Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
30 de Setembre de 2017
LOLLLLLLLL
I’m not going to visit the site (they don’t have a Wikipedia page) because I refuse to ever look at pornographic imagery under any circumstance. But I would absolutely assume that ALS Scan is run by a bunch of kikes. Virtually every single porno company is.
And they are deposing Cloudflare – and CEO Matthew Prince himself – over refusal to remove a site with copyrighted content, while going ahead and removing our site under dubious circumstances.
“The Case of the Missing Stormer” is going to be cited in a lot of lawsuits in the future. What I can’t wait for is when it is cited in a case against the rat bastards at ICANN and/or the sickening Department of Commerce that agreed to give up control of ICANN to an “international body.”
But for now, this porno case is good for a serious LOL.
Last month Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince decided to terminate the account of controversial neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer.
“I woke up this morning in a bad mood and decided to kick them off the Internet,” he announced.
While the decision is understandable from an emotional point of view, it’s quite a statement to make as the CEO of one of the largest Internet infrastructure companies. Not least because it goes directly against what many saw as Cloudflare’s core values.
For years on end, Cloudflare has been asked to remove terrorist propaganda, pirate sites, and other controversial content. Each time, Cloudflare replied that it doesn’t take action without a court order. No exceptions.
In addition, Cloudflare repeatedly stressed that it was impossible for them to remove a website from the Internet, at least not permanently. It would only require a simple DNS reconfiguration to get it back up and running.
While the Daily Stormer case has nothing to do with piracy or copyright infringement, it’s now being brought up as important evidence in an ongoing piracy liability case. Adult entertainment publisher ALS Scan views Prince as a “key witness” in the case and wants to depose Cloudflare’s CEO to find out more about his decision.
“Mr. Prince’s statement to the public that Cloudflare kicked neo-Nazis off the internet stand in sharp contrast to Cloudflare’s testimony in this case, where it claims it is powerless to remove content from the Internet,” ALS Scan writes.
The above is part of a recent submission where both parties argue over whether Prince can be deposed or not. Cloudflare wants to prevent this from happening and claims it’s unnecessary, but the adult publisher disagrees.
“By his own admissions, Mr. Prince’s decision to terminate certain users’ accounts was ‘arbitrary,’ the result of him waking up ‘in a bad mood,’ and a decision he made unilaterally as ‘CEO of a major Internet infrastructure corporation’.
“Mr. Prince has made it clear that he is the one who determines the circumstances under which Cloudflare will terminate a user’s account,” ALS Scan adds.
For its part, Cloudflare says that the CEO’s deposition is not needed. This is backed up by a declaration where Prince emphasizes that he has no unique knowledge on the company’s DMCA and repeat infringer policies, issues that directly relate to the case at hand.
…
The adult publisher, however, harps on the fact that the CEO arbitrarily decided to remove one site from the service, while requiring court orders in other instances. They quote from a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article he wrote and highlight the ‘kick off the internet’ claim, which contradicts earlier statements.
Cloudflare’s lawyers contend that the WSJ article in question was meant to kick off a conversation and shouldn’t be taken literally.
“The WSJ Article was intended as an intellectual exercise to start a conversation regarding censorship and free speech on the internet. The WSJ Article had nothing to do with copyright infringement issues or Cloudflare’s DMCA policy and procedure.
“When Mr. Prince stated in the WSJ Article that ‘[he] helped kick a group of neo-Nazis off the internet last week,’ his comments were intended to illustrate a point – not to be taken literally,” Cloudflare’s legal team adds.
He’s since changed this position to “I did it because of Jewish money.”
These court documents are from last month and are just now getting reported on.
The deposition of Trey Guinn, a technical employee at Cloudflare, confirms that the company doesn’t have the power to cut a site off the Internet. It further suggests that the entire removal of Daily Stormer was in essence a provocation to start a conversation around freedom of speech.
From Guinn’s deposition Still, since the lawsuit in question revolves around terminating customers, ALS Scan wants to depose Price to find out exactly when clients are terminated, and why he decided to go beyond Couldflare’s usual policy. “No other employee can testify to Mr. Prince’s decision-making process when it comes to terminating a user’s access. No other employee can offer an explanation as to why The Daily Stormer’s account was terminated while repeat infringers’ accounts are allowed to remain.
“In a case where Mr. Prince’s personal judgment appears to govern even over Cloudflare’s own policies and procedures, Cloudflare cannot meet its heavy burden of demonstrating why he should not be deposed,” ALS Scan’s lawyers add.
I will be very interested to hear his explanation.
Was it because of the first thing?
That he thought Andrew Anglin was an asshole?
Because I can provide the court with comprehensive documentation proving conclusively that Andrew Anglin is not an asshole, Andrew Anglin is in fact a very nice person.
We can also show that I never said Matthew Prince was a secret Nazi like he said in his statement and told VICE News – some random person in the comments section said this, which means nothing.
Meaning that his decision was most certainly not based on facts of any sort.
I want Matthew Prince to be humiliated and I want to see his company collapse.
He claimed much more influence than he actually had – in fact, getting the site back online after he dropped me was very quick using Bitmitigate, a company sure to become the standard in DDoS protection. My issue continues to revolve around domains.
However, he became the public face of my internet ban through his incessant whinging and playing at the media. And he is in a position where he is supporting child molesters – who do things like discuss places to find unaccompanied children, ostensibly to “watch” them – as well as ISIS, while claiming that a totally legit political commentary site shouldn’t be on the internet because we said a mean thing about a fat bitch that had a heart attack at a political rally.
By claiming that he did have the authority to kick us off, he became the perceived authority. Thus, he must pay the piper.
