Clapper is clearly as guilty as sin by
his own admission but the law doesn't apply to him at all. Without talking
about what is right and wrong morally, that loss of what is and isn't legal
and has consequence to be decided on court no matter who you are is deeply and
profoundly worrying to me.

A novel interpretation and prosecution for one man (right or wrong) while not
pursuing a very well trodden prisecution path for another. It's no light
thing.

~~~
colechristensen
Is your position that because the US engages in espionage that we can't
prosecute foreign spies? (otherwise we should hold our own spy agencies guilty
of espionage?)

~~~
harry8
The point is someone doing _exactly_ what has been accused here, _exactly_ ,
but to leak stories in support of whoever is in charge of various military
branches. Would that same law apply for _exactly_ the same thing? I strongly
doubt it. "Unnamed official sources"

Perjury is not exactly a novel prosecution to run, nor would be something
setting precedent. This (right or wrong) sets precedent in it's interpretation
and effect and will create case law either way it goes. Do you see the point
I'm making? I can't see prosecution hesitating for a second to prosecute
someone like Assange for perjury if there was even a hint of a case for it.
That doesn't make Assange right and Clapper wrong or indeed say anything at
all about that. It's just a worrying thing.

~~~
nabla9
> Would that same law apply for exactly the same thing

Absolutely not.

------
OBLIQUE_PILLAR
Assange is in jail for the sole reason he embarrassed the American military
industrial entertainment complex.

~~~
TomMckenny
He's also a useful tool to undermine journalism and a free and independent
press.

Even more effective than the blind defense of Khashoggi's murders and the
"enemy of the people" language.

~~~
tictoc
How is he a tool for undermining the proliferation of facts? Just because
facts come from a sexual predator doesn't make them any less true. If someone
isn't willing to put in the effort to validate truth, then they can't handle
it.

~~~
cyphar
I think they meant a tool for the government (in the sense that they can use
him as an example to pass laws limiting press freedom or to punish him to
dissuade others).

Also the sexual crimes related to Assange (regardless of whether you think
they're true or not) are allegations.

------
campuscodi
I'm a tech journalist and I'm not troubled at all.

~~~
zrth
i'm a dog on the internet and i am mostly indifferent

