Dennis Collins, Christopher Wayne Cooper, Joshua

IN SUPPORT OF DDOS AS A LEGAL FORM of DIGITAL CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE & SUPPORT OF #OPPAYBACK13 #PAYPAL14

ANTI COPYRIGHT

Do you remember the day in late 2012 Anonymous took down PayPal because PayPal canceled service to WikiLeaks?

#OpPayBack13

#PayPal14

COURT SUPPORT NEEDED DECEMBER 5

First of all, please understand that Im not describing hacking. What occurred was a DDoS attack, which is the digital equivalent of a group of protesters going to PayPal headquarters and holding a sit-in. PayPals site was flooded with traffic until it was inoperable, which some people say could happen to a site if everyone in the world went to the same website at once and sat there hitting the f5 (refresh) key over and over until the server overloaded. Its like what happens to a cell phone if it gets dozens of text messages at once and just freezes up and becomes completely inoperable. There are a lot of different ways DDoS attacks can be executed, but Im not going to describe them in detail here because I honestly have no idea which exact methods were used in these cases, and more importantly, I prefer to argue that DDoS should be legal, viewed as Internet Street Protest, and protected by the First Amendment. 14 people were eventually indicted for the DDoS attack on PayPal. They have not been to trial yet. Some of them could face up to 15 years on prison for the 2010 PayPal DDoS protest.

back, we will take the risks because it is all about truth.' And that's what tonight's event is about. It's about Jeremy, it's about Barrett, it's about Bradley Manning, it's about Mr. Assange, it's about Mr. Snowden. It's about the PayPal 14. It is about refusing to go silently unto the night. It is about refusing to bow down to the industry of silence. It is about refusing to nod your head as others tell you, not just how to live your life, but how an entire society and world should function. And on behalf of Barrett, on behalf of Jeremy, on behalf of Mercedes, Mr. Assange, Mr. Snowden, and Bradley Manning, we have a very simple, two word answer, 'Fuck you.'" Source: Stanley Cohen, who defended Anonymous in the PayPal 14 case, Speaks at Benefit for Hammond and Barrett Brown http://istanleycohen.org/index.php/component/content/article/8stanley-cohen-in-the-media/27-stanley-cohen-speaks-at-a-benefitfor-hammond-and-barrett-brown

Attorney Jay Leiderman explains: The example of the PayPal protest provides a good analogy for why DDoS is speech. In the 1960s, civil rights protesters went to the Woolworth's lunch counter in the segregated American south because they sought to make a point by asserting their right to buy a simple meal much as protesters went to PayPal because they wanted to donate to WikiLeaks. In Woolworth's, the protesters made plain their goal: "If you serve me a meal, I will eat it, pay for it, and then I will leave." This concept was lost on the Jim Crow south, so protest became necessary.
Source: Justice for the PayPal WikiLeaks protesters: why DDoS is free speech http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/22/paypal-wikileaksprotesters-ddos-free-speech

WTF is a protected computer?

One of the most disturbing aspects of this is that the CFAA, a law that was written in 1986, has a vague definition of a protected computer. The alleged crime is use of a traffic generation tool in order to disrupt service for PayPal, or to commit Intentional Damage to a Protected Computer.
This phrase appears in the indictments in reference to the the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, that law thats in bad need of reform or abolition (the same law that was used to torture Aaron Swartz and is being used to imprison Jeremy Hammond, Weev, and Barrett Brown among others). FreeAnons dot org explains the PayPal14: John Covelli, Keth Wilson Downey, Mercedes Renee Haefer, Donald Husband, Vincent Charles Kershaw, Ethan Miles, James C. Murphy, Drew Alan Phillips, Jefferey Puglisi, Daniel Sullivan, Tracy Ann Valenzuela, Christopher Quang Vo. Read that list of names. Now read it again. These are the people who are going to be brought before an American judge and have their fates determined by a jury of their American peers for using their American, constitutionally granted, and judicially defended right to free speech. At the present time, The United States of America has decided that it is willing to prosecute these defendants on behalf of PayPal, a corporation that handles financial transactions across state lines (in turn qualifying api.paypal.com as a Protected Computer under 18 U.S.C. 1030) for an attack that took place

While these heroes were protesting virtually, the Occupy Movement was physically protesting in front of banks, and thousands of people closed their bank accounts on Move Your Money day. There are certainly people who physically protested and flooded the streets with traffic, people who may now be targets of government surveillance but who are not being indicted two years later like the PayBack13 are. To learn more about the CFAA, the Electronic Frontier Front is a good place to start learning about why this law needs to be reformed or abolished (as some, including Jeremy Hammond, argue): https://www.eff.org/issues/cfaa Please do not forget these heroes.

against their servers. With this, the United States government, in conjunction with PayPal, has chosen a few members of the Anonymous Legion to scapegoat, in the name oflaw and order? Of course not. More likely to send a message to Anonymous and to any other would be digital activists. The alleged crime is use of a traffic generation tool in order to disrupt service for PayPal, or in legal speak to commit Intentional Damage to a Protected Computer. While this particular charge being levied is laughable to anyone with a basic understanding of networking, the type of tool used, and an idea of what damage to a computer actually consists of, it is a felony charge and carries up to 15 years of jail time and up to a half a million dollar fine. Surprisingly, in the indictment itself, the Grand Jury acknowledges that the attack itself was a direct response to the actions taken by PayPals effort to, in the words of the community, economically strangle WikiLeaks. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/22/paypal-wikileaksprotesters-ddos-free-speechSo this begs the question, can this form of digital activism be considered protected speech? To understand protected speech we must first understand that there has been an evolution of free speech, from flying red flags, to wearing black armbands. Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) burns the brightest in recent history, pun intended. Justice Brennan articulates how the First Amendment is always evolving: The First Amendment literally forbids the abridgment only of speech, but we have long recognized that its protection does not end at the spoken or written word. While we have rejected the view that an apparently limitless variety of conduct can be labeled speech whenever the person engaging in the conduct intends thereby to express an idea, we have acknowledged that conduct may be sufficiently imbued with elements of communication to fall within the scope of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. In deciding whether particular conduct possesses sufficient communicative elements to bring the First Amendment into play, we have asked whether [a]n intent to convey a particularized message was present, and [whether] the likelihood was great that the message would be understood by those who viewed it. Hence, we have recognized the expressive nature of students wearing of black armbands to protest American military involvement in Vietnam, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 505 (1969); of a sit-in by blacks in a whites only area to protest segregation, Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 141-142 (1966); and of the wearing of American military uniforms in a dramatic presentation criticizing American involvement in Vietnam, Schacht v. United States, 398 U.S. 58 (1970). People everyday are called on by interest groups and President Obama to flood the switchboard at Congress, in order to be heard, to participate, to ensure that every person has a method of expressing themselves and their beliefs to their elected leaders without fear of repression by their government. When

Stanley Cohen, who defended Anonymous in the PayPal 14 case, spoke about DDoS and Free Speech at a benefit for Jeremy Hammond and Barrett Brown earlier this year (link to full speech included). They elected to speak out, they elected to fight back, they elected to take barricades, they elected to stand up to guns, and the fucking cops, and to spying. And they stood up and they're being slaughtered in the streets. And, 'What the fuck,' do people say, 'does that have to do with our clients, and our friends, and our community?' Well, it's because it's one world. It's because we all stand up and fight our fight in different ways, in different places, in different times. And it is about freedom, it is about truth, it is about honesty, it is about integrity, it is about telling 'I have a drone,' and every other fucking petty-desperate in the world, 'Fuck you! You don't own our lives, you don't own our thoughts, you don't own what we say, you don't own where we go. We put you in and we can take your fuckin' asses out. Everyone of you!' And that's why they're so afraid of the so-called 'hackers,' or the whistle blowers, or the truth speakers. That's why they are so all fucked up over those people who say, 'Yeah, I'll go to prison. Okay, but I'm gonna out you fuckers. I'm not going to let you keep the pearly wisdom to yourselves, because we don't trust you. We do not believe you. We do not listen to you, we do not follow you.' There's an old saying I learned in law school, 137 years ago: 'In the marketplace of discourse the truth will always rise.' There is no such thing as protected speech, there is no such thing as hate speech, there is no such thing as suppressed speech. Speech is speech. You let it come out, you let people make their decisions, if they don't fuckin' like it, they can turn off Fox, they can turn off CBS, they can shut down and stop listening to Cohen, and walk out the door; it's speech. Now it's easy for me to say here tonight, that 'it's just speech.' I'm not facing ten years, it's only five years or whatever the hell it is. But there are women, there are men, there are people among us that have crossed the line and said, 'We will make a stand, we will fight

FreeAnons dot org has provided a statement regarding the Payback 13. 13 people that are alleged to be aligned with the Anonymous collective were indicted on October 3, 2013, out of the Eastern District of Virginia. They are charged with conspiracy in connection with Operation Payback. One of the defendants, Dennis Owen Collins, has been charged previously, in connection with Paypal 14. The burden on him must be unimaginable. These people are going to need a lot of support, both moral and financial. We urge people to hold donations to freeanons.org until we can establish whether the defendants will set up funds for themselves. It is better to donate directly to their funds, if so. If any of the defendants or their supporters have questions on how to establish a fund, they may call us directly, and we will be happy to advise them. Once we see which funds are available, we will work with those people to promote them to the best of our ability. If you see a fund that needs promotion, know of a defendant in need, or can help in any capacity, please call or join us at irc.anonops.com #freeanons. Source: US Government continues its war on anonymous http://freeanons.org/u-s-government-continues-war-anonymous/

was the last time you heard of someone getting arrested for flooding the congressional switchboard? In an age where we have all become nameless, and our main form of identification is a dotted quad and a handle, what does it mean to speak in the 21st century? What better form of communication than TCP/IP. The protocol itself was created to ensure messages are somewhat reliably transmitted around the nation, even during a nuclear strike. But are we limited to emails, forums, and blog posts? Or are our voices evolving into to something more? These defendants were not spreading malware, hacking servers, or even damaging the systems themselves. They simply were expressing an opinion as loudly as any protester in a park, signer of a petition, or our beloved congressional switchboard caller. While the speech that was used in this particular instance might be slightly different than the examples above, it just shows how speech on the internet is evolving and how right Justice Brennan was when describing this metamorphosis. These members of Anonymous clearly were making a statement and publicly shaming PayPal in front of their shareholders and the world on behalf of those of us who value the freedom of information. This shaming message appears to have been heard loud and clear by PayPal while events were unfolding as well. PayPal itself has conceded there was no damage and minimal delays in service and while they refuse to admit Anonymous had anything to do with it, in the end they were convinced that they should release the funds to WikiLeaks. Not only did PayPal and WikiLeaks hear them we all did. In more recent history, nearly unanimous Supreme Court decisions have determined that there is very little online that is not protected by free speech. So that leaves us only with Damaging a Protected Computer System. But the question is, why are these 14 activists being held and charged if no systems were actually damaged according to PayPal themselves? Some might say that we need to make an example out of them. Why? For making their voices heard in a scream of protest against suppression of information? It is an embarrassment that we are barely allowed to gather in public without being, at best, herded like cattle into controlled areas for peaceful protest, or at worst beaten, ziptied, and then jailed. What other forms of protest are we left with? The best tool we have right now to influence change is right in front of us. Voluntary distributed denial of service is the new digital sit-in. Those of us who understand how the digital age is modernizing law can see where these battles are going and can see how this battle will be wonin the courtrooms of the United States of America.
Source: DDoS is the new digital sit-in: FreeAnons.org http://freeanons.org/ddos-is-the-new-digital-sit-in/

Write to the PayPal14 They are currently awaiting trial and face up
to 15 years in prison. While awaiting trial they have to adhere to certain bail release conditions. One of those conditions is no contact with Anons. So its

imperative that when you send letters or valentines you make sure not to mention Anonymous or anything that might be associated with Anonymous.
Vincent Kershaw c/o Omar Figueroa 7770 Healdsburg Ave Suite A Sebastopol, CA 95472 Ethan Miles c/o Graham Archer 95 S Market Street Suite 300 San Jose, CA 95113 Christopher Vo c/o Gregory Bentley 506 Broadway San Francisco, CA 94133 Drew Phillips c/o George Boisseau 740 4th Street, 2nd Floor Santa Rosa, CA 95404 James Murphy c/o Robert Carey Jr PO Box 1040 Palo Alto, CA 94302-1040 Mercedes Haefer c/o Stanley Cohen 119 Avenue D, 5th Floor New York, NY 10009 Keith Downcy c/o John Hamasaki 1112 Bryant St, 3rd Floor San Francisco CA 94103

#OpPayback13
This past October, 2013, 13 people were indicted for DDoS attacks related to "Operation Payback. Below is one of the online flyers Anonymous distributed when Operation Payback was closing down the websites of companies including the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), Visa, Mastercard and Bank of America between September 2010 and January 2011.