Amazon continues tight-lipped policy with WikiLeaks takedown

December 1, 2010 9:22 PM
Anthony Ha

Add a Comment

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

WikiLeaks, the nonprofit site that publishes leaked government documents, was booted off Amazon.com’s cloud computing services today following political pressure from Senator Joe Lieberman.

Personally, I’m disappointed by Amazon’s action, because I think WikiLeaks performs a valuable service. (Gawker’s Ryan Tate has a great post highlighting why the move is hypocritical.) At the same time, I realize that this is a complicated, sensitive issue, and that Amazon may only have done what it believed was legally required or morally right.

Too bad the company isn’t explaining itself at all.

We emailed an Amazon spokesperson for comment, but they didn’t respond. The company also declined to comment on its relationship with WikiLeaks to the Associated Press and hasn’t released a statement to any news organization as far as I can tell. (The announcement, such as it was, came from Sen. Lieberman’s office.)

This seems to have become Amazon’s standard approach to controversial decisions — just refuse to comment and hope that things blow over. For example, when it temporarily pulled books published by Macmillan from its website while the companies were in the middle of tense pricing negotiations, Amazon didn’t announce what it was doing, it didn’t respond to requests from more information from reporters or authors, and instead it posted a passive-aggressive comment on the Kindle forum.

More recently, when Amazon came under fire for selling a self-published “pedophile guide”, it again declined to comment, and instead pulled the book without explanation.

In this case, I’d be particularly concerned if I was a Web company hosted by Amazon or thinking about signing up with them. If there’s controversial content on my website, is Amazon going to take it down as soon as it’s pressured? Political blog Talking Points Memo points out that Amazon’s terms of service prohibit illegal activity, but it’s not clear yet whether WikiLeaks has done anything illegal.

Meanwhile, the WikiLeaks site is back up on a Swedish hosting service, and unlike Amazon, the organization has been very open about what it thinks. On its Twitter account, WikiLeaks said, “If Amazon are so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books.”

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IBCQKEEVIJWPN54OWCKJ6HM7OQ John Doe

Pathetic!!! What happened to freedom of speech in America?
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_M7V6EIV3RFSSFGTIFG2I6I5ZRQ 4getu

Fuck you Joe Lieberman, afraid he might be telling the truth. Your just a 2 face piece of shit anyway
perivision

Ok, people calm down a bit. However, I do agree that if Amazon is going to pull the plug on wikileaks then they should provide an explanation. To simply pull out with no statement given the political, freedom and real security issues around wikileaks is failing to live up to the expectation of Amazon being a mature professional company. http://www.perivision.net/wordpress
Dagnabbitroid

yes- weenie comes to mind
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XHSZP24FE4VMKACKTJLG4AFMGU archaeopteryx

Yeah, fuck Lieberman. The true definition of the word PATRIOTISM is beyond his comprehension…along with TRANSPARENCY and ACCOUNTABILITY.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UUZIEZ5VKVJNIIWP5AHNK24ASY Alfred

Amazon's act was despicable and deserves condemnation. Net citizens must speak out. As a frequent Amazon buyer, I will switch to eBay.
kathleenfoos

There is always next election……………..we will see how Americans like Lieberman's action,I bet he will not be elected next time. Seems like he should be more concerned about all of the foreign banks that got our trillions of dollars behind our backs in the great bailout(and insurance company's).Did we do that to try to own the world?I don't remember a vote to take over influence of the whole world by lending them money so they have to do what we say.Couldn't even use some money to create jobs for the USA.Even the section that describes something(1 thing) we directly got as citizens ,small business help,and they didn't even state the amounts, not the billions that other country's received .
commentingID

I'm not thrilled about the war related or recent cables being leaked but Forbes did a big interview with Lassange and he said Banks, big pharma and corrupt private sector companies were next up.Had he exposed the corrupt banks and corporations FIRST I think he'd have had more support.
PaloAltoWorldView

Hosting WikiLeaks is a problem for two reasons:1. It is effectively trading in stolen goods.2. It probably runs afoul of The Espionage Act and undermines the US war effort. A country cannot effectively prosecute a war if its citizens are working against it. For example, any US citizen trying to help the Japanese or Germans 1941-45 would have been prosecuted and potentially be put in front of a court martial and a firing squad. We executed German spies operating on US territory as well. Even after the war, we executed Julius and Ethel Rosenberg as they were working against the US national security interests.If things such as Wikileaks are tolerated, how can a country effectively prosecute a war? War contains many components that need to be conducted in secret and in solidarity with the a country's citizens against the enemy. If the country's war secrets are leaked and its own citizens are working against the war, how can a war be won?
http://twitter.com/c3lticwolff Felicia Handley

wikileaks put our soldiers lives at risk and for that, i'll never support the site and think all you who do should go fight this war for the soldiers who live in hell everyday from the enemy and now got stabbed in the back by not only their own, but their country. i hope you are proud of yourselves. i hate to break it to you, but our first ammendment is worth SHIT without people willing to put their lives on the line to protect it. so u keep spitting in the face of our service men and women, being a true patriot means standing for those. if you won't stand behind our soldiers, feel free to stand in front of them.