4 ms·

> The United States’ lawsuit did not seek to stop or restrict the publication or distribution of Permanent Record [...] Rather [...] the government sought to re

> The United States’ lawsuit did not seek to stop or restrict the publication or distribution of Permanent Record [...] Rather [...] the government sought to recover all proceeds earned by Snowden Gotta love America. We're not going after you for whistleblowing on systematically illegal activity by the NSA. We just want your money.

AmericanChopper 6y ago
I'd imagine the book is constitutionally protected speech, whereas profiting from a crime isn't.
Rebelgecko 6y ago
Probably because this was easier to prove and actually have a trial. It's trivial to show that he didn't seek permission before publish, and violating an NDA is a civil issue. Because trials in absentia are typically not allowed for felonies, I don't think anything can happen with the criminal charges against him until he's physically present.
pdonis 6y ago
> We're not going after you for whistleblowing on systematically illegal activity by the NSA. Yes, the US is doing that. Just not in this lawsuit. As I noted upthread, this lawsuit is only the civil lawsuit; there is a separate criminal lawsuit still in progress.
tempsolution 6y ago
Another less biased way of looking at it is that this was the easiest option to pursue. Even if they could stop publication in the US somehow, it would still only apply in the US. And it's not like grandma is going to pickup this book in the store. People who are interested will get it, either online, as PDF or order it from another country. There is literally no way to prevent publication world-wide. However, US will probably be a big market and there might be repercussions throughout other countries through political pressure to also collect the proceeds or even ban the book. On the other hand, I also find it curious why Snowden would sell this book to begin with. Kinda undermines his credibility. He is earning a shitload of money through his talks already and the book is essentially a chronicle of a crime he committed. Seems "morally interesting" that he wants to monetize it like that. On the other hand, who cares about morals, but then its just a tad hypocritical.

AmericanChopper 6y ago

I'd imagine the book is constitutionally protected speech, whereas profiting from a crime isn't.

Rebelgecko 6y ago

Probably because this was easier to prove and actually have a trial. It's trivial to show that he didn't seek permission before publish, and violating an NDA is a civil issue. Because trials in absentia are typically not allowed for felonies, I don't think anything can happen with the criminal charges against him until he's physically present.

pdonis 6y ago

> We're not going after you for whistleblowing on systematically illegal activity by the NSA. Yes, the US is doing that. Just not in this lawsuit. As I noted upthread, this lawsuit is only the civil lawsuit; there is a separate criminal lawsuit still in progress.

tempsolution 6y ago

Another less biased way of looking at it is that this was the easiest option to pursue. Even if they could stop publication in the US somehow, it would still only apply in the US. And it's not like grandma is going to pickup this book in the store. People who are interested will get it, either online, as PDF or order it from another country. There is literally no way to prevent publication world-wide. However, US will probably be a big market and there might be repercussions throughout other countries through political pressure to also collect the proceeds or even ban the book. On the other hand, I also find it curious why Snowden would sell this book to begin with. Kinda undermines his credibility. He is earning a shitload of money through his talks already and the book is essentially a chronicle of a crime he committed. Seems "morally interesting" that he wants to monetize it like that. On the other hand, who cares about morals, but then its just a tad hypocritical.