Datacell: "Immediate Legal Actions (Against Visa, MC) to Make (WikiLeaks) Donations Possible Again"

[Hissyspit]

Source: Datacell

From: Andreas Fink
CEO
DataCell ehf

News in respect to Wikileaks

8th December 2010 12:30 CET

Since yesterday around 22:30 CET Visa and Mastercard payments are being rejected on our donation system. We have received a suspension notice stating that Visa Europe has ordered our payment processor to suspend payments and undertake due diligence investigation in order to pretect the Visa brand ensure neither the payment processor nor Visa Europe is running legal risks by facilitating payments for the funding of the Wikileaks website. For the same reasons the payment processor has suspended the payments of Mastercard.

The suspension period will be one week with effect from 8 December 2010 Danish local time. The suspension period may be prolonged.

DataCell ehf who facilitates those payments towards Wikileaks has decided to take up immediate legal actions to make donations possible again. We can not believe Wikileaks would even create scratch at the brand name of Visa. The suspension of payments towards Wikileaks is a violation of the agreements with their customers. Visa users have explicitly expressed their will to send their donations to Wikileaks and Visa is not fulfilling this wish. It will probably hurt their brand much much more to block payments towards Wikileaks than to have them occur. Visa customers are contacting us in masses to confirm that they really donate and they are not happy about Visa rejecting them. It is obvious that Visa is under political pressure to close us down. We strongly believe a world class company such as Visa should not get involved by politics and just simply do their business where they are good at. Transferring money. They have no problem transferring money for other businesses such as gambling sites, pornography services and the like so why a donation to a Website which is holding up for human rights should be morally any worse than that is outside of my understanding.

Visa is hurting Wikileaks and DataCell ehf in high figures. Putting all payments on hold for 7 days or more is one thing but rejecting all further attempts to donate is making the donations impossible. This does clearly create massive financial losses to Wikileaks which seems to be the only purpose of this suspension. This is not about the brand of Visa, this is about politics and Visa should not be involved in this.

Read more: http://www.datacell.com/news.php

[pmorlan1]

1. Things are getting very interesting

Thanks for the post. I posted a link to the Datacell website on my Facebook page.

[MikeW]

2. doesnt matter

Im sure Visa which is HUGE compared to Datacell has clauses in their contracts for termination without reason.

Whoever wrote "It will probably hurt their brand name much more ..." is a fool. Your assuming that anyone in the real world

the average consumer if datacell is served or not.

Net effect will be a few lost DU customers ... LOL

[Myrina]

4. Agent Mike? Is that you? How are ya' man??

It's been awhile, thought you left us .... :hi:

[femrap]

6. I thought he just worked in

a cubicle at the Heritage Foundation. :shrug:

[L0oniX]

9. Agent Mike ...you're back again ...wonderful. How's the job working out for ya?

[sabrina 1]

16. You haven't been following this story very closely, have you.

This is an award-winning news organization and the actions of the U.S. government towards it NOW, has alerted people all over the world to how dangerous the U.S. government is, not just to the countries they invaded illegally, but the democracies everywhere. This is now a movement, and it is a movement to stop totalitarian governments everywhere from silencing the press.

Ironically, that was the founding principle of Wikileaks and most of its work until this summer when they received the Iraq War docs, was aimed at totalitarian governments around the world, and thanks to the whistle-blowers who provided them with material on some of these governments, actions were taken to stop human rights abuses in Kenya eg. And for their excellent contribution to this, they have received several awards.

Wikileaks is not about the U.S. It was started by a group of Chinese dissidents (remember Tiananmen Square?) in 2006 to end the silencing of the press which gives cover to corrupt, brutal rulers and restore the idea of a really free press where there is no fear of reprisals when a whistle-blower wants to expose corruption and brutality and human rights abuses.

People around the world are supportive of this movement. The U.S. government is shameful in its reaction to having its dirty secrets exposed, and instead of going after the criminals exposed by these documents, they go after the press? Sorry, I don't accept living in a country like that. If I did I would move to China.

As for your snide remark about DUers being the few who support them? How ignorant can people be. This is a world wide movement now, and is backed by millions of people around the world including some of the best minds of our times.

Persecuting the press was a very stupid move by this government. That has stimulated even more support for freedom of the press and in fact, has exposed this government's censorship of our own media.

[JDPriestly]

19. Ah! The Chinese. I know the Chinese dissidents posted a lot of

information on walls and the like during the Tianamen Square period, but I figured this information might come from the Chinese government. Never knew Wikileaks had anything to do with the Chinese activities in the Tianamen Square peiod. That just puts it in a very different light. Are you sure about that, sabrina 1?

[sabrina 1]

30. The site claims to have been started by

Chinese dissidents among others. But the founders have not been actually identified. Julian Assange is credited most often with being the founder. I think they want to keep it vague. But there are many Chinese people involved in the project as you can see below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks

The WikiLeaks website first appeared on the Internet in December 2006.<13><14> The site claims to have been "founded by Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa".<1> The creators of WikiLeaks have not been formally identified.<15> It has been represented in public since January 2007 by Julian Assange and others. Assange describes himself as a member of WikiLeaks' advisory board.<16> News reports in The Australian have called Assange the "founder of WikiLeaks".<17> According to Wired magazine, a volunteer said that Assange described himself in a private conversation as "the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier, and all the rest".<18> As of June 2009, the site had over 1,200 registered volunteers<1> and listed an advisory board comprising Assange, Phillip Adams, Wang Dan, C. J. Hinke, Ben Laurie, Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang, Xiao Qiang, Chico Whitaker and Wang Youcai.<19> Despite appearing on the list, when contacted by Mother Jones magazine in 2010, Khamsitsang said that while he received an e-mail from WikiLeaks, he had never agreed to be an advisor.<20> Starting in 2010, Kristinn Hrafnsson has also acted as a spokesman for the group.<21><22>

WikiLeaks states that its "primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations."<1><23>

I have not checked if the site still has that notice up. But it makes sense that it would be people who had a real reason to want a free and open press who would start something like this. Assange was known as a computer whiz and hacker in the Tech world. That is the kind of person needed to help set it up so it's possible he was contacted and since their goals would have been very similar, he is passionate about human rights issues and freedom of the press also, it makes sense they would have connected on several levels.

[caseymoz]

17. Except they can state their legal position about their rights

any way they want before it's adjudicated in court. They can declare their right to "termination without reason," but in fact, that might just be their opinion about it and not found legally binding by courts. Ever wonder why they also say if one section or more of this contract is found to be void it doesn't mean the whole contract is void? It's because, in fact, they have shod it through with bullshit to discourage you from taking action when they make a dick move, and it's perfectly legal to do that.

Just like when you see a sign that says, "This business is not responsible for lost or stolen items," no, it isn't true. It's a declaration of their legal position prior to court ruling, not necessarily the way tort law sees it.

[krabigirl]

35. Are you really a CIA agent?

[caseymoz]

39. Has clauses, except they might not be legally binding.

Fact is, they can state their legal position in writing any way they want before a court rules on it. It's called "free speech." The reason why they say if one section of this contract is struck down by the courts that the other sections still apply? Because a lot of what they've passed off as a legally binding contract might just be bullshit. It might be things that have been struck down in court before but the legislatures haven't made laws against stating that particular claim. They might just be telling you how "they feel about it," and as I said, that would be protected by free speech.

In other words, if they make a real dick move on you, and they can't force you into arbitration, sue them if you can. Don't listen to what they say until a lawyer tells you you don't have a case.

BTW, in the contract they offer other companies like DataCell, maybe they don't even have that particular clause. Maybe only consumers have been stupid enough to sign a contract that claims, "We reserve the right to fail you at any time" with an arbitration clause.

You really like cheering for the Big Guy don't you?

[Swagman]

3. visa and mastercard transferred funds in the Operation Ore child porn cases

[femrap]

5. Take it to the courts....make a stink....

make them pay. They don't like this kind of publicity.

Anything that goes against Big Biz makes me happy.

[peacetalksforall]

7. Has V, MC, Amazon, PayPal cited law? if not, does it mean they took the law into their own hands?

[Pavulon]

21. No they do not have to do business with you or anyone else..

being able to use their PCI system is not enumerated in the constitution. Sorry, no shoes no shirt, no service.

[bhikkhu]

28. Fascism needs no explanation or excuse. n/t

[Pavulon]

45. SO they can start a wikicard. Nothing stopping them

calling things you dont like Fascism is silly.

[caseymoz]

48. And so you've discovered something wrong with capitalism now?

I thought if they were in business they had no obligation. It's how anybody must do business.

[Demeter]

8. A Righteous Response!

It's always about the abuse of power....

[tomm2thumbs]

10. They have no problem transferring money for gambling sites, pornography etc

true, true -

[Devil_Fish]

11. Hey Visa and MC, Suspend the accounts of the admitted war criminal George Bush. NT

[HCE SuiGeneris]

12. K & R

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. We just got a call, and the war is on!

As long as no one gets hurt, this might actually be fun to watch.

[madmax]

15. +10 nt

[Pavulon]

23. Enjoy the party, its on your tab

you will be paying to clean up the shit the monkeys sling on the walls. Simple as that.

[krabigirl]

33. it's on yours, too.

[ronnie624]

41. Foreign policy-for-profit, aggressive war and maintaining empire,

are a hell of a lot more expensive than "paying to clean up the shit the monkeys sling on the walls".

Or I assume they are, anyway. That meme you spread around is rather vague.

[Pavulon]

44. you realize the wiki model was not set up as a non profit

its design was based on a pay service. All this mess will be mopped up with cash, your cash.

[ronnie624]

49. My cash.

Right. Thanks for the heads-up.

:hi:

[sabrina 1]

14. Excellent. The world fights back about the long, totalitarian

arm of the U.S. government. Who do they think they are that they can stop people in other countries from donating to whomever they wish? Or from this country also.

I suggest we all donate, even if it's only a dollar, to make a statement that Freedom of the Press MUST be brought back to this country.

They are throwing a global temper tantrum because they could not control the World media, they way they have controlled this country's. Bullies, criminals all of them and they are desperate to hide their crimes.

[Pavulon]

20. You can send you money to the CIA in the mail.

you just cant use visa to donate to an intelligence agency conducting a global attack on diplomatic channels.

Hey did you see that information on weapon systems or war fighting secrets, no? Just diplomatic attacks...

Funny.

[sabrina 1]

24. I haven't a clue what you're talking about Pavalon.

Does the CIA need money?

Lol, I don't know why, but I think you're funny. I get a kick out of your futile attempts to defend the indefensible. Shutting down an award-winning International news organization is going to piss off the whole world. In fact it has. Bad move on the part of the U.S. government. Even you have to admit that. There are better ways to get what you want, this was a pretty rotten idea. I would fire whoever came up with it.

[Pavulon]

25. The man and his friends are still breathing

when they turn up shot or just disappear, then blame the CIA. If he leaves that UK prison in a bag, think cia. Right now you have children playing games.

Why would they chase the technology when they could just kill a half dozen people?

[sabrina 1]

29. Why is he in prison at all? We did see a CIA memo

published on Wikileaks a few months ago discussing what to do about Wikileaks. The conclusion was that the best wy to discredit him would be to smear him. And within months, he is accused by two women of sexual misconduct. Of course that doesn't mean that they were working for the CIA. Otoh, it IS a strange coincidence.

Why kill him and make him a martyr when they can do worse? Completely discredit him? The problem is few people believe the charges, most believe it is the smear tactics they discussed in that memo.

Times have changed, people have access to more information and it's not so easy to paint someone as a sexual pervert anymore, especially when their intention to do so was already exposed.

Personally I don't think they were involved in the initial 'complaint'. But I do think they were thrilled about it. Then the case was thrown out. Bummer for them. So, a lawyer enters the picture, a lawyer who believes that even if the 'victims' state that there was no rape, no violence and no fear of violence, which they did, the victims don't get to decide that. The Government does. So pressure is put on the Swedish Government to reopen the case and on Interpol to issue a 'sort of' warrant.

Meanwhile back here in the U.S. the government is 'scrambling to find a crime to charge him with' as Elliot Spitzer said so perfectly. Espionage??? Really? A News organization that publishes material given to it by a whistle-blower is now guilty of espionage? Chilling, really. The very thought has awakened people around the globe to just how dangerous a concept this is. That would mean every news organization who publishes information they get from 'unnamed sources' exposing corruption in governments around the world, could be charged with 'espionage'. Who is running this show?

I do not believe they will kill him. That would produce a world-wide uprising against this country. Wikileaks is an International, prize-winning news organization with supporters around the world.

Someone in this government needs to reign in the forces responsible for what is going on. Censoring the press here is one thing, they've been doing it for decades, but reaching around the world and preventing people from other countries from supporting Wikileaks, that was a step way too far. Even you must admit that without a free press, there IS no democracy. And that is the message they have delivered, the U.S. is not a democracy anymore and is now interfering in the rights to a free press around the world. That is pretty scary and should be even to those who do not like Wikileaks.

[Pavulon]

46. Again Gerry Bull is still dead. Its a simpe CBA

the cost of making everyone who touched this data in wikileaks land go away is not worth the benefit. The damage is done. Manning will rot in jail, assange may rot there with him.

Here is the deal, you don't have a right to a mastercard, dont have a right to read classified data. World wide uprising, right. More of what we see in greece or london. Broken windows.

If you want access to classified information get elected and go sit on a committee. or file a foia request.

Wikileaks in not the press, it is an intelligence agency with no state backer. That makes them a target.

[sabrina 1]

47. You are wrong. The court ruling in the Pentagon papers case

ruled against you and anyone who thinks the people do not have a right to see what their government is up to. It all comes down to whether or not the release of the documents is for the greater good. So far, it has been.

We do not kill people. We have a system of justice to deal with people charged with crimes. Assange will not rot in jail. Like Daniel Elsberg, he will be viewed as a hero. There will be more organizations like Wikileaks, in fact there already are. Too many secrets is bad for a democracy. The press here is controlled, people are sick of it. Elected officials will be far less inclined to eg, lie this country into another war if they know they are being watched and their exposed. That is the reason for a free press. We see what happened now without one.

Governments classify material to hide it from the public. Then they invoke the same old 'national security' nonsense to continue to hide their shenanigans from the public. I hope Wikileaks grows. They already exposed a brutal and corrupt government in Kenya, stopping more deaths and disappearances and torture. If they did not exist, those criminals would still be murdering their own people.

I guess it's been such a long time since America had a free press, it's hard for you to adjust to it. It relly is a good thing, you know. The Founding Fathers thought so. The only people hurt by the release of these docs, are people who abused the power they people trusted them with. Those who really do have blood on their hands, are still walking around free in this country. And that's a crime. Julian Assange and Manning are not the bad guys, they are the good guys.

When you were a kid, were you on the side of the Joker, or The Sheriff of Nothingham Forest? Everhone I knew was on the side of Batman and Robin Hood ~ the good guys.

[loudsue]

26. Republicans, and other authoritarian idiots, can't spell, and their grammar sucks.

Just sayin'.

[krabigirl]

34. ?

[vanlassie]

18. I still can't get over the use of INTERPOL to search for a "failure to use a condom" "criminal."

[caseymoz]

22. What's more bizarre is that the press calls it "rape!"

And also they had said Assange was on the run from the law, that he was in hiding from police. No. He stayed in Britain in contact with the police, waiting for the warrant. You see, they couldn't arrest him without the warrant. He could have turned himself in but police would have just said, "We don't have your reservation, Mr. Assange." And he turned himself in immediately when they had one.

That had to have been the laziest international manhunts in Interpol history. Somebody said this was like a cyberpunk novel, except that would have been one of the most boring climaxes in any novel.

You think our press isn't some kind of state propaganda machine?

If I were Assange and this ever blows over, I would look into dozens of suits for liable.

[Wednesdays]

37. The PRESS calls it "rape"?

Hell, you don't even have to leave DU to find that meme being bandied about...ad nauseum. :eyes:

[caseymoz]

38. Goes to show how effective the tactic has been.

And they would choose the one meme, the one "charge" that would divide the left against him!

[bhikkhu]

27. If only I had credit card debts...

I believe I would suspend paying my bills for a period, to undertake the due diligence which is my right, to determine whether or not they were issued to me under false pretenses by money-hungry fascists.

[rocks]

31. Pavulon, what is

a war fighting secret? Could you please illucidate? Thanks

[Oilwellian]

32. ROFL

That made me laugh out loud. :D

[Wednesdays]

36. K&R

:kick:

[LiberalFighter]

40. Good point about credit services providing access to gambling and pornography services.

[newtothegame]

42. This isn't very professionally written. Who wrote this, an 8-year-old kid?

Doesn't give me confidence that they can pull together a lawsuit. :(

[JackRiddler]

43. Actually, it was written by a non-native speaker, and it is professional.

The idioms as employed tell me it was written by a native speaker of a Germanic tongue, one who probably did pretty well on their English test at the end of high school (Abitur, possibly). Not up to English literary standards, but ready to do business in the world.

As for "professional," this term would apply more to intent, argument, and effectiveness, not idiomatic perfection. Go ahead and debate that (without me).

By the way, what languages do you speak?

[Kevin1a]

50. Centralized Payment is Anti-democratic

I've always thought that credit card and debit card payments were anti-democratic. The industry is just too centralised in its power structure and is controlled by powerful business interests rather than democratic powers. I try to conduct as much of by business in cash as possible. It's even worse online where Paypal is just about the only payment processor most people use. Cash is discrete, hard to trace, and there are no accounts that can be suspended. Some of my favourite progressive businesses only deal in cash. (Mercury Cafe in Denver, Colorado, USA)

Having said that, I think it's important for people to express their displeasure at Wikileaks being denied service when it's so important to have this access in our modern world. The idea that anyone's commerce can be shut down simply as a result of very powerful interests putting pressure on a company is abhorrent. I don't see a high likelihood that Wikileaks will have it's accounts reinstated, but if they are, I will make a small donation, even though I'm in red and can hardly afford to keep my car on the road and my mobile phone online.

I hope through all of this, people come to realise some of the realities about the world we've built and start to decentralise as much as they possibly can.