It seems that the injunction steps pretty far over the bounds of
legality. IANAL, but I've had a bit of opportunity to talk with
certain legal authorities over the weekend, and concluded that several
issues need to be asserted, to protect the Internet itself.
There is an expectation of privacy for communication over the Internet.
Declan's communication with sources should be protected, as are all
journalist's, even when these are communicated over the Internet.
The original paper is published, and the mirror sites are libraries
of the original publication. No library is an "agent" of the author
by reason of making that author's work available to the public.
Lists of document accesses from web sites should be protected, as are
all library reading lists, even when these accesses are over the Internet.
Surely there are other arguments to be made about the direct legal
issues with the lawsuit itself, but these ancillary issues need to be
addressed. We need to act to assert them. A large number of us need
to be named as defendants.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
