FBI agent tries to copyright super-secret torture manual, inadvertently makes it public

[AnthonyC]

That would be a violation of copyright, and the FBI could sue you.

Also, I’m of the “someone involved probably knew what they were doing” camp. Yes, this level of error can made by mistake with sufficient stupidity, but I doubt it.

[jerwin]

I’m a little confused. I thought the Kubark stuff was released in 1997 to the Baltimore Sun.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB122/

[jerwin]

The copyright office does not allow readers to take pictures or notes, but during a brief inspection, a few redactions stood out.

Besides, we wouldn’t want you to be unable to successfully parody the Black Chamber.

[jerwin]

He also had physical custody of the document. Ordinary people don’t, so they cannot use the Copyright Office to leak documents they would like to see.

[IMB]

Probably because he was proud of it.

[Kimmo]

@singletona082

At this point I’m hoping the person that did this thought ‘I need to get this out into public attention but I don’t want to pull a Snowden in case something bigger comes across my desk’ so uses the fact their bosses are so out of touch that they slide the idea across the desk and frame it as being helpful.

That would be so very fucking awesome, but I’m not sure such epic cleverness is likely enough; it’s exponentially easier to be that clever in retrospect.

Oh, wait -

@toyg

Not “you” – this guy was a unit chief. It’s plausible that a smart underling played him into making an ass of himself - after all, somebody trying to claim copyright of a federal document (which is by definition in the public domain, in the US) must have quite the sense of entitlement, and likely an ego to with it. Being a slow-burning prank, the underling was likely to get away with it scot-free; who knows, s/he might actually be one who eventually tipped off reporters.

Ah, I can definitely see that. Hatred of a boss can be a fierce motivator

[nonfer]

actually this is too funny to pass up. you were busy trying to give a revisionist treatment again. this is the same julian sanchez that coined the term epistemic closure, isn’t it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_closure#Epistemic_closure_in_US_political_discussion

[dexitroboper]

The CIA can’t patent this - there’s prior art.

[nonfer]

maybe, i admit i find the humor. however, maybe that ‘boss’ is just that big of an incompetent idiot. it’s bewildering to think about how these people haven’t allowed anyone intelligent enough to become competent through their networking schema.

[nonfer]

cough. why do you post here? democratic leadership is your new buzzword? fascinating.

[smut_clyde]

@FFabian

that they wrote a fucking torture manual seems no big deal though. Torture is bad 'mmkay.

You may have been led astray by Cory’s headline, which describes the document as “super-secret torture manual”. If you link through to the original MotherJones article, no-one is accusing the FBI of writing a torture manual.

[FFabian]

As if it’s somehow important which government agency wrote that manual. The point is that the government has/produced such a manual. If you need a manual for something you plan to or already have used the techniques described therein. Democracy with rule of law and Torture are mutually exclusive, thats the point.