Without Registration, Swedish Law Does Not Protect Wikileaks Sources 86
An anonymous reader writes with word that Wikileaks, which currently stores a lot of their material on servers in Sweden, may not be as safe there as once believed. From the above linked article (from April): "Wikileaks is benefiting form Sweden's basic law 'Grundlag' on the freedom of print information, because it also guarantees the anonymity of sources in digital media, say sources at the European Parliament. In Sweden, if a website registers with the public authorities and can prove it has an editor-in-chief, then it can also be protected under the law, argues the parliamentary source." Says the anonymous submtter, "However, it seems Wikileaks never registered with the public authorities (article in Swedish; here it is auto-translated to English), and thus is not protected by the freedom of print information basic law even if they do have an editor-in-chief."
So register (Score:4, Funny)
What is the problem? Do they get no retroactive protection?
Re:"Grundlag" (Score:1, Funny)
Wikipedia article: Constitution of Sweden [wikipedia.org]
The relevant law in this case is probably the Freedom of the Press Act. I am not a Swedish lawyer, thought.
Re:"Grundlag" (Score:2, Funny)
Re:"Grundlag" (Score:1, Funny)
Your apparent belief that "ground" doesn't mean "foundation" or "base" like "grund" does in Swedish, and that you thus have to use "foundation" is... groundless.
Are you trying to say that his belief is without foundation?
Re:So register (Score:3, Funny)
So you have to register as the editor of two newspapers and have each be the other's source. Then you'll disappear in a puff of recursive logic!
Hrm, I think I should stay away from zebra crossings for awhile.
Re:"Grundlag" (Score:2, Funny)
Nå må dere tjenerfolk fra øst se å klappe igjen og servere en kald øl.