Wikileaks: Lawbreakers Or Whistleblowers?

WikiLeaks is a non-profit media organisation that publishes leaked documents, often exposing state and corporate secrets. It has been praised for increasing transparency and enhancing democratic discourse. However, it has also faced intense criticism and legal issues, with some arguing that it broke the law.

In 2010, the US government warned federal workers that reading WikiLeaks documents, which were still classified, would be illegal. This was extended to accessing media reports about the disclosures. The State Department also informally advised people not to write about the leaks on social media, as it could affect their ability to get a government job.

WikiLeaks has been accused of violating personal privacy and inadequately curating content. In 2017, it was reported that WikiLeaks may have broken the law by guessing the password of a website and sharing it with Donald Trump Jr. Legal experts deemed this to be a breach of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA).

WikiLeaks has also faced legal issues in Australia, Europe, and the US. In 2019, Julian Assange was charged with violating the Espionage Act.

Did WikiLeaks break the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act?

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) is a United States cybersecurity bill enacted in 1986 as an amendment to existing computer fraud law. The CFAA prohibits unauthorised access to a computer and the unauthorised deletion, alteration, or blocking of access to data or information.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was charged with one count of violating the CFAA. The indictment stems from an incident in 2010 when Assange allegedly told then-Army private Chelsea Manning, who was leaking classified materials to Assange to be published on WikiLeaks, that he would help her crack a password to gain access to military computers.

The CFAA is a notoriously overbroad law that can be easy for prosecutors to abuse. Attorney Tor Ekeland, who has worked on several high-profile CFAA cases, said that the Justice Department's argument in the Assange case is relatively shaky. Ekeland noted that there is usually a five-year statute of limitations on CFAA charges, and Manning's document leaks stopped in 2010. He also said that the Justice Department is stretching that limit by invoking a section that classes hacking as an act of terrorism.

The core problem with the CFAA is that it doesn't clearly define one of the central things it prohibits: unauthorised access to a computer. The courts across the country have issued conflicting decisions, resulting in a lack of definitional clarity that allows prosecutors to charge felonies even when the harms are minimal or questionable. This is a serious problem, given that much political speech and protest these days are done with computers.

The CFAA is the federal government's primary anti-hacking statute. It is both a civil and criminal statute, meaning that people and businesses can use it to sue each other for private wrongs, and the government can use it to put people in jail for public wrongs. Its dual nature gives rise to a problematic feature: most of the law interpreting it comes from civil cases where the stakes are not as high as in a criminal case. Thus, the quality of reasoning in civil cases is not as robust as in a hard-fought criminal case.

Did WikiLeaks break the Espionage Act of 1917?

The Espionage Act of 1917 makes it a crime to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country by collecting or communicating information that would harm the national defense. It is also a crime to enter an installation or obtain a document connected to the national defense in order to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country. Knowingly receiving classified information that has been obtained illegally, as well as passing it on, also runs afoul of the Espionage Act.

WikiLeaks has been accused of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 by publishing classified documents and other media provided by anonymous sources. However, it is unclear whether WikiLeaks broke the Espionage Act of 1917. The U.S. government has never successfully prosecuted anyone other than a government employee for disseminating unlawfully leaked classified information.

The closest the Supreme Court has come to examining the issue is the famous Pentagon Papers case, New York Times v. United States, when the Court rejected the government’s attempt to prevent The New York Times and The Washington Post from publishing a leaked copy of a top-secret study of the Vietnam War.

Did WikiLeaks break the law by publishing classified information?

WikiLeaks is a non-profit media organisation and publisher of leaked documents. It was founded in 2006 by Julian Assange and has published classified documents and other media provided by anonymous sources.

The question of whether WikiLeaks broke the law by publishing classified information is complex and remains unanswered.

Arguments for WikiLeaks breaking the law

Some believe it is possible to prosecute WikiLeaks for distributing classified information under the Espionage Act. WikiLeaks' promotion of its work as a form of journalism raises the stakes for the news media. There are also two bills making their way through Congress that would amend the Espionage Act, which some say would make it easier to prosecute journalists for publishing classified information.

The US government has never successfully prosecuted anyone other than a government employee for disseminating unlawfully leaked classified information. However, this does not mean that WikiLeaks has not broken the law. The Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of such a prosecution, and the First Amendment would not necessarily protect journalists from being prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

Arguments against WikiLeaks breaking the law

First Amendment advocates argue that it would be contrary to the First Amendment to prosecute journalists under the Espionage Act. University of Chicago Law Professor Geoffrey Stone told Congress that prosecuting journalists under the Espionage Act would violate the First Amendment.

Journalists have never been successfully prosecuted for disseminating unlawfully leaked classified information. The closest the Supreme Court has come to examining the issue is the Pentagon Papers case, where the Court rejected the government's attempt to prevent The New York Times and The Washington Post from publishing a leaked copy of a top-secret study of the Vietnam War.

WikiLeaks' stance

WikiLeaks has stated that it has never released a misattributed document and that documents are assessed before release. In response to concerns about the possibility of misleading or fraudulent leaks, WikiLeaks has stated that misleading leaks "are already well-placed in the mainstream media" and that WikiLeaks is "of no additional assistance".

The debate around whether WikiLeaks broke the law by publishing classified information is ongoing. While some argue that WikiLeaks' actions are protected by the First Amendment, others believe that the organisation has violated the Espionage Act. The question of whether WikiLeaks will be prosecuted, and whether such prosecution would be successful, remains unanswered.

Did WikiLeaks break the law by publishing hacked information?

WikiLeaks is a non-profit media organisation and publisher of leaked documents. It was founded in 2006 by Julian Assange, who has been holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London since 2012. WikiLeaks has released many documents exposing serious violations of human rights and civil liberties by various governments.

In terms of its legality, WikiLeaks exists in a grey area. The US government has never successfully prosecuted anyone other than a government employee for disseminating unlawfully leaked classified information. However, the Espionage Act of 1917 makes it a crime to communicate information that would harm national defence. It is also illegal to enter an installation or obtain a document connected to national defence with the intention to harm the US or benefit a foreign country. Knowingly receiving and passing on classified information is also illegal.

In 2010, the US government warned federal workers that reading WikiLeaks documents could be breaking the law. This was because, in the view of the US government, many of the documents were still classified, and reading classified documents without clearance is illegal. However, this was criticised as a form of censorship.

WikiLeaks has also been accused of breaking the law in other ways. In 2017, it was revealed that WikiLeaks had correctly guessed the password to a website set up by multi-millionaire Rob Glaser. Legal experts wondered whether WikiLeaks would face charges as, according to most lawyers, the simple act of guessing a password is deemed a breach of US law.

In 2019, Assange pled guilty to one count of violating the Espionage Act. Under a plea deal, he was sentenced to time served and released.

Did WikiLeaks break the law by publishing information about government employees?

WikiLeaks is a non-profit media organisation and publisher of leaked documents. It was founded in 2006 by Julian Assange and has since released over ten million documents.

In 2010, WikiLeaks released footage of the 2007 Baghdad airstrike, in which Iraqi journalists and civilians were killed by a US helicopter crew. It also published thousands of US military field logs from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as diplomatic cables and emails from various governments.

The US government has never successfully prosecuted anyone other than a government employee for disseminating unlawfully leaked classified information. However, the Espionage Act of 1917 makes it a crime to communicate or obtain information that would harm national defence. It is also illegal to enter an installation or obtain a document connected to national defence with the intention to harm the US or benefit a foreign country.

In 2010, the US government warned federal employees that reading WikiLeaks documents, even via news sites, would be breaking the law. This was because the cables released by WikiLeaks were still considered classified documents. The State Department also informally warned people against writing about the leaks on social media, as it would jeopardise their ability to deal with confidential information and affect their eligibility for government jobs.

WikiLeaks has been criticised for its lack of transparency and inadequate curation of content, including the violation of personal privacy. For example, it has revealed Social Security numbers, medical information, and credit card numbers.

In 2017, WikiLeaks was accused of breaking the law by guessing the password to a website. However, no charges have been brought against the organisation.

Frequently asked questions