> I'm not sure the distinction between "dumped onto" vs "seeking out" is a real one It is huge. It is also recognised as such by laws in many countries. E.g. U

> I'm not sure the distinction between "dumped onto" vs "seeking out" is a real one It is huge. It is also recognised as such by laws in many countries. E.g. UK libel act 2013 and US DMCA act (safe harbour provisions). In both cases publishers are protected from legal trouble if they act as an intermediary rather than as a publisher. > but my main objection is that I don't see any evidence that wikileaks has been a passive conduit for leaks that come their way; they do curation of "leaks" that arrive in their inbox, they choose to promote certain leaks in certain ways, etc. This is a valid point. But offering money for leaks is a whole different thing.