Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship The Almighty Buck Your Rights Online

WikiLeaks Continues To Fund Itself Via Flattr 194

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the money-finds-a-way dept.
novenator writes "Since the corporations MasterCard, PayPal, and Visa have been trying to shut down the cash flow to the Wikileaks project, those who wish to donate have been having trouble finding a way to help out. The social media/micropayment site Flattr (run from Sweden) continues to leave the channels open."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WikiLeaks Continues To Fund Itself Via Flattr

Comments Filter:
  • funds to keep the servers up and running

    OR

    Assange's legal fund?

  • obl: link. (Score:5, Informative)

    by B5_geek (638928) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @12:33PM (#34629440)

    As opposed to posting a link to another board that has am IMAGE of the url; (madness!!)

    here ya go:

    https://flattr.com/profile/wikileaks [flattr.com]

    Really editors, was that so hard? My new-years resolution? Find a site that is as good as Slashdot used to be.

  • It's amusing that some people believe they can get at an organisation like WikiLeaks by going after one man and putting pressure on every company imaginable not to do business with them. WikiLeaks will get donations regardless and if it's not WikiLeaks it will be something else. It's like no one has learned anything from the past ten or fifteen years.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bluefoxlucid (723572)
      That's what I'm leaning from this. The whole US government classified bullshit is interesting and controversial; moreso, however, is the idea that businesses can basically kill off anyone they don't like by shutting their doors to them. Paypal goes down, BAC goes down, Visa/Mastercard goes down, and your business dies. Wal-Mart has threatened to stop selling CDs and DVDs because, frankly, they make 2% of their money from the merchandise and could use the space for something more profitable; while the lab
      • by jgtg32a (1173373)
        I was under the impression that classified was the lowest level, and everything starts at that level until it has been cleared as unclassified.
        • by segedunum (883035)
          They say that it is classified, but nevertheless, it is read by around three million people in diplomatic circles. Unfortunately they still don't seem to understand that they can't label anything they choose as 'secret' and try ane enforce it after the fact.
        • by drinkypoo (153816)

          I was under the impression that classified was the lowest level

          I was under the impression that "classified" meant that someone had bothered to review it or just classify it as to security status. Thus any restricted/sensitive document is classified which covers a lot of ground. No?

        • Re:But Of Course (Score:4, Informative)

          by Beardo the Bearded (321478) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @03:29PM (#34632548)

          Nope, a document is either Classified or it is not.

          There are different levels inside Classified, such as 2, 3, NATO, ATOMAL, etc, but that's not terribly important. The vast, vast, vast majority of documents are Unclassified. That's because it is a FUCKING PAIN IN THE ASS to get your hands on anything Classified. You can't copy it, you can't email it, you have to use secure networks, work in pairs, etc. You'd be surprised at how much stuff is Unclassified. For example, the layouts of warships are Unclassified so the contractors can work on them. Only the tiny little bits that are really important (like the [REDACTED] or the [REDACTED]) are Classified. You can go about your day, working on military equipment, without ever having to use your security clearance. That's a good thing because you also have to go through a lengthy debriefing once you've worked on the drawings. Careless talk like "Oh yeah, I had to order part XYZ a year ago. A good vendor is ABC." Who-oops! Part XYZ, being of dimensions X, Y, and Z, now gives out a starting point for some first principles work, and then presto, the same info that's in a Classified spec.

          You have to have three things to read a Classified document:
          1. The appropriate clearance level. That's where the levels above come into play.
          2. The need-to-know. If you have a clearance it doesn't mean you can just look up any document you feel like. You have to have a reason.
          3. The appropriate environment. Computers and networks are assumed to be non-secure and you can't make copies.

          So the interesting thing about this is the guy who leaked the documents isn't entirely responsible for what happened. Where was his supervisor? How did he breach security? I can't just walk into a secure room and download [REDACTED] on a thumb drive.

          If you mark something as Classified when it's not supposed to be then it's a violation of those same Acts. There's a completely separate classification system for things that are personally embarrassing and can cause damage to a person. Classified is only for things that are damaging to the country. Damaging, NOT EMBARRASSING!

        • by jank1887 (815982)

          your impression is wrong. classified is not a de

      • What I wonder is, why is the reaction so different this time around? I can think of a couple of possibilities, not mutually exclusive.

        One possibility is that Wikileaks and Assange are losing public support. Interfering with a war is one thing, interfering with diplomacy- the attempt to settle issues without military action- is harder to justify. Reports that Wikileaks released the names of Afghan informants hasn't helped, and even setting aside the controversial charges against him, profiles of Assange (su

        • One possibility is that Wikileaks and Assange are losing public support. Interfering with a war is one thing, interfering with diplomacy- the attempt to settle issues without military action- is harder to justify.

          Diplomacy does not have to be in the PUBLIC interest. It can be a huge rouse to help solidify government control by supporting counter-antigovernment actions and removing international tensions that draw focus away from controlling the sheep populous.

          At times I think the UN might be the worst thing to ever happen, and the end of classic wars and attempts to expand territory and take over the world has marked the end of civilization and the beginning of a giant puppet show.

          Reports that Wikileaks released the names of Afghan informants hasn't helped, and even setting aside the controversial charges against him, profiles of Assange (such as the one in the New York Times) don't paint him in a very flattering light.

          Regardless of what opinions y

        • What I wonder is, why is the reaction so different this time around?

          Just before the cables began to be published, he threatened to go after the banks.

          You can mess with the puppets, but you do not mess with the puppet masters.

        • One possibility is that Wikileaks and Assange are losing public support.

          They are.

          WikiLeaks: A Document Dump Too Far [abcnews.com]

          WikiLeaks Comes Under Fire from Rights Groups [time.com]

          Reports that Wikileaks released the names of Afghan informants hasn't helped

          Sad, but true. Hopefully none are killed. We need as many informants against the Taliban as we can, both to protect the Afghans, and to protect the US from more terrorist attacks [washingtonpost.com].

          WikiLeaks Reportedly Outs 100s of Afghan Informants [cbsnews.com]

          profiles of Assange (such as the one in the

    • That is something I am thinking about. I mean let's face it. The people who want to take wikileaks down are by no means idiots. Even if every once and a while they resorted to something that looks idiotic. So this raise the question, why the hell he is being targeted like that ? He can just be replaced in a heart beat if he is gone!
      • by Viol8 (599362)

        "So this raise the question, why the hell he is being targeted like that "

        Surely you can't be so naive? He's being made an example of. Sure , someone else could stick their head above the parapet but if they know they'll get theirs blown off too they might not be so keen to do it.

        • There is a lot of people blind with ideals. Trash tactics like this won't work with people like that. Hence the point.
          • by sgt_doom (655561)
            No, but it is working at the public forum level, which is the primary target. Scare the masses. Scare the herds. Rope in all these pseudo-feminist twits who will attack Assange, and anyone else, because they always support the status quo as they are so financially tied into it.

            Take Jaclyn Friedman, who vociferously is pursuing Assange, and anyone who supports him or Wikileaks, and is one of those avowed pseudo-feminists, who has books published by Seal Press, part of the Perseus Books Group, known for pu

  • by eepok (545733) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @12:35PM (#34629488) Homepage

    How is it funding itself? Do they have $20 and continually re-donate it to their organization?

  • by troll -1 (956834) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @12:52PM (#34629774)
    Understand that Wikileaks hasn't leaked anything. They just published what was already leaked and which is what the New York Times and others have published in part so I wonder why MasterCard et al aren't doing the same thing to all the other media outlets that publish leaked info.

    Maybe they all got a call from Lieberman's office or something.
    • by blueg3 (192743)

      They've leaked it in the sense that they're responsible for making it public.

      They're not responsible for initially acquiring the classified information. At least with regards to laws and regulations about handling that information, they are innocent. They're also not being arrested or prosecuted as such. They're just finding that business is becoming hard to do, which shouldn't be a surprise to an organization that's doing something legal but not particularly popular.

    • by Jeian (409916)

      Just publishing documents and files is one thing.

      Editing them into questionably accurate videos with misleading titles while their founder flexes his e-peen about how he's "busy ending two wars" is another.

  • Direct bank transfer (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mathinker (909784) * on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @01:17PM (#34630242) Journal

    Based on http://wikileaks.nl/support.html [wikileaks.nl] it is still possible to transfer money directly to two bank accounts (to fund Wikileaks itself, there is also information there if you want to fund Assange's defense):

    Bank Transfer - Option 1: via Sunshine Press Productions ehf:

    Skulagötu 19, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland
    Landsbanki Islands Account number 0111-26-611010
    BANK/SWIFT:NBIIISRE
    ACCOUNT/IBAN:IS97 0111 2661 1010 6110 1002 80

    Bank Transfer - Option 2: via the not-for-profit Wau Holland Stiftung Foundation:

    This support is tax deductible in Germany
    Bank Account: 2772812-04
    IBAN: DE46 5204 0021 0277 2812 04
    BIC Code: COBADEFF520
    Bank: Commerzbank Kassel
    German BLZ: 52040021
    Subject: WIKILEAKS / WHS Projekt 04

    The page also states that some European banks can transfer directly to Datacell, the collection agent for Wikileaks:

    Using:

    • DirectEBanking : For online Donations from selected banks in Germany, Belguim, Austra, Switzerland and UK
    • iDEAL : For online Donations from the Netherlands

    See URLs http://www.datacell.com/news.php [datacell.com] and https://payments.datacell.com/ [datacell.com] for more info about that last option

  • Just a few more dollars and the Flattr team can afford to buy that ever-desirable Second Vowel!

    Don't pass-up the opportunity to help a bunch of great guys escape the Web 2.0 trap.

  • Quoting from the Flattr FAQ [flattr.com]:

    How do I get money in and out of the Flattr system?

    - Currently, Flattr supports most credit cards and direct banking. We're using Moneybookers and PayPal to achieve this. To get money out of the system, we currently support PayPal only.

  • If everyone who did "like" on facebook Wikileaks, also sent them a dollar..... fold it in a piece of paper, stick it in an envelope, address it to the given address, put a stamp on it and mail it...

%DCL-MEM-BAD, bad memory VMS-F-PDGERS, pudding between the ears

Working...