raspberry to paypal

[DeeZire]

....Try to get reality into your head. This Wikileaks business is something that no government in the world wants or will tolerate for any longer than they possibility have to....

I find it interesting that, apparently, "governments" have the power to shut down the wikileaks servers, but they don't have the power to shut down torrent sites offering stolen music, movies and software. One of the few things that the USA has left to export is intellectual property, and yet our government is doing nothing to protect that intellectual property.

There is also the issue of the freedom of the press. Where do you draw the line between terrorism and patriotism? Exposing the hoax that preceded the invasion of Iraq could have been seen as patriotism - although at the time, the conservatives would have called it terrorism. That's part of the problem with this discussion. After the Bush years, when conservatives call transparency "terrorism", it's hard for a rational person to take them seriously.

 

[Weird Harold]

Do the actions of the leaker or of Assange fall under the Espionage act?

That would depend on just which leaker you're talking about. The German diplomatic clerk arrestedfor his part in internal German communiques winding up in that batch most certainly was NOT covered by US Law.

US Law is much less stringent that other countries' laws on espionage and/or "official secrets."

NOTE: hardly any of the docs were classified, iirc, less than 5%. nice try, though.

If even ONE Document was classified, -- or even just ONE document was obtained illegally -- a law was broken and Assange's willingness to publish ecouraged that unlawful act thereby violating Paypal's terms of agreement. It doesn't matter how many non-violations of the law are involved, what matters are the violation(s) of the law (and whether Assange "encouraged, etc" them.)

It might not have been a US law, or even a US UCMJ violation -- it could have been any law in any country covering official or commercial secrets; like the various laws in the US governing Internet Security Computer Hacking, and Identity Theft. The Private First Class apparently downloaded documents he did not have authorized access to and gave/sold them to Wikileaks; The same laws that would punish him for downloading your files or accessing your e-mail or other accounts apply to accessing sensitive government documents.

 

[R. Richard]

RR A Private First Class (strange title for someone with no class) stole US government classified documents. There are two violations of US law:
1) Theft


why exactly is it theft. if i'm visiting your house, and unknown to you, make a copy of your Soldier of Fortune magazine, which i then post, have I *stolen* anything? from you?

define 'theft'.

NOTE: hardly any of the docs were classified, iirc, less than 5%. nice try, though.

If you visit my house and make an unauthorized copy of a computer program that I have written, then you have indeed stolen something of value from me (I sell computer programming, among other things.) Your 'example' assumes that what was obtained is public information.

Ah then, if I cut only 5% of your flesh away, haven't 'really' taken anything and Shylock got a very bad rap (actually he did, but that's really another matter.)

As to not classified, let's assume that I obtain nude photos of a girl, without her consent, and I post the photos in the Internet. Then obviously, at least by your standards, I haven't done anything wrong. I mean, the photos weren't classified!

(By the way, to answer one of your questions, you stole something of value from Soldier of Fortune magazine, not me. I would beware of that, the personna of SoF is such that I would suspect that they tend to settle matters with a gun, not a law book. JMHO.)

 

[sr71plt]

I find it interesting that, apparently, "governments" have the power to shut down the wikileaks servers, but they don't have the power to shut down torrent sites offering stolen music, movies and software. One of the few things that the USA has left to export is intellectual property, and yet our government is doing nothing to protect that intellectual property.

There is also the issue of the freedom of the press. Where do you draw the line between terrorism and patriotism? Exposing the hoax that preceded the invasion of Iraq could have been seen as patriotism - although at the time, the conservatives would have called it terrorism. That's part of the problem with this discussion. After the Bush years, when conservatives call transparency "terrorism", it's hard for a rational person to take them seriously.

On another thread just yesterday (I think), I noted that the U.S. government doesn't really want to protect intellectual property rights that much. American society (and its governments) have a long tradition of supporting and encouraging open access. (Many other government were/are afraid of the Internet, for instance. The U.S. government embraced and promoted it--and isn't doing a hell of a lot to try to control what floats around on it.)

The U.S. government was nearly the last one to sign the Berne Convention that put more author/artist/composer-friendly protections in the copyright conventions than ever had been there before. And even wehn the United States signed the convention, it failed to update U.S. laws to put teeth in the new provisions. (Ergo, this is why the government now says that a work is copyright protected as soon as created--the Berne Convention line--but the U.S. government has not changed the laws that require anyone going to court over copyright infringement to obtain/hold a formal copyright on the work to get a court date. And why the "laws" on what is a violation are still so fuzzy and why there are so few copyright cases going to court in the United States.")

The United States doesn't really support intellectual property rights very much--certainly not any foreigner's rights--and it only pays it lip service, only goes after it at its own convenience, and dances around on the issue otherwise.

As for the rest, I've already noted that the discussion on this is a "does the end justify the means" one, which is one that is frequently round robined. Going back to the Ellsberg business, it seems that the upshot is that you can't overlook a crime committed just because it surfaced exposure of wrongdoing. If the only way to expose the wrongdoing is to do the crime, the martyr needs to do the time as well. Otherwise, the whole legal structure falls apart on the question of who has "truth" on any given day--and when is a crime not a crime.

But the current issue isn't the Ellsberg issue. The Ellsberg issue was one on already formulated and executing policy. Diplomatic correspondence is fodder for creating government policy. You restrict that, you are making policy on incomplete/unreal information/options. It's not government policy yet. So, exposing wrongdoing in government activity isn't really relevant on this. What's relevant is that it cripples formulation of thoughtful, fully informed policy--and, contrary to what someone claims up the line--it does, indeed endanger lives and the coherent functioning of government. If a diplomat gets a realistic, insider's negative view of a country's leader from a private discussion with the country's interior minister--something that affects a policy the U.S. government is considering--and that discussion is later exposed, this does endanger that interior minister and cripple coherent U.S. policy formulation.

Not a government in the world wants anything to exist that could do that to them too.

 

[R. Richard]

This is being provided for educational purposes only, under the 'fair use' doctrine. You would think that, with the switching to metric, it would now be Scotland Meter instead of Scotland Yard, but who knows? Comment?

Swiss cut off bank account for WikiLeaks' Assange

GENEVA – The Swiss postal system stripped WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of a key fundraising tool Monday, accusing him of lying and immediately shutting down one of his bank accounts.

The swift action by Postfinance, the financial arm of Swiss Post, came after it determined the "Australian citizen provided false information regarding his place of residence during the account opening process."

Assange had told Postfinance he lived in Geneva but could offer no proof that he was a Swiss resident, a requirement of opening such an account.

Postfinance spokesman Alex Josty told The Associated Press the account was closed Monday afternoon and there would be "no criminal consequences" for misleading authorities.

"That's his money, he will get his money back," Josty said. "We just close the account and that's it."

The setback leaves Assange with only a few options for raising money for his secret-spilling site through a Swiss-Icelandic credit card processing center and accounts in Iceland and Germany.

WikiLeaks has been under intense international scrutiny over its disclosure of a mountain of classified U.S. diplomatic cables, after previously releasing tens of thousands of classified U.S. military documents on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The unprecedented disclosures have embarrassed the U.S. and other governments worldwide and prompted U.S. officials to pressure the WikiLeaks site and its facilitators.

A Swiss website, wikileaks.ch, has been handling much of the traffic from WikiLeaks after other Internet service and online payment providers began severing ties with the organization.

WikiLeaks' Swedish servers came under suspected attack again Monday, the latest in a series of online computer assaults that have knocked the secret-spilling group across the Web.

WikiLeaks, in a tweet to its followers, confirmed it was having difficulty with its PRQ severs but did not elaborate.

"We are investigating the cause," it said.

While U.S. officials are investigating whether they can charge Assange, the 39-year-old Australian faces sexual misconduct allegations connected to his stay in Sweden over the summer.

The Swedish case has been described by his British lawyer Mark Stephens as a political stunt, but it could eventually lead to his extradition from Britain to Sweden. A European arrest warrant was issued for Assange last week and it is currently working its way through the British legal system.

Extradition experts say such warrants can take weeks or even months to lead to an arrest, although high profile cases tend to move faster. The BBC said the Swedish warrant was now with London's Scotland Yard — suggesting that matters were developing quickly.

The broadcaster didn't cite its source, and the police force declined comment.

Scotland Yard would still have to seek a warrant at Westminster and City Magistrates' Court, which handles extradition, before Assange were detained. Such a move would not be announced ahead of time.

 

[sr71plt]

This is being provided for educational purposes only, under the 'fair use' doctrine. You would think that, with the switching to metric, it would now be Scotland Meter instead of Scotland Yard, but who knows? Comment?

Even under the fair use doctrine (which doesn't apply to a for-profit Internet Web site), you can only repost a small portion--certainly not this much of the document. The proper way to bring this to someone's attention, is to excerpt only a snippet of it and provide a link so it can be seen in the original. If the original in a subscription-only Web site, that should tell you something about the propriety of reposting it right there.

 

[Pure]

reply

Originally Posted by Pure
RR A Private First Class (strange title for someone with no class) stole US government classified documents. There are two violations of US law:
1) Theft


pure: why exactly is it theft. if i'm visiting your house, and unknown to you, make a copy of your Soldier of Fortune magazine, which i then post, have I *stolen* anything? from you?

define 'theft'.

NOTE: hardly any of the docs were classified, iirc, less than 5%. nice try, though.
==

RR replies If you visit my house and make an unauthorized copy of a computer program that I have written, then you have indeed stolen something of value from me (I sell computer programming, among other things.) Your 'example' assumes that what was obtained is public information.[..]

RR, please, this answer is irrelevant to the Assange thing AND to my example. I didn't copy YOUR program.


RR (By the way, to answer one of your questions, you stole something of value from Soldier of Fortune magazine, not me. I would beware of that, the personna of SoF is such that I would suspect that they tend to settle matters with a gun, not a law book. JMHO.)

i think you see the point: the leaker may have 'stolen' [appropriated] something from the US gov. whether that's a crime with depend on the item. just because the cable says "as ambassador to Afghanistan, my assessment is that Karzai is corrupt" does not make the appropriation a crime, though it's embarrassing.

secondly, i think you agree that Assange, however, did not steal. he published what was sent to him. though the US is distressed, its national security is hardly compromised, so I don't think Assange can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act [or anti terrorism laws, either].

 

[Pure]

swiss action

The swift action by Postfinance, the financial arm of Swiss Post, came after it determined the "Australian citizen provided false information regarding his place of residence during the account opening process."

this resembles the Swedish action. it's petty harrassment, EVEN IF the matter is a technical infraction.

clearly the US is pressuring the Swiss, Swedish and everyone else to FIND SOMETHING to do that will annoy, cripple, or destroy Assange.

what's to prevent assange from re applying, once the place of residence issue is cleared. (or use a swiss subsidiary of wikileaks).?

i think i'll route my contribution through Iceland. (remember Bobby Fischer?)

 

[sr71plt]

just because the cable says "as ambassador to Afghanistan, my assessment is that Karzai is corrupt" does not make the appropriation a crime, though it's embarrassing.

Irrelevant. The crime does not relate to the content. It relates to the classification the cables the content are in.

And it's certainly not your vote on what the content represents either.

 

[theravenfox]

PayPal sucks anyway! They are a horrible company with loads of complaints against them. They use their power (connection to eBay) as an excuse to be unfair and rude to their customers.

I use Alertpay!

 

[Pure]

thanks raven,

alertpay.

now there's an idea.. as i requested in my first post. paypal is certainly NOT the easiest entity to deal with.. though when I'm terminally frustrated and phone them long distance in Calif, they generally do help.

 

[theravenfox]

alertpay.

now there's an idea.. as i requested in my first post. paypal is certainly NOT the easiest entity to deal with.. though when I'm terminally frustrated and phone them long distance in Calif, they generally do help.

Alertpay is in Canada, so you'll still have the long distance calls. But their hold times are very short in my opinion and they get any problems cleared up in one phone call. They are a young, growing company. I love them. They get all of my business.

Incidentally, PayPal does not allow adult business. When I inquired about upgrading my personal account to a business one, they asked me what business I had. I told them it was sales of erotic audio for download. The guy told me it was no problem, upgraded my account and offered to sign me up for a credit card instead of the debit card (I think, it's been a while since this happened...but he offered me some sort of business tool.) The next day, they deleted my account! I am banned for life from having an account with them. They still owe me a significant amount of money, but because they upgraded it to my business name, they won't send me the check in my real name...so I would have no way to cash their check. I hope they choke on the stolen funds from my old account.

 

[Handley_Page]

I do a fair bit via E-Bay, so PayPal is the only methods available.

But Raven, WHY tell them all the details ?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Alertpay is in Canada, so you'll still have the long distance calls. But their hold times are very short in my opinion and they get any problems cleared up in one phone call. They are a young, growing company. I love them. They get all of my business.

Incidentally, PayPal does not allow adult business. When I inquired about upgrading my personal account to a business one, they asked me what business I had. I told them it was sales of erotic audio for download. The guy told me it was no problem, upgraded my account and offered to sign me up for a credit card instead of the debit card (I think, it's been a while since this happened...but he offered me some sort of business tool.) The next day, they deleted my account! I am banned for life from having an account with them. They still owe me a significant amount of money, but because they upgraded it to my business name, they won't send me the check in my real name...so I would have no way to cash their check. I hope they choke on the stolen funds from my old account.

That is interesting. I have an account with Paypal, and they charge me 4.15% for processing payments from GroupMVP for stories I sell them and from online sales via another company. They have never said anything about banning adult businesses.

I am not an adult business, but the payers are. I might be better off going with Alertpay, but the amounts involved are only about $100 per month.

 

[sr71plt]

My erotica publishers pay through PayPal. There hasn't been a problem that I know of.

 

[michchick98]

Alertpay is in Canada, so you'll still have the long distance calls. But their hold times are very short in my opinion and they get any problems cleared up in one phone call. They are a young, growing company. I love them. They get all of my business.

Incidentally, PayPal does not allow adult business. When I inquired about upgrading my personal account to a business one, they asked me what business I had. I told them it was sales of erotic audio for download. The guy told me it was no problem, upgraded my account and offered to sign me up for a credit card instead of the debit card (I think, it's been a while since this happened...but he offered me some sort of business tool.) The next day, they deleted my account! I am banned for life from having an account with them. They still owe me a significant amount of money, but because they upgraded it to my business name, they won't send me the check in my real name...so I would have no way to cash their check. I hope they choke on the stolen funds from my old account.

Just as sr71plt, I get all my royalties for my erotic publications through PayPal. I have a business account under my pen name and a debit card, with my real name of course. When I signed up for the business account, I believe it asked what type of business and I simply said author or something along those lines....I think. It's been awhile.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

I agree Wikileaks hasn't broken any law. Also PayPal and a Web host won't break any law by deciding to cut him off from their services.

What Wikileaks has done, though, is endanger lives and try to undermine governments. So, I guess the answer to Assange is, then, to take him out before he gets people killed and nations at war. Perhaps you would prefer that.

The most disturbing thing to come out of this is the US response to having their dirty laundry aired in public. Especially when former/future presidential candidates talk openly about executing/assassinating a civilian of a foreign nation.

We criticize China for blocking off parts of the internet they don't want their public to see.
We criticize Russia for (allegedly) murdering their journalists.

I bet they and all the other nasty little corners of the Earth are laughing their arses off right now.

Nice to see the big ol' US of A isn't even bothering to try and pretend it's any better.

I suspect this hypocrisy is what Julian Assange and Wikileaks are really out to expose. He's already implied the amazon hosting controversy was left out as bait to prove the US could be just as ruthless as China when suppressing free speech to protect its own interests.

 

[sr71plt]

The most disturbing thing to come out of this is the US response to having their dirty laundry aired in public. Especially when former/future presidential candidates talk openly about executing/assassinating a civilian of a foreign nation.

We criticize China for blocking off parts of the internet they don't want their public to see.
We criticize Russia for (allegedly) murdering their journalists.

I bet they and all the other nasty little corners of the Earth are laughing their arses off right now.

Nice to see the big ol' US of A isn't even bothering to try and pretend it's any better.

I suspect this hypocrisy is what Julian Assange and Wikileaks are really out to expose. He's already implied the amazon hosting controversy was left out as bait to prove the US could be just as ruthless as China when suppressing free speech to protect its own interests.

Could be. I've never had any illusions about the United States (no matter what party was in control) being any goody two shoes in relationship to other nations. But I also grew up being able to handle the reality of it. Much of the discussion on this forum--and what I see elsewhere--indicates that many are living in some sort of fantasy land about it all.

 

[theravenfox]

I do a fair bit via E-Bay, so PayPal is the only methods available.

But Raven, WHY tell them all the details ?

Them who? PayPal? Because I needed a business account and they required the details...I think. It's been a while. AlertPay is aware of the nature of my business and, while my fees are a tad higher than other businesses, it's worth it to be completely legitimate.

Also, I think you can use any credit card on eBay without going through PayPal. I know you can with other online shopping thingys like Amazon. EBay just strongly recommends PayPal. I could be wrong. It's been ages since I shopped eBay.

That is interesting. I have an account with Paypal, and they charge me 4.15% for processing payments from GroupMVP for stories I sell them and from online sales via another company. They have never said anything about banning adult businesses.

I am not an adult business, but the payers are. I might be better off going with Alertpay, but the amounts involved are only about $100 per month.

My erotica publishers pay through PayPal. There hasn't been a problem that I know of.

Just as sr71plt, I get all my royalties for my erotic publications through PayPal. I have a business account under my pen name and a debit card, with my real name of course. When I signed up for the business account, I believe it asked what type of business and I simply said author or something along those lines....I think. It's been awhile.

I do believe it has to do with the virtual nature of my adult business. If I was selling hard copy audios, I could have fought it. Adult videos and books are purchasable through PayPal. Again, it's been a while and I just did a marathon recording session...so I'm tired and fuzzy-brained. LOL

Just to be safe, no one go confessing things to PayPal that they don't already know. I would hate for what happened to me to happen to anyone else.

P.S. AlertPay is going to have debit cards, just like PayPal after the first of the year. So excited! YAY!

 

[michchick98]

P.S. AlertPay is going to have debit cards, just like PayPal after the first of the year. So excited! YAY!

Cool for you. Having a debit card for PayPal is so much easier (and faster of course) to get my money from there than waiting the 3-5 days for a transfer.

 

[theravenfox]

Cool for you. Having a debit card for PayPal is so much easier (and faster of course) to get my money from there than waiting the 3-5 days for a transfer.

Yes, it was the one thing I missed about PayPal. Now, PP can truly kiss my ass!!!

LOL

P.S. Did you do an elf yourself video? I did. Too cute. I did the Charleston! I will have to post it here if it's possible.

 

[Darkniciad]

Any of you using PayPal as a payment method for erotic writing ( or even something as simple as selling off old issues of Playboy on Ebay ) should have a back-up plan in place ( especially after mentioning it here ) They do indeed have a no-adult business provision in place, and will terminate you without warning, making it as difficult as possible to get any remaining funds from the account.

 

[R. Richard]

It appears that PayPal isn't the only one who has a problem with WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks Founder Assange Arrested in Britain
LONDON - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange handed himself in to British police on Tuesday after Sweden issued a warrant for his arrest over allegations of sex crimes, London's Metropolitan Police said.

Assange, whose WikiLeaks website is at the centre of a row over the release of secret U.S. diplomatic cables, was arrested under a European Arrest Warrant.

Swedish prosecutors want to question the 39-year-old Australian about allegations of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. He denies the allegations.

Assange is due to appear before City of Westminster Magistrates' Court in London later on Tuesday when a date for an extradition hearing is likely to be set. This must take place within 21 days of his arrest.

 

[Liar]

My erotica publishers pay through PayPal. There hasn't been a problem that I know of.

Wait til you include classified Pentagon briefs in your next book.

 

[sr71plt]

Wait til you include classified Pentagon briefs in your next book.

I might include them, but I'd have to make them up. I've been retired for a dozen years.

I do, though, keep news clippings in my files of whatever I write about in this nature to show that I got whatever I used from what was already out in the open.