Many sites are reporting that the Indymedia.org servers have been subject of confiscation. Most reports suggest that the US FBI issues papers for Rackspace to hand over the hard disks, even though the servers were in the UK datacentre. The Register suggests that the confiscation may be under the UK's RIPA act, under which anyone at Rackspace who even admitted that the RIPA act was used could go to prison (!!)

The official reason for the consfiscation is unknown. The response is clearly very heavy handed. If someone objected to an article on the Times' website then would they confiscate the web servers??

Indymedia is a media organisation providing grassroots coverage from countries across the world, including Iraq and Palestein. Often it is the only place that stories get much coverage, as covering the plight of the Palestenians or the lies about Iraq are not in the interests of Fox et al.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/08/fbi_indymedia_raids/

I have a server in at Rackspace UK on behalf of a UK trades union. If Rackspace UK did indeed respond to a request from the USA authorities on the grounds that they are a USA owned company, does that mean that any political server is less safe with Rackspace than other datacentres?

interesting....

I am more than certain that rackspace would have contacted there legal team before handing anything over to the FBI.
There is obviously a process in place and they must have followed it.

We'll just have to wait and see

one says that rackspace is lodging webs of terrosimo Islamic (of the own heads of the heads of the bands, like Sadan Husseim)

you: hi?
Jay: Are you interested in a dedicated managed server?
you: one says that you are being investigated by the FBI to lodge to webs of Islamic terrorism?
Jay: For all media inquiries, please contact Annalie Drusch at ....
Connection Closed.


:)



Bye,

Originally posted by Doble
one says that rackspace is lodging webs of terrosimo Islamic (of the own heads of the heads of the bands, like Sadan Husseim)

you: hi?
Jay: Are you interested in a dedicated managed server?
you: one says that you are being investigated by the FBI to lodge to webs of Islamic terrorism?
Jay: For all media inquiries, please contact Annalie Drusch at ....
Connection Closed.


:)



Bye,

and what does this prove? :spiny:

Originally posted by cabalstudios
and what does this prove? :spiny: That some people are daft enough to think they can obtain senstiive information from a sales department whilst the media couldn't obtain any further information from the correct outlets? :D

Originally posted by Jay Cornwall
That some people are daft enough to think they can obtain senstiive information from a sales department whilst the media couldn't obtain any further information from the correct outlets? :D

hah, nice conclusion. too many dumb people around!

Correspondence between Rackspace and Indymedia is here (http://jebba.blagblagblag.org/).

It appears to show:
- Rackspace communicated OK with Indymedia.
- The order to impound came from US FBI via the UK Home Office under a Multi-lateral Assistance Treaty (MLAT).
- The official reason is that photos, names and addresses of Swiss police officers were published on a French Indymedia site (hosted on the UK server).
- Indymedia say that the addresses were removed very quickly from the site and certainly long before the Rackspace incident. Indymedia say the faces of the police officers were obscured voluntarily by them at the time of publication.

I think that any UK company would have to comply with a request under a MLAT, so I don't think Rackspace's US ownership is relevant in this case (to answer my original question).

At its best, this is a shot across the bows of the independent media for them to tighten editorial policy (i.e. moderate publicly posted articles before publication). However, the fact that Indymedia still don't know where the servers are, who took them, what for, what they did wrong (they are only guessing about the Swiss connection) indicates something much much more sinister.

In the absense of other information, this looks like a clear case of intimidation of independent media. It is the job of us on this board, as experts in the hosting industry, to scrutinise and publicise this event.

Originally posted by garrence
In the absense of other information, this looks like a clear case of intimidation of independent media. It is the job of us on this board, as experts in the hosting industry, to scrutinise and publicise this event.

I don't know that it's our job to do any such thing, but in the absence of other information, it is important to not jump to conclusions such as this being a clear case of anything.

-Bob

With the sinister legislation used and refusal to even give a reason for the seizure, what other conclusion can be reasonably jumped to?

Gary

Merge Request (http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=329973)

(Yep it could do with a merge. I'll post on this thread since it's the one I started).

Five days later, still no explanation. I still argue that it's our job as experts in the industry to scrutinise and publicise this sinister event. Who wants to see the random removal of servers that happen to carry news stories that disagree with the government's official line?..


ACTION ALERT: Urgent Action In Support of Indymedia

"An unacceptable attack on press freedom, free speech and privacy."

On 7 October 2004 two Indymedia Web Servers were seized from the US-owned web hosting company Rackspace operating in London (UK), at the request of the US Justice Department, which apparently acted at the prompting of Italian and Swiss authorities.

Indymedia is an global alternative media network that provides challenging and independent reporting, particularly of political and social justice issues, with a newswire where any member of the public can publish their own reports and articles.

The seizure of the servers in London shut down around 20 different Indymedia websites including Ambazonia, Uruguay, Andorra, Poland, Western Massachusetts, Nice, Nantes, Lilles, Marseille, Euskal Herria (Basque Country), Liege, East and West Vlaanderen, Antwerpen (all Belgium), Belgrade, Portugal, Prague, Galiza, Italy, Brazil, UK, and parts of Germany Indymedia. Many are still offline, those few that have returned have suffered data loss.

The particular legal framework under which the seizures took place is unknown. Five Days after the seizures there is still an almost total information blackout from the authorities in the UK, US, Switzeland and Italy. Indymedia still has no confirmation of who ordered the seizures, who took the servers in London, why the seizures took place, where the servers are now located, and whether they will be returned.

We are concerned over the growing use of international co-operation frameworks by Governments and Law enforcement agencies which can be used to obscure clear legal process, and call for openness and clarity in international co-operation, to ensure due process and that civil liberties are protected.

Statements of support for Indymedia and condemnation of the shutting down of over 20 Media outlets have been recieved from The Electronic Frontier Foundation, The International Federation of Journalists, the National Union of Journalists, Reporters Without Borders, World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters and many other organisations.

Indymedia UK condemns the seizure of the servers as an unacceptable and unprecedented attack on press freedom, free speech and privacy and asks for urgent solidarity action in demanding:

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Please write to the British Home Secretary and the US Attorney General:

1. Expressing grave concern at the action taken against Indymedia.

2. Demanding the immediate return of the servers to Indymedia with all data intact.

3. Requesting a full investigation into the circumstances and legality of the action taken to seize the Indymedia servers and to close Indymedia websites, with the disclosure of the names of the organisations and individuals involved in the seizure.

APPEALS TO:

Rt Hon David Blunkett MP
Home Secretary
The Home Office
London - UK
Email: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.govSTOPSPAM.uk

John Ashcroft
Attorney General
US Department of Justice
Washington - USA
Email: askdoj@usdojSTOPSPAM.gov

Please send copies of letters to: imc-uk-contact@lists.indymediaSTOPSPAM.org

Organisations and individuals are also encouraged to issue their own statements in support of Indymedia and against the seizure of the servers. Please send copies to: imc-uk-contact@lists.indymediaSTOPSPAM.org

Additionaly organisations and indivduals can add their statements of support here:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/10/298931.html

For background on the Server Seizures see:
http://indymedia.org/en/static/fbi
http://www.indymedia.org
http://www.indymedia.org.uk

The hdd's were returned yesterday evening without a word as to who had taken them, why, who authorised it and so on.

news is moving fast on this and the latest i have heard is that the drives were illegally sequestered in order to obtain information about activists currently involved in the case against police in Genoa. the police are on trial for their part in the 2003 G8 disturbances when one demonstrator was shot dead and a number of people were severely assaulted:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/14/indymedia_seizure_genoa_connection/

the Sheffield Hallam MP Richard Allan has tabled a question on this to the Home Secretary and he has an interesting blog here:

http://www.richardallan.org.uk/