WikiLeaks slams Amazon over dumping

Whistleblower site WikiLeaks has lashed out at its former hosting provider, Amazon, after the site was booted from the company's servers.

Neowin reported yesterday that WikiLeaks had moved to Amazon's EC2 cloud computing platform following the second Denial of Service (DDoS) on its Swedish host, Bahnhof. Just hours later, users began reporting problems with accessing WikiLeaks, which has been publishing a steady stream of leaked US diplomatic cables.

The EC2 system is billed as a ''self-serve'' cloud computing solution which allows users to rent as many virtual servers as they require.

At the time, neither Amazon nor WikiLeaks would comment on the hosting issues. But earlier today, WikiLeaks confirmed via Twitter that Amazon had dumped them from its servers.

''WikiLeaks servers at Amazon ousted. Free speech the land of the free--fine our $ are now spent to employ people in Europe,'' the tweet read.

An hour later, WikiLeaks followed that tweet with another questioning Amazon's commitment to free speech.

''If Amazon are so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books,'' it read.

Amazon have refused to comment on why WikiLeaks was dumped, but according to The Seattle Times, the move was driven by political pressure. A staff member of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee reportedly contacted Amazon sometime earlier this week, and questioned the company about reports it was hosting the WikiLeaks site. That conversation apparently prompted Amazon to cease hosting WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks has now reportedly moved back to Bahnhof for its hosting and the site was accessible as of 8.45PM EST.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft launches Xbox LIVE Rewards program

Next Story

TechSpot Tip: Speed Up Firefox by Loading Tabs On-demand

102 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I keep hearing Julian the Rapist spew "free speech" and "first admendment" references, this isn't the first time. He's not an american citizen but he wants to enjoy it's freedoms.

Kids commenting as if governments should publish material as if it was Twitter, open for everyone to read. Yeah, (excuse the language) dumb f*cks who want the truthful information to be spread out to everyone guess what? You have no idea what your asking for. Oh? I just made someone mad, well inb4 you stop reading this and reply in a rage read the rest ...

... Say your local government was to just publish and let its citizens, and er, the world known everything its been up to for the last 10 years between other governments and various operations. You, your friends, your family, the media, neighboring countries, other governments, etc. would of just ... sh*t a brick, so to speak. If you truly believe you or anyone could take in what all governments do behind closed doors (not just the US - which is all Wikileaks has been on about so far) and sit there and say "Well okay", get ... the ... f*ck ... real.

Just my views on a certain group of people that are just oh so "lovin'" Wikileaks as if it were a godsend, has little clue what has been shown in these documents, and who could careless what the result of these leaks will bring forth to America and the rest of the world.

vette said,
Kids commenting as if governments should publish material as if it was Twitter, open for everyone to read. Yeah, (excuse the language) dumb f*cks who want the truthful information to be spread out to everyone guess what? You have no idea what your asking for. Oh? I just made someone mad, well inb4 you stop reading this and reply in a rage read the rest ...

... Say your local government was to just publish and let its citizens, and er, the world known everything its been up to for the last 10 years between other governments and various operations. You, your friends, your family, the media, neighboring countries, other governments, etc. would of just ... sh*t a brick, so to speak. If you truly believe you or anyone could take in what all governments do behind closed doors (not just the US - which is all Wikileaks has been on about so far) and sit there and say "Well okay", get ... the ... f*ck ... real.

Just my views on a certain group of people that are just oh so "lovin'" Wikileaks as if it were a godsend, has little clue what has been shown in these documents, and who could careless what the result of these leaks will bring forth to America and the rest of the world.

@USSTATDEPT: #HILCLINT OMGZ! CHNA MADZ AT US GAIN! Check Doc Link http://itby.ly/45Fdf34

Personally My mum brought me up with the thought IF you don't have anything nice to say about someone the DON'T say anything at all or atleast don't let it be heard and recorded

Personally if I was a hosting company and one of my customers was leaking classified government documents, I'd **** my pants.

Defiantly said,
WikiLeaks is a terrorist organization. It's site and members should be targeted accordingly.

How so? What have they done to terrorize the populace of any country? They haven't blown anything up or attacked anyone.

I don't disagree with Amazon's decision but who here is surprised? Did anyone expect the headline to read:

WikiLeaks neutral on Amazon dumping

That doesn't generate interest. That doesn't sell their website. And that's all they're trying to do here. It really has nothing to do with Amazon whatsoever - they have no obligation to WikiLeaks.

I can't say I blame them.

I have mixed feelings about the wisdom and necessity of what Wikileaks publish myself.

Even if you are in support of Wikileaks there's no reason why any one particular business should be obligated to host it. It's controversial and going to attract trouble.

This raises a valid concern over any transition to cloud computing. Clearly, your at the cloud computing provider's mercy.

Vannos said,
This raises a valid concern over any transition to cloud computing. Clearly, your at the cloud computing provider's mercy.

Precisely why I avoid cloud computing

What is really sad, Amazon will still sell the The Anarchist Cookbook which is banned in the USA.
So if you like conspiracy, read the stories behind the government banning this book.

Good Day.

nidaros said,
What is really sad, Amazon will still sell the The Anarchist Cookbook which is banned in the USA.
So if you like conspiracy, read the stories behind the government banning this book.

Good Day.

The Anarchist's Cookbook is not banned here. It's garbage anyway. I have a copy of it sitting on my bookshelf right next to me. If you want to know how to smoke banana peels or make a firecracker out of red playing cards then it's for you.

nidaros said,
What is really sad, Amazon will still sell the The Anarchist Cookbook which is banned in the USA.
So if you like conspiracy, read the stories behind the government banning this book.

Good Day.

no that book is not banned in the USA, that is a myth

No, Amazon still has pretty good free speech policies. You can get some wonderfully sick, demented books like the Turner Diaries and the S.C.U.M. Manifesto Society for Cutting Up Men. I don't advocate that you read either (it will make your brain hurt with the stupid arguments) but they are listed for sale. They also have the White Man's Bible (WTF?)... silly, silly white people, this stuff makes me ashamed. I am sure if you did some research, you could probably find equally stupid stuff by people who are not white.

Finally, yes, the Anarchist Cookbook going for $19.77 and shipping eight hours after order. I would list the link, but... Well, anyway, a lot of people have given it 1star for the damage that it has caused to society, though there are five stars as well.

I tried to edit my last comment, but I guess I was too late. It should be important to note that SCUM is actually a satire (or at least believed to be). It is basically a flip on a patriarchy society. The reason I included it in the books mentioned above is because it's anti-man and somewhat graphic in resolution (again, even if done in parody).

Amazon is in the business of making money; supporting Wikileaks puts them at odds with numerous, very upset, governments of the world. That's bad for business. Though honestly, both parties should have known it was going to end this way, why they tried in the first place is silly.

Voice of Buddy Christ said,
Amazon has no obligation to provide space to WikiLeaks.

Yes, of cource. And I have no obligation not to cal you %@%^^#%.
But if I called you %@%^^#%? won't you be upset a little?

RealFduch said,

Yes, of cource. And I have no obligation not to cal you %@%^^#%.
But if I called you %@%^^#%? won't you be upset a little?

Doubtful since you are really just another random person on a random thread that in the grand scheme of things means nothing to any given person here or their existance. Anyone who takes personal offense to something someone says on here should really reevaluate where they get their sense of worth from.

I said this on CNNs website...so I have to say it here...

Let me get this straight...

Amazon cuts off Wikileaks because they didn't like their website...but had no problem selling a book called..."The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure."

How double standard of Amazon...

texasghost said,
I said this on CNNs website...so I have to say it here...

Let me get this straight...

Amazon cuts off Wikileaks because they didn't like their website...but had no problem selling a book called..."The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure."

How double standard of Amazon...

I'm sorry, but while you may feel its a clever comparison, its not. Amazon does not filter or monitor every item they sell. Furthermore, a huge number of items on their site are pushed and advertised by third parties and individuals. Do I think its retarded they do not better filter the content on their site, yes, but that doesn't mean they condone every item available either.

thornz0 said,

I'm sorry, but while you may feel its a clever comparison, its not. Amazon does not filter or monitor every item they sell. Furthermore, a huge number of items on their site are pushed and advertised by third parties and individuals. Do I think its retarded they do not better filter the content on their site, yes, but that doesn't mean they condone every item available either.

How does a company not monitor products it sells on it's own website?

texasghost said,

How does a company not monitor products it sells on it's own website?

Because a company is not a all knowing person. It is a group of people that together have to do these things. If you have hundreds of thousands of things, if not millions, there will always be the chance that something gets through the cracks. Any given item on the site has not been checked but we don't notice it unless its noteworthy, such as "The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure." Like thornz0 said, they failed to catch it in the filter and that is their fault. Anyone who pays attention to the news knows about the wikileaks stuff and the second wikileaks announced Amazon would be the new host, someone in the company would pick up on it.

Another thing: the US People are to lazy to actually take the time to read and research the info. US Politicians have to much influence over public media. Can anyone say they have seen local newspapers flooding their papers with leaked documents? Exactly NO...
If the American people cared, their good morals would rise up and over throw the US government, but American government has achieved its goal of media/information control. The PEOPLE are to lazy and concerned with their own needs. So as long as the electricity is on, water is flowing, and gas is affordable; People will leave well enough alone.

Clinton is the one that needs to do damage control, to protect her husband / family and her future in the US Government.

First don't think of this as a politial issue: This is strictly business.
AMAZON has the worst customer service rating, and one of the top 10 most complaints in the country. The Washington State Attorney Generals office has its own sub-department to handle all the law suites for Amazon.
So when the US Government comes calling, Amazon will listen. The Attorney Generals Office can shut Amazon down as a business. Amazon could receive the maximum on all their fines the site would go bankrupt.
So I am sure a backdoor deal went down, to allow Amazon to stay in business. Amazon can't affort to get shut down during the holiday season.

Yes I'm speculating, but Amazon's problems with the attorney generals office in Washington State and other states are clearly documented and public.
The American People have files more complaints with the BBB, and US Attorney Generals office regarding Amazon than other business. That speaks volumes when you have Comcast, AT&T, couple other credit card companies that screw everyone on a daily basis.

nidaros said,
First don't think of this as a politial issue: This is strictly business.
AMAZON has the worst customer service rating, and one of the top 10 most complaints in the country. The Washington State Attorney Generals office has its own sub-department to handle all the law suites for Amazon.
So when the US Government comes calling, Amazon will listen. The Attorney Generals Office can shut Amazon down as a business. Amazon could receive the maximum on all their fines the site would go bankrupt.
So I am sure a backdoor deal went down, to allow Amazon to stay in business. Amazon can't affort to get shut down during the holiday season.

Yes I'm speculating, but Amazon's problems with the attorney generals office in Washington State and other states are clearly documented and public.
The American People have files more complaints with the BBB, and US Attorney Generals office regarding Amazon than other business. That speaks volumes when you have Comcast, AT&T, couple other credit card companies that screw everyone on a daily basis.

can you back that post up with some facts? I just looked up customer service ratings for amazon and they are #11 in rank for the best service in the nation, where do you get the worst from?

its not like some guy wrote out his conspiracy theories and then the gov took them down(free speech).. he posted stolen material.. on a national scale its actually called treason.. this is not an issue of free speech..

madLyfe said,
its not like some guy wrote out his conspiracy theories and then the gov took them down(free speech).. he posted stolen material.. on a national scale its actually called treason.. this is not an issue of free speech..

This isn't treason... at all. The documents were not turned over to an enemy of the state. Treason is betraying your own country to a foreign power.

Assange is not American and the documents were released to the public.

madLyfe said,
its not like some guy wrote out his conspiracy theories and then the gov took them down(free speech).. he posted stolen material.. on a national scale its actually called treason.. this is not an issue of free speech..

Assange cannot commit treason against the US...why? He is NOT a US citizen, treason is the act of betraying your own government FFS. The guy that gave it to him may be guilty of treason as many of these were classified documents.

I say good for amazon. Wikileaks does not care what they release. They do not censure the names themselves and they do not care if the info does not show any corruption.

What good is releasing the wires that show what the politicians think of each other from other countries? Thats not corruption and could lead to war. Why release that ?

Unless wikileaks starts showing restraint at what they release I will always think of them as a bad site and they deserve everything they get.

majortom1981 said,

What good is releasing the wires that show what the politicians think of each other from other countries? Thats not corruption and could lead to war. Why release that ?

Cause maybe, I say maybe, politicians will start to see that they can't have a free pass on everything and should think twice before opening that mouth and say stupid things. If I call yu a-hole I get sued, if a diplomat says another diplomat a-hole no hard feelings?

and one last thing.. do you think newspaper and media actually publish things these days to inform people or do they publish to see what kind of uproar they can cause. the media is just as corrupt as the world governments so if you want to start pointing fingers then you definitely have to point one that way. the worlds evils summed up: money, power, politics, media.

people really need to wakeup and smell the roses here...is this really anything new that we didn't already know about our governments...we all know that politics and government go hand in hand with corruption and dirty deeds. have known this for years..so why should we get all in a fuss when some whack job attention nut case gets his hands on a bunch of documents that tell us what we already know. what? you think the world stage is a happy little fair tale where we play in a field of daisies all day holding each others hands? its a dog eat dog world. has been for as far back as we know. so accept the fact or move to mars, your choice. the world has bigger problems than crap like this to worry about. and before you say it, this crap is not the cause of these bigger problems. the press and media are just contributing to the problem by feeding this pacifier sucking baby. seriously people, move along and quit worrying about this crap.

Its not us that's labelling them as terrorists and forcibly taking down content, thats all the US Government's doing. The fact is that when this data came out, everyone that looked at it saw it for what it was, a bunch of diplomatic cables that only confirmed what we already knew. Its the US government that are continually making the situation worse by trying to oppress the information. Its the Streisand Effect on an hilariously epic scale.

Majesticmerc said,
Its not us that's labelling them as terrorists and forcibly taking down content, thats all the US Government's doing.

Don't forget the Neowin members that wand WikiLeaks founder killed.

Let's see; Amazon retailed "The Pedophile's Guide" for over two weeks, citing censorship as the reason they refused to remove it, yet removed Wikileaks within a day.

So there you go, paedophilia is more acceptable to Amazon than whistleblowing.

I'm not an expert, but I thought you could only use the free speech/first amendment argument with the government, as in, if a business doesn't want that stuff on their servers then they can get rid of them. But if the government were hosting the website they couldn't get rid of them because that would be against free speech.

There is no law that requires Amazon to keep up the information (unless they're breaking a contract), however there is also no law that prevents Wikileaks from saying that Amazon is a bunch of pansies and scared out of their knickers of the US government.

If there was a contract, they can always claim the illegality of the data WikiLeaks was hosting and using that as just cause to break said contract. Either way, the First Amendment does not apply here.

Voice of Buddy Christ said,
If there was a contract, they can always claim the illegality of the data WikiLeaks was hosting and using that as just cause to break said contract. Either way, the First Amendment does not apply here.

Are you a lawyer or a pre-law student? Saying that Amazon has the right to host the content they want is one argument. Bringing in 1st Amendment issues is another. Too completely different arguments.

There goes freedom of speech, as soon as it is not comfortable for US then all laws stops applying?

I am more curious why now, latest leak wasn't really as important as two previous ones about wars in Iraq/Afghan ... so US must got really scared of something it they are pulling all string they can to box this guy, or is it his next-to-be-leak about bank so dangerous for them?

Voice of Buddy Christ said,
"Freedom of speech" does not apply here. Amazon has no obligation to provide WikiLeaks with space.

Correct. But why did the government (from the Department of Homeland Security, no less) contact Amazon about hosting a particular website? That may be a freedom of speech issue.

kouhii00 said,
So all this DDoS'ing and the government is not investigating the origin of the attacks? Hmm!

+2

They were getting nailed with DDoS attacks worth a few gigabytes, heck of course they're going to get shut down... Plus i'm pretty sure the Guvment already sent Amazon a nasty letter >_>

kouhii00 said,
So all this DDoS'ing and the government is not investigating the origin of the attacks? Hmm!

Governments rarely investigate DDoS's. Secondly, the attacks weren't on servers based in America as far as I know, so they have no jurisdiction.

And I don't blame Amazon, last thing they want is to have the US Government start seizing servers and screwing up their business.

kouhii00 said,
So all this DDoS'ing and the government is not investigating the origin of the attacks? Hmm!

actually they did catch the attacker...

Pc_Madness said,

Governments rarely investigate DDoS's. Secondly, the attacks weren't on servers based in America as far as I know, so they have no jurisdiction.
I think the government doesn't regulate much of anything these days including monopolies, securities trading, interest rates, commodity prices, size of the various 100+ billion dollar companies and their activities against competing small businesses, approval of loans including stimulus cash, printing money, approvals of various food products, approval of various obvious patents and trademarks, approval of patents in one field to another company in a competing field who simply wants to block the use of the technology, and so on.

Edited by Jebadiah, Dec 2 2010, 1:27pm :

kouhii00 said,
So all this DDoS'ing and the government is not investigating the origin of the attacks? Hmm!

I think what he was asking is why does the US government not investigate itself for the DDOS attack on Amazon? I think the reason is really obvious.

stevember said,
My respect for Amazon has gone up considerably.
Because they have buckled under political pressure? If anything, that is disrespectful.

stevember said,
My respect for Amazon has gone up considerably.

Wow... The Wikileaks staff isn't even under a warrant for the publication, and yet you like to see this. Yay, mindless censorship about embarassing gov't material for the win!

stevember said,
My respect for Amazon has gone up considerably.

Yay for supporting political corruption. If you don't care about important information being known then why should you vote because let me say that no one is going to take office and totally change the country. It's what they do in the background.

Where would the security threat be if you's never trained Osama and Iraq.

Expose the real government, you's talk about tax cuts which is stupid and not having a NHS but you's continue to spend trillions per decade on war which does nothing but lead to more violence in the future with countries you sold to last decade.

Gaffney said,

Yay for supporting political corruption. If you don't care about important information being known then why should you vote because let me say that no one is going to take office and totally change the country. It's what they do in the background.

Where would the security threat be if you's never trained Osama and Iraq.

Expose the real government, you's talk about tax cuts which is stupid and not having a NHS but you's continue to spend trillions per decade on war which does nothing but lead to more violence in the future with countries you sold to last decade.

Nowhere did I say I was for political corruption or any such thing. But I do believe this is not the right way about getting things changed.

I am not pro war, on the contrary I wish like the majority it wasn't needed. But unfortunately if some of these rogue political groups were left to continue growing things would get a lot worse.

I would still rather live under a Western corrupted government than nearly all the other governments in the world.

cloaked said,

You do look a bit slow...

Maybe... on the other hand I didn't realise disagreeing with someone's opinion meant you were backwards compared to them.

stevember said,

Nowhere did I say I was for political corruption or any such thing. But I do believe this is not the right way about getting things changed.
What is? Seriously, I am curious. What would you do differently?

I think of the people who tried to do any good in the past, many were either shot or turned into puppets through threats from their own people. So what is the secret sauce you have? Or are you just all talk?

Edited by Jebadiah, Dec 2 2010, 1:49pm :

Jebadiah said,
What is? Seriously, I am curious. What would you do differently?

I think of the people who tried to do any good in the past, many were either shot or turned into puppets through threats from their own people. So what is the secret sauce you have? Or are you just all talk?

let me explain why I don't think this leak is good for any government, we are not talking about what governments have done wrong which many people posting here seems to think so.

We are talking about communications between governments that are not official statements they are just personal opinions that they are entitled to have without fear of causing trouble and conflict between countries.

It is a worry when political figures will not be able to talk to another country or within a department they're honest thoughts on a situation, political figure or country.

It would be political correctness (which has gone crazy) gone way too far.

Now, if they had leaked something that proved Bush was behind 911 or something crazy like that then I would understand the sensationalism behind this, but of course that won't happen because it does not exist.

stevember said,
It is a worry when political figures will not be able to talk to another country or within a department they're honest thoughts on a situation, political figure or country.
But isn't this where the problem lies to begin with? Countries aren't being honest with one another because they think that they have the ability to keep secrets from one another. If countries knew that there was no way something would remain a secret forever, would they not be a lot more careful with their words and actions?

Intrinsica said,
But isn't this where the problem lies to begin with? Countries aren't being honest with one another because they think that they have the ability to keep secrets from one another. If countries knew that there was no way something would remain a secret forever, would they not be a lot more careful with their words and actions?

Maybe yeah

Intrinsica said,
But isn't this where the problem lies to begin with? Countries aren't being honest with one another because they think that they have the ability to keep secrets from one another. If countries knew that there was no way something would remain a secret forever, would they not be a lot more careful with their words and actions?

And flying cars will revolutionize travel along with the personal jet pack...Crap in one hand, fill the other with all your wishes come true in the other, see which fills up faster. Unless you balance reality with fiction, you will lose every time.

Are you 100% honest with every person you deal with every day? If you are, I defer to your holiness, otherwise - I believe the phrase is "be the change you want to see in the world".

schubb2003 said,
Are you 100% honest with every person you deal with every day? If you are, I defer to your holiness, otherwise - I believe the phrase is "be the change you want to see in the world".
No one is honest with everyone 100%, and I haven't said that at any point. My point is that if I go and hide something, I accept the consequences if I get caught out, rather than whining like a b**** about it and trying to find a scapegoat to distract from my original mistake. However, because I understand that my actions and words could come under scrutiny from other people, I choose my words and actions carefully before going ahead with them.

Choosing words and actions carefully is not the same as being 100% honest.

So have you ever managed employees and tried to protect them from upper management? I have watched a manager who protected my team from some really stupid policies...UM was not going to change, so he did a very similar dance.

Now imagine you are protecting 300M people, you need to be frank with some missives and delicate with how you interact with those discussed in the missives.

Intrinsica said,
But isn't this where the problem lies to begin with? Countries aren't being honest with one another because they think that they have the ability to keep secrets from one another. If countries knew that there was no way something would remain a secret forever, would they not be a lot more careful with their words and actions?

No.

The bigger issue (with quite a few nations) is how they look inside their own borders (why do YOU think the PRC has the Great Firewall of China?) If the Russians in Russia (for example) see that we regard their leaders as largely clueless, there just might be pressure (from within Russia, mind you) to replace those same leaders. If tthe election was truly rigged ( a distinct possibility) there will be resistance. Mind you, we are all aware that politicians don't like looking bad (witness initial reaction from US politicians over the leaking of the diplomatic cables in the first place) - do you really think that politicians, that by and large, were not elected, or cheated to get into office, are going to be any nicer having THEIR dirty secrets exposed for the world (and especially their own citizenry) to see? The anger at Amazon over booting WL merely states that we are all so many gossipmongers, waiting for the next juicy bit of leakery from WL as if they were a "scandal sheet".

Revealing the names of spys which has been found on wikileaks has gotten people killed. But that is all fine apparently on Neowin, that is all for the greater good.

I agree, They are doing more harm than good and I respect Amazon for showing them the door. I want to hear all the great changes that have come out because of wikileaks, everyone seems to think there are many.

stevember said,

Now, if they had leaked something that proved Bush was behind 911 or something crazy like that then I would understand the sensationalism behind this, but of course that won't happen because it does not exist.

I totally agree with you i mean it is just ridiculous to think that Government had anything to do with 9/11 i mean when you see planes heading towards worlds most guarded facility pentagon, and the twin towers u got to think the radars just went crazy. It was just a matter of time something like this to happen. And i still thank God that the Pentagon sector that was hit was empty due to renovations. All those uneducated people should stop hoping that wikileaks could reveal something crazy like the all planned 9/11 stuff done for controlling the enormous Gas sources in Afghanistan, dropping the privacy laws, and selling billion of weapons worldwide. This will never going to happen. I mean cmon now what they will come up with next ? That the war in Iraq where civilians hundreds of American families lost their children, was not because of controlling the Oil but to prevent Saddam launching his tons of mass destruction missiles ? And yes they will find those weapons in the next few years he has hidden them well and they cant find them yet.

Amazon did the right thing. Wikileaks should close because its illegal to publish goverment's illegal actions.

Amazon simply don't want to be associated with this whole thing anyway. Plus they can just say they needed the extra server space due to Christmas demand.

Chasethebase said,
Amazon simply don't want to be associated with this whole thing anyway. Plus they can just say they needed the extra server space due to Christmas demand.

We know it was due to political pressure. It's obvious they don't care about associations since they were selling the pedo's guide.