"Screwing People Over To Make A Buck:" Assange Statement On Publication Of 'Autobiography'

[Hissyspit]

http://www.wikileaks.org/Julian-Assange-Statement-on-the.html

Julian Assange: Statement on the Unauthorised, Secret Publishing of the Julian Assange “autobiography” by

Julian Assange Press Statement on the Unauthorised "Autobiography": Thursday 22nd September 2011, 0100

I have learned today through an article in The Independent that my publisher, Canongate, has secretly distributed an unauthorised 70,000 word first draft of what was going to be my autobiography. According to The Independent, Canongate “enacted a huge security operation to secretly ship books out to thousands of stores nationwide without tipping anyone off as to the content of the book”. It will be in the bookshops tomorrow.

I am not “the writer” of this book. I own the copyright of the manuscript, which was written by Andrew O’Hagan. By publishing this draft against my wishes Canongate has acted in breach of contract, in breach of confidence, in breach of my creative rights and in breach of personal assurances. The US publisher, Knopf, withdrew from the deal when it learned of Canongate’s intentions to publish without my consent. This book was meant to be about my life’s struggle for justice through access to knowledge. It has turned into something else. The events surrounding its unauthorised publication by Canongate are not about freedom of information — they are about old-fashioned opportunism and duplicity—screwing people over to make a buck.

On 20 December 2010, three days after being released from prison and while under house arrest, I signed a contract with Canongate and US publisher Knopf. In it I agreed to authorise a 100,000-150,000 word book - part memoir, part manifesto - in order to fund legal defences and to contribute towards WikiLeaks’ operating costs. On the 7th of December 2010 Bank of America, Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and Western Union folded to US pressure by arbitrarily and unlawfully cutting WikiLeaks off of its financial lifeline. The blockade continues. The European Commission is due to issue its first findings in October. My legal defence fund was similarly targeted and closed.

The draft is published under the title "Julian Assange: The Unauthorised Autobiography" - a contradiction in terms. It is a narrative and literary interpretation of a conversation between the writer and me. Although I admire Mr. O’Hagan’s writing, this draft was a work in progress. It is entirely uncorrected or fact-checked by me. The entire book was to be heavily modified, extended and revised, in particular, to take into account the privacy of the individuals mentioned in the book. I have a close friendship with Andrew O’Hagan and he stands by me.

MORE

[SidDithers]

1. "Screwing People Over To Make A Buck"...

Well, he would know.

Sid

[Hissyspit]

4. Yes, he's incredibly wealthy.

:eyes:

[nomb]

16. He's already claimed copyright on all his collected leaks. Personal possession.

[Luminous Animal]

20. Really? Do you have a link for that?

[nomb]

2. *zero* sympathy

[Hissyspit]

5. Why not?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

3. Oh, irony.

:rofl:

[Hissyspit]

6. Not really.

[WildEyedLiberal]

7. Yeah, really.

Mr. "I divulge secrets other people want to keep" is pissed that someone is divulging his secrets against his will? That's sort of the definition of irony.

[Hissyspit]

8. Except that context and the nature of the "secrets" is different.

So not really.

[LoZoccolo]

9. It's only wrong when they do it. n/t

[Hissyspit]

10. No. It's not the same thing.

Breaking a contract to make money is not the same thing as whistleblowing and Julian Assange is not a government.

[nomb]

13. If a contract was broken he would have sued in a heartbeat. Bullshit on that one.

[Luminous Animal]

11. Humans have a right to privacy. Governments do not.

[nomb]

12. And what of all the un-redacted innocent names and quotes Assange personally "published"?

[Luminous Animal]

14. Which ones? Please cite innocent names.

[nomb]

15. That would be anyone that spoke to a US diplomat in confidence.

[Luminous Animal]

18. Thus, in that capacity, they have no right to secrecy. They do, of course, have

a personal right to privacy.

[seabeyond]

19. this is what blows me away. ALL conversation must be public accessible.

that is ridiculously stupid and naive and short sighted. business, personal, adn yes, even govt, conversation must be allowed where it is not for everyones ears.

and for grown adults to not get that, truly amazes me.

[Luminous Animal]

22. Again, government's expectation of secrecy does not trump the public's right to know.

[seabeyond]

23. you are really, seriously, saying that no conversation a govt employee ever has should be

anything but publically accessible? really? as i say, blows my mind.

[Luminous Animal]

24. When conducting government business a government employee has to no RIGHT to secrecy.

That same employee does have the right to personal privacy. This is 7th grade civics. The government may argue in court that revealing a secret could cause national harm but flat out claiming a right does not pass judicial muster. It blows my mind that grown adults believe that the government has the RIGHT to keep secrets from we the people.

[seabeyond]

25. bullshit. deal with any of the cazillion issues in this world not able to speak frankly

because all hear.

that is so outlandishly stupid, beyond amazing.

[Luminous Animal]

26. Governments should do due diligence to protect their secrets but they do not hold

a carte blanche right to keep them hidden... thus, the Pentagon Papers.

[seabeyond]

27. did anyone say a carte blanche right. i am arguing the carte blanche right to know ALL

things anyone in govt discusses. which is what bradley manning did stealing 250k correspondences. and assauge is doing putting out. even fuckin personal shit that he now opposes with self. hypocrisy

[Luminous Animal]

30. Actually, the public's right to know is well established by many court cases over the years once

the information escapes government control. Every single one of the "cables" is a government communication. The fact that they may have contained personal gossip does not negate the fact that they are government property; i.e., our property. It is not ours or Wikileaks responsibility to exclude personal gossip from being entered into official government documents. That you can't understand the difference between a government communication and a personal one is mind-boggling.

[seabeyond]

35. of course, they have absolutely no responsibility in theft. nt

[Better Believe It]

28. Please don't join the character assassination campaign against a true progressive, Julian Assange.

You should read his statement before attempting a comment on it.

Because clearly your post has absolutely nothing to do with the issues he raised in his statement.

Nothing at all .... beyond a cheap personal attack.

Now please don't join the character assassination campaign against a true progressive. Leave that kind of smear job up to the right-wingers. Don't just accept and echo their propaganda.

Thanks.

[Dreamer Tatum]

17. The shoe has taken up residence on the opposing foot.

Suck on it, rapist.

[truebrit71]

21. Wow, without benefit of a trial even? "Suck on it, rapist"....how progressive...

...:puke:

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Better Believe It]

29. Since you labeled a true progressive a "rapist" I have to put you on ignore.

True progressives don't engage in such low level personal attacks and character assassination campaigns against one of our own.

Progressives believe a person is innocent until proven guilty and reject the notion that someone must prove they are innocent of government charges.

I'm sorry you're not a supporter of those basic concepts of justice.

Bye.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nomb]

32. Anyone remember when Assange published Steve Jobs medical file and said he had HIV?

http://www.informationweek.com/blog/229208058

[Warren DeMontague]

33. Wait. Someone took his autobiography and published it w/o his permission?

I'm sorry, but that IS kind of funny.