US Courts ruled in favor of Wikileaks against Julius Baer in 2008

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by buzzy2, Dec 2, 2010.

  1. No one said then that it was handling of stolen property or that it was risking lives or jobs.

    A US judge ruled that this was a first amendment case and not of protection of private property or bank secrecy.

    So using this ruling, the wikigeeks cannot be accused even of terrorism or conspiring again national security, a judge already ruled it's all first amendment and nothing more.

    Now US banks and also the US goverment are legally helpless against the wikigeeks attacks.

    Faces In The News
    Wikileaks A Taxing Issue For Swiss Bank
    Lionel Laurent, 03.06.08, 5:15 PM ET

    LONDON - Swiss bank Julius Baer has finally dropped its lawsuit against the whistle-blower Web site Wikileaks, after it failed in its quest to have incriminating documents, accusing the bank of international tax fraud, taken down.

    Zurich-based Julius Baer confirmed Thursday it had stopped legal proceedings against Wikileaks, after United States District Judge Jeffrey White overruled an earlier decision to freeze and disable the Wikileaks domain name. According to the Web site, which was launched last year by a mysterious group of international dissidents, Judge White "had the maturity to reverse his earlier rulings, having realized that those rulings trampled the First Amendment."