Monthly Archives: June 2020

This is the week when the movement to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act got serious. The Justice Department released a substantive report suggesting multiple reforms. I was positive about many of them (my views here). Meanwhile, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) has proposed a somewhat similar set of changes in his bill, introduced this week. Nate Jones and I dig into the provisions, and both of us expect interest from Democrats as well as Republicans.

The National Security Agency has launched a pilot program to provide secure domain name system (DNS) resolver services for US defense contractors. If thats such a good idea, I ask, why doesnt everybody do it, and Nick Weaver tells us they can. Phil Reitingers Global Cyberalliance offers Quad9 for this purpose.

Gus Hurwitz brings us up to date on a host of European cyberlaw developments, from terror takedowns (Reuters, Tech Crunch) to competition law to the rise of a disturbingly unaccountable and self-confident judiciary. Microsofts Brad Smith, meanwhile, wins the prize for best marriage of business self-interest and Zeitgeist in the twenty-first century.

Hackers used LinkedIns private messaging feature to send documents containing malicious code which defense contractor employees were tricked into opening. Nick points out just what a boon LinkedIn is for cyberespionage (including his own), and I caution listeners not to display their tattoos on LinkedIn.

Speaking of fools who kind of have it coming, Nick tells the story of the now former eBay executives who have been charged with sustained and imaginatively-over-the-top harassment of the owners of a newsletter that had not been deferential to eBay. (Wired, DOJ)

Its hard to like the defendants in that case, I argue, but the law theyve been charged under is remarkably sweeping. Apparently its a felony to intentionally use the internet to cause substantial emotional distress. Who knew? Most of us who use Twitter thought that was its main purpose. I also discover that special protections under the law are extended not only to prevent internet threats and harassment of service animals but also horses of any kind. Other livestock are apparently left unprotected. PETA, call your office.

Child abusers cheered when Zoom buckled to criticism of its limits on end-to-end encryption, but Nick insists that the new policy offers safeguards for policing misuse of the platform. (Ars Technica, Zoom)

I take a minute to roast Republicans in Congress who have announced that no FISA reauthorization will be adopted until John Durhams investigation of FISA abuses is done, which makes sense until you realize that the FISA provisions up for reauthorization have nothing to do with the abuses Durham is investigating. So were giving international terrorists a break from scrutiny simply because the President cant keep the difference straight.

Nate notes that a story previewed in April has now been confirmed: Team Telecom is recommending the blocking of a Hong Kong-US undersea cable over national security concerns.

Gus reminds us that a bitter trade fight between the US and Europe over taxes on Silicon Valley services is coming. (Politico, Ars Technica)

Nick and I mourn the complete meltdown of mobile phone contact tracing. I argue that from here on out, some portion of coronavirus deaths should be classified as mechanogenic (caused by engineering malpractice). Nick proposes instead a naming convention built around the Therac-25.

And we close with a quick look at the latest data dump from Distributed Denial of Secrets. Nick thinks its strikingly contemporaneous but also surprisingly unscandalizing.

Download the 321st Episode (mp3).

You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to [emailprotected]. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug!

The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Read the rest here:

The Cyberlaw Podcast: Using the Internet to Cause Emotional Distress is a Felony? - Lawfare

Following the 2016 election, pundits frequently predicted that Trump would usher in a new era of protest art. After decades of going relatively unnoticed, the argument went, his polarizing election would push sidelined protest art into the mainstream. The months and years that followed helped validate that argument in multiple ways: late-night comedians found new audiences through more political humor, stories of government oppression like 1984 came back in vogue, and shocking pieces of art denouncing Trump made headlines and stirred controversy. To some, it seemed like Trump redefined the zeitgeist overnight.

But the story is more complicated than just one election. Art in reaction to Trump is certainly everywhere; still, sometimes it takes flashpoint cultural moments to bring that existing work to the forefront of our minds.

Enter Algiers. The Atlanta band fronted by Franklin James Fisher released its third studio album, There Is No Year, on Jan. 17, but the album failed to chart in every country but Germany. While the band had by then eclipsed one million plays on Spotify with some cuts from their self-titled debut and 2017s The Underside of Power, none of this albums tracks have received the same attention. Mixed reviews from Pitchfork and The Needle Drop suggested the album failed to leave a lasting impression on listeners. This critique seemed accurate before the events following the horrific murder of George Floyd at the hand of Minneapolis police officers.

Algiers bring a sound to There Is No Year that is less consistently hard but more varied than The Underside of Power. Wait For The Sound illustrates this dichotomy well. Similar to their debut's remarkable Blood, the track's beat consistently builds throughout the run time, refusing to relent. "Blood" focuses on the constricting, generational impact of slavery and oppression. As such, the song never lets Fisher escape its beat. His emotional final verse still falls in line with the backing track, which then continues for a full minute after that last verse has stopped. But where "Blood" never fully boils over, "Wait For The Sound" eventually repositions itself behind Fisher's cathartic vocals, creating an emotional outro that ends as soon as Fisher's cries stop. Other songs such as "Hour of the Furnaces" take inspiration from "The Underside of Power" closer "The Cycle / The Spiral: Time to Go Down Slowly" by experimenting with layered vocals and larger soundscapes. As a whole, the album feels much funkier than their past efforts, and songs like "Chaka" display a band that's both confident and introspective.

As indicated by the album art which depicts the letters of Algiers tumbling over a picture of a falling man There Is No Year deals with a world in freefall. Fishers lyricism shines here, by bringing an unparalleled sense of urgency to his message. Indeed, Fisher's lyrics seem downright prophetic when listened to now, especially for listeners whose concern for racial injustice has arisen only recently. The very first words of the album Now its two minutes to midnight," off the titular track warn of an imminent revolution. Fisher writes of a salient contrast between demonstrators and bystanders. The Streets are raining fire in Wait For The Sound, but on the other side, Hour Of The Furnaces depicts Outright denial / Of the dying and the sane. Fisher further explores this opposition to the movement in songs like Losing Is Ours, with lines like Let the sirens sing out their nightmare because Theyll be too in denial to know." The ultimate dagger to the resistance is indifference. The final words of the album, from Nothing Bloomed, detail how Everything starts to fade under the weight of silence. It is hard to listen to these words and not be reminded of today's activists, whose main enemy is arguably the silence surrounding them.

It is too simplistic to say There Is No Year has a singular thesis and it shouldnt have to but the standout track Dispossession is the albums closest thing to a mission statement. Sonically, the songs production is refined but invigorating, and the choruss backing vocals make the tune undeniably catchy. The tracks brilliance, though, lies in its message. Fisher acts as a harbinger of the coming revolution, telling the listener to Run around, run away from your America / While it burns in the streets / I been here standing on top of the mountain / Shouting down what I see. The larger message is not one of hope but rather the necessity of fighting back: Everybody wants to break down, he sings, but You cant run away from the struggle. While the band explored similar themes over the course of "The Underside of Power," Dispossession hits on all of these themes at once. The song blends elements of unity: We are the blade and the groove that come together; and force: We are the rain of fire thats coming down. Dispossession coalesces into a cohesive narrative of resistance, one that is so accurate that it has been used to caption photos of protestors.

Overall, There Is No Year could not sound more relevant at this point in time. Critics myopically dismissed the album as frustratingly opaque, as if they would have preferred a narrower, easier-to-digest rebuke of the Trump administration. Algiers leaves those rebukes for other artists for an important reason: The last few weeks have made disturbingly clear that societal problems, while greatly exacerbated by Trump, extend far beyond his reach. Fishers cries for action can only be read within a broader history of Black activism and suffering. Protest art reflects both new problems and old, particularly now, as tentacles of hate that reach back into this countrys roots threaten to suffocate it.

While There Is No Year is not an album for optimists, Fisher hopes out loud in Dispossession that Freedom is coming soon. When is soon? Nobody knows. Until then, however, There Is No Year deserves to be recognized as one of the most important albums of recent memory, the protest art the country needs to hear not just in the wake of George Floyds death, but throughout the ongoing struggle for racial justice.

Staff writer Jack M. Schroeder can be reached at jack.schroeder@thecrimson.com.

See the rest here:

'There Is No Year' is Prescient Protest Art | Arts - Harvard Crimson

This story was published in partnership with The Trace, a nonprofit newsroom covering gun violence.

Matt Windschitl had one more chance to address colleagues in the Iowa House of Representatives before they voted on his pro-gun bill, the culmination of a years-long effort to produce what one supporter hailed as the most monumental and sweeping piece of gun legislation in Iowas history. The veteran Republican lawmaker walked up to the chamber podiumand unleashed a counterattack against an unlikely foe.

It was April 2017, and for years Windschitl had found himself absorbing broadsides from a man named Aaron Dorr, a far-right provocateur who led a gun rights advocacy organization called Iowa Gun Owners. Dorr had recently taken to Facebook to accuse Windschitl of brokering backroom deals to appease anti-gun forces in the state Capitol, saying the lawmaker was far more concerned about making sure his hair is just perfectly taken care of than fighting for gun rights.

Standing stern-faced at the microphone, Windschitl denounced the professed activist as a hype man focused on ginning up donations for his group. Dorr promoted himself as the leader of Iowas only no compromise gun lobby, but Windschitl pointed out that Dorr was not even registered as a lobbyist. When Windschitl asked whether anyone in the chamber had spoken to Dorr about the omnibus gun bill, no one raised a hand.

If youre sending this guy money, Im asking you to stop It is time for his scam to end, Windschitl said. You need and you deserve the truth: Aaron Dorr is a scam artist, a liar, and he is doing Iowans no services and no favors.

Dorr received an avalanche of criticism in the months and years that followed as he and two of his younger brothersChris and Benapplied their brand of far-right activism to contentious political issues. The brothers, who were raised in Iowa, are part of a circle of far-right activists who manage more than a dozen nonprofits spread around the country, from Wyoming and Wisconsin to North Carolina and Georgia. They have built a massive grassroots fundraising machine that churns out a steady stream of messages beseeching donations to snuff out gun control, abortion rights, and other sources of conservative outrage.

I used to think they were really bad lobbyists; it turns out theyre working against the cause they claim to be fighting for.

GOP State Sen. Jason Schultz

In April, about a month after COVID-19 lockdowns took effect in the U.S., Reddit users placed the three brothers at the center of an astroturfing campaign against government measures designed to slow the outbreak. Chris Dorr helped organize a demonstration in the Pennsylvania capital despite official warnings about mass gatherings leading to a surge of infections. Since then, the death toll from coronavirus in Pennsylvania has climbed to more than 6,400. In recent weeks, the brothers sounded alarms about the thugs, criminals, and political terrorists who took to the streets nationwide following the May killing of George Floyd under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer.

At the center of the Dorrs efforts is the brothers own for-profit consulting firm, which has received huge sums of money from their tax-exempt organizations, fueling allegations that the brothers are deceiving their supporters.

What theyre doing is raising a lot of money by setting up nonprofits and latching onto various conservative, hot-button issues, said Scott Hubay, an Ohio attorney who specializes in nonprofit compliance and examined findings compiled by The Trace and The Daily Beast. But instead of spending that money on what they told the public their purpose was, they appear to be using it to enrich themselves.

The Dorrs affiliated outfits have hauled in millions of dollars over the years, tax returns show. But successes on the fundraising front are belied by waning political clout, as the brothers tactics draw increasing fire from across the ideological spectrum. Their enemies denounce them as parasitic gadflies bent on using the latest political zeitgeist and alarmist rhetoric to line their own pockets, sometimes at the expense of causes they claim to support. Some of the biggest criticisms have emanated from the pro-gun community, including the National Rifle Association, which accused Aaron and Chris Dorr of being scam artists.

After The Trace and The Daily Beast sent this investigations findings to the Dorr brothers, Aaron Dorr responded with a statement that he said was also issued on behalf of his siblings. The Trace and its affiliated entities have always been tops on the list of the radical Lefts Hate-America fake-news outlets, he said.

At a time when armed thugs are rioting in our streets, murdering police officers, looting stores, and burning down private businesses, we Dorr brothers could not be more proud of the aggressive, vicious fighting we do for law-abiding gun owners and pro-lifers all across America, he added. We apologize for nothing, and to be attacked by the same socialist, fake-news blogs that hate President Trump means we are doing our jobs fabulously.

But the Dorrs footprint grew as widening ideological divisions and fragmenting media created fertile ground for conspiracy theories and misinformation. COVID-19 brought this infodemic into sharper relief as false claims about the coronavirusincluding some pushed by President Donald Trumpcontinue to frustrate efforts to contain the disease. The Dorr brothers were early propagators of the notion that power-hungry politicians were exploiting the outbreak to weaken coveted American freedoms, a line with echoes in the gun rights debate, where proposals for stricter laws have raised the specter of mass firearm confiscation.

Leading up to early protests against COVID-19-related lockdowns, the Dorrs created Facebook groups to organize opposition in Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. These groups attracted more than 200,000 members and became rallying points for conspiracy theorists. People who joined were directed to misleading web addresseswww.ReOpenMN.com, for instancewhere they could ostensibly message leaders to reopen their states economy. Those who clicked on the links were taken to websites for the Dorrs gun rights groups, where they could buy memberships from $35 to $1,000.

These are the kinds of things these guys do. They take advantage of rabble-rousing on the far right, said Minnesota state Senator Ron Latz, a member of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party whose efforts to tighten gun laws have drawn the Dorrs wrath. Its a business for them, Latz added. They know how to do it, and theyre jerks.

After The Washington Post first reported on the Dorrs role in the burgeoning anti-quarantine movement, the credit card processor handling donations to the brothers groups quietly booted them off its platform. Aaron and Chris Dorr sent out nearly identical messages in which each of them said they had been alerted to the processors action by a lifetime member who wanted to contribute $100 to their respective groups. They portrayed the de-platforming as part of a corporate gun control movement that would hamper our efforts to expose gun grabbers during the upcoming election cycle. By the time they sent out the messages, they had brought their fundraising capabilities back online. If we dont have the ammo we need to fight with, we cant fight. Its just that simple, both messages said. And thats why I want to ask you to make an emergency donation.

While the Dorrs gun rights groups have nothing close to the prowess or profile enjoyed by the NRA, theyve flourished at a time when internal feuds and financial scandals are hobbling Americas most influential gun rights organization, creating an opportunity for activists whose aggressive and unconventional tactics previously relegated them to the margins of American culture wars.

Casting themselves as the most powerful counterweight to jelly-spined Republican politicians and anti-gun socialists,the Dorrs have seized the moment to hone their image as the uncompromising wing of gun rights advocacy. But these pitches frequently involve misleading statements, embellishments, and outright falsehoods. A close look at the brothers online activity reveals numerous instances in which one of them mischaracterized a lawmakers record, attacked pro-gun Republicans as anything but, or spun criticisms of them and their groups as evidence of their influence.

After Windschitl denounced Aaron Dorr on the Iowa House floor in 2017, lawmakers approved the omnibus gun bill, which included Stand Your Ground protections for gun owners who killed in self-defense. Republican Governor Terry Branstad signed the measure into law. Despite Windschitls public assertions denying Dorrs role in the bills success, the activist has claimed credit anyway.

Later that same year, Aaron Dorr defeated state House ethics charges brought by another Republican lawmaker who argued he had violated lobbyist registration rules. The lawmaker pointed to Facebook videos in which Dorr claimed to have conducted meetings with legislators and spent time finalizing legislation at the Capitol. Dorr defended himself by asserting that there were, in fact, no direct lobbying activities by me.

Included in his evidence: No one raised a hand when Windschitl asked whether any House members had spoken to Dorr about the omnibus gun bill.

After the House Ethics Committee dismissed the chargesthe chairman cited loopholes that exempted unpaid nonprofit directors from registration requirementsDorr sent out a fundraising plea characterizing the ordeal as payback for FORCING the General Assembly to pass Stand-Your-Ground and much more during the 2017 legislative session.

Revilement among mainstream gun rights advocates and GOP politicians has produced entire websites devoted to debunking the Dorrs rhetoric. Ben Dorr, the youngest of the three brothers, is the political director for Minnesota Gun Rights. He claimed to have killed every single gun control bill filed in Minnesota over the last few years, a remarkable assertion given how the states pro-gun lawmakers have publicly and emphatically denounced his group since at least 2015. In February, the House and Senate Republican caucuses joined with Republican Party leaders to launch http://www.mnscammersexposed.com, dedicated to warning constituents about the brothers attempts to cash in on unsuspecting Minnesotans sympathetic to their message.

Aaron Dorr once described himself as a graduate of numerous Rothfeld schools, an apparent reference to Mike Rothfeld, a national political consultant known for his mastery of direct-mail marketing, now a centerpiece of the brothers fundraising efforts. Rothfeld, who declined to comment for this story, has sat on the board of directors for the National Association for Gun Rights, whose strong-arm methods and absolutist portrayal of Second Amendment rights blazed a trail for the Dorr brothers to follow.

The National Association for Gun Rights stepped in with early fundraising help after Aaron Dorr launched Iowa Gun Owners in 2009. It wasnt long before he tasted national notoriety. Chris Dorr, while working for U.S. Representative Michele Bachmanns presidential campaign before the 2012 Iowa caucuses, was alleged to have stolen a politically valuable Excel spreadsheet from a colleagues private computer containing contact information for members of Iowas largest homeschool organization. Chris Dorr had also clerked for state Senator Kent Sorenson, who was surreptitiously accepting payments from the Bachmann campaign for his endorsement, but was considering switching allegiance to Ron Paul, and the homeschool list would help make Sorenson more appealing as a paid surrogate.

Acting as Sorensons go-between, Aaron Dorr emailed Pauls campaign manager a list of demands: $8,000 a month for Sorenson; $5,000 a month for Chris Dorr; and a $100,000 donation to a political action committee. That committee was chaired by an Iowa Gun Owners board member. Also, one of Pauls campaign staffers would need to sign a letter apologizing for previous public statements bashing the gun rights group. One of the things the campaign would receive in exchange was the list of the main Iowa home-school group allowing for targeted home-school mail, Aaron Dorr wrote.

What the Dorrs are doing goes far beyond what I would ever recommend to a client.

Scott Hubay, attorney

Sorenson went on to collect $73,000 funneled to his consulting firm to mask the Paul campaign as the moneys source. Sorenson and three Paul campaign staffers were later convicted of criminal charges. Sorenson and one Paul staffer served time in federal prison, while the other two received probation. The Dorrs were never charged.

The brothers involvement in the payoff scheme came into focus after Aaron Dorrs email surfaced in the news. Chris Dorr was copied on the email. However, he told investigators he didnt read it until after the story broke. He claimed ignorance in relation to his brothers negotiations with the Paul campaign and described the taking of the homeschool list as a mistake that likely occurred while he was procuring data around the office. An Iowa Senate ethics report later concluded that the evidence was conflicting as to whether Chris Dorrs claims regarding the list were true.

Over several years after the presidential campaign, the brothers expanded by opening or affiliating with gun rights groups in Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. They have also linked up with hard-right characters leading pro-gun organizations in Georgia, Idaho, North Carolina, and Missouri, among other places, spawning a network of affiliates with similar websites, messaging, and tactics.

As the executive director at Ohio Gun Owners, Chris Dorr leads operations in Columbus, where hes made enemies with gun rights activists and Republican politicians alike. Officials at the Buckeye Firearms Association blasted Ohio Gun Owners as a false flag group that was urging supporters to sign petitions to build a database for future fundraising efforts. In August, Republican Governor Mike DeWine referred Chris Dorr to State Police after he said there would be political bodies laying all over the ground and a corpse for the buzzards if lawmakers clamped down on guns following the mass shooting that killed nine people in Dayton. The police closed the investigation without filing criminal charges.

Chris Dorrs antics have become something of a joke at the Statehouse, where hes eschewed important legislative announcements to set up his tripod in the hall and film himself for supporters. He recently took his trademark bushy beard on camera to claim that George Lang, a Republican Ohio state representative and chair of the House Criminal Justice Committee, had voted against stand your ground legislation in 2018 and let a similar measure stall after it was filed one year later. In fact, Lang voted in favor of a bill containing stand your ground in 2018 before that provision was removed by the Senate. Lang co-sponsored the measure introduced the following year and, in a phone interview, he said the bill didnt advance because neither of the primary sponsors requested a hearing.

I did not watch the video at all, so I dont know what hes talking about, but if he inferred in any way that I have ever voted against stand your ground legislation, thats a bald-faced lie, Lang said in a telephone interview. He added that Ohio Gun Owners attacks had cost it a potential ally. From an ideological perspective, I probably line up with that group on about 90 percent of the issues, but I do not in any way, shape, or form condone the tactics that they use.

Gun rights advocates whove watched the brothers at work hope they will leave the game. Turf wars and funding battles are common in the nonprofit world, but the Dorrs unpopularity among would-be allies is remarkable, and underscores their penchant for sabotage. Their all-or-nothing approach dispenses with political strategizing and coalition-building in favor of a scorched-earth plan likely to be counterproductive.

We are familiar with their tactics: Theyre a fundraising organization, and they use the money for themselves, said Jerry Henry, the executive director of GeorgiaCarry.Org, a pro-gun organization thats grappled with the Dorrs Georgia chapter. Theyll introduce a piece of legislation and then come out against everybody who can pass that legislation for them.

Since the enactment of Windschitls stand your ground law in Iowa, Aaron Dorr has channeled his energies into advocating constitutional carry, which abolishes permitting requirements for carrying handguns in public. But as lawmakers rallied votes for constitutional carry legislation in 2019, Dorr attacked committee leaders whose support was crucial to moving it forward. Republican Jason Schultz, whod been guiding the bill through the state Senate, was so appalled he yanked it from consideration and then read a statement vowing to never back any bill Dorr put his hands on. Schultzs colleagues applauded.

Were fighting for our members and were saving them so much membership dues, so much money by doing it for pennies on the dollar because we love watching politicians cry.

Ben Dorr

In a phone interview, Schultz said the Dorr brothers were mostly concerned about their bottom line. Theyre only throwing gas on the fire to generate more donations, contributions, and memberships, Schultz said. I used to think they were really bad lobbyists; it turns out theyre working against the cause they claim to be fighting for.

Nonprofits are required to disclose details about yearly revenues and expenses on publicly available tax returns if their gross receipts are more than $50,000. The Internal Revenue Service can yank a groups tax-exempt status or levy fines if vendors, board members, or executives improperly enriched themselves at the expense of an organizations mission.

Tax returns for the Dorrs gun rights groups show they have seldom received compensation despite reporting that they worked as many as 70 hours per week. One of the few exceptions was in 2018, when Chris Dorr reported earning $30,000 from Ohio Gun Owners. Aaron Dorr has disclosed a total of less than $10,000 in pay since Iowa Gun Owners formed more than a decade ago.

But a closer look through the Dorrs statements and public records shows donations are steered to the brothers in multiple ways. One of the primary channels involves a for-profit consulting and direct mail business, Midwest Freedom Enterprises L.L.C. The brothers recently cut an hour-long video in which they took viewers on a tour of the warehouse where Midwest Freedom Enterprises is ostensibly headquartered, showing off some of the gadgetry they use to print, fold, and stuff mailers into envelopes.

Aaron and Chris Dorr spoke in the video about launching the company in the early days of Iowa Gun Owners because it was cheaper to cram mailboxes with solicitations if they created them in-house. At one point, Ben Dorr held up a sheet of paper and read off the amountnearly $125,000Minnesota Gun Rights paid for direct mail and postage pulverizing those anti-gun candidates and keeping members informed in 2016. The price tag would have been twice as high if not for Midwest Freedom Enterprises, he said.

And if these politicians dont like it, we frankly dont give a crap. We dont give a damn what you think, Ben Dorr said. Were fighting for our members and were saving them so much membership dues, so much money by doing it for pennies on the dollar because we love watching politicians cry.

He smirked. At least I do.

Direct mail has long been a favored fundraising tactic on the right. The Trace and The Daily Beast analyzed seven gun rights groups in the brothers network that had filed at least one detailed financial statement with the Internal Revenue Service between 2014 and 2018. The examination showed that these groups collectively spent more than $1.9 million on direct mail, postage, and related costs, accounting for almost half of their cumulative expenses.

Most of that moneynearly $1.1 millioncame from Iowa Gun Owners, Minnesota Gun Rights, and Ohio Gun Owners, nonprofits managed directly by the Dorr brothers. According to their video, those three groups use Midwest Freedom Enterprises for their direct mail. Over that same five-year period, Iowa Gun Owners spent another $300,000 on management expenses, duties also performed by Midwest Freedom Enterprises, statements indicate.

Elections have also been a boon for the brothers mail business. In Iowa, candidates and political action committees paid $226,000 to Midwest Freedom Enterprises between 2010 and 2016, according to campaign finance records. At least about 30 percent$67,000of those funds had been contributed to the Iowa Gun Owners PAC and other committees controlled by Aaron Dorr or his close associates.

In a video flagged by cleveland.com, Ben Dorr said hes gotten a cut of the consulting fees paid by Minnesota Gun Rights. Tax returns show Minnesota Gun Rights spent more than $163,000 on consulting between 2014 and 2018. Consulting cost Ohio Gun Owners and Iowa Gun Owners an additional $109,000 over the same timeframe.

Minnesota Gun Rights once faced legal action from a state Republican lawmaker when the group continued to disseminate mailers bearing his signature after hed ordered them to stop. That lawmaker later joined 15 of his colleagues in issuing an open letter denouncing the fakers and fraudsters who were trying to take advantage of gun rights supporters while doing nothing to actually advance the cause.

The IRS revoked the tax-exempt status for Minnesota Gun Rights in 2016 after it failed to file several years worth of tax returns. Nevertheless, Minnesota Gun Rights continued promoting itself as an active nonprofit. When confronted by reporters from a local Fox affiliate in 2019, Ben Dorr dismissed questions about the discrepancy as fake newsonly to later acknowledge that Minnesota Gun Rights had indeed fallen behind. The group filed the missing returns, and its status was restored.

Throughout their existence, Iowa Gun Owners and Ohio Gun Owners have never reported paying for fundraising. At Minnesota Gun Rights, meanwhile, tax returns show that 90 percentnearly $542,000of all the funds spent between 2016 and 2018 went toward raising more money, a share far exceeding industry standards. The Better Business Bureau has recommended that fundraising should account for no more than 35 percent of a nonprofits expenditures.

What the Dorrs are doing goes far beyond what I would ever recommend to a client, said Hubay, the Ohio attorney and nonprofit compliance expert. 501(c)(4) organizations are supposed to be about advocacy and lobbying for legislation, but the Dorrs seem to be focused on generating contributions and then funneling those resources to themselves through management fees and direct mail. Its definitely suspicious.

As tax-exempt social-welfare organizations under section 501(c)(4) of the federal tax code, the brothers groups are different from charities in that they can spend money swaying voters toward specific candidates, as long as thats not their primary purpose. Groups must report the amount they spent on such activities to the IRS and may have to pay a tax.

Forms for the Dorrs groups show they have never reported engaging in political campaignseven while theyve solicited funds for the explicit purpose of boosting or defeating candidates. At Iowa Gun Owners, Aaron Dorr thanked donors for funding a $150,000 election program aimed at targeted races across the state, and in a separate instance, he complained about being betrayed by a state senator for whom his group had bought TV and radio ads, along with 12,000 pieces of direct-mail.

Hubay said the law is hazy about what activities constitute reportable political campaign expenses, but the fact that they described their program as a political program and talked about targeting certain races is something that the IRS could look at as evidence of unreported expenditures.

Meanwhile, the Dorrs keep finding ways to stoke right-wing rage.

On June 9, Chris Dorr issued an Action ALERT to Ohio Gun Owners email subscribers amid nationwide demonstrations against police brutality. Dorrs missive misportrayed the calls for defunding police departments as a campaign by antifa and Black Lives Matter thugs to savage our great nation with lawlessness. He added: I cannot begin to describe the anarchy, the social destruction that would ensue if America disbanded our police forces and let the left-wing nutjobs who run Americas major cities implement their leftwing community-based social solutions.

Dorr went on to denounce Sandy Hook Promisean organization founded by parents of the elementary school children slain in the 2012 mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticutfor recent expressions in favor of police reform and racial justice. Dorr uged his readers to contact Ohio lawmakers and demand that they vote against a Sandy Hook Promise-backed bill to increase education on violence and suicide prevention in schools.

Once you are finished, please also consider chipping in $10 or $20 to help us cover the continual costs of fighting back against these gun-control bills, Dorr wrote. Every penny you can donate is being put to use immediately in this fight to mobilize more and more Ohians to this fight (sic), and we gratefully appreciate your support!

View post:

Meet the Brothers Behind an Extreme Gun Rights Network Republicans Call a Big Scam - The Daily Beast

Outfits big and small are shedding top editors over racial controversies

WASHINGTON, DC

ALEXIS JOHNSON, one of the few black journalists on the staff of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, was barred from covering the protests against racist policing on June 1st because editors claimed that she had displayed bias. Her offence? Firing off a sardonic tweet comparing the aftermath of looting to that of a tailgate gathering outside a country-music concert. Outrage mounted when colleagues who rallied to her sideincluding Michael Santiago, a Pulitzer prize-winning photojournalistwere deemed ineligible to cover the protests, too. Mr Santiago has since taken a severance payment and left. Ms Johnson is suing for a civil-rights violation. And the journalists union is demanding the resignation of the newspapers top two editors.

At other American papers, heads have already rolled. Adam Rapoport, the editor-in-chief of Bon Apptit magazine, resigned after an old Halloween photo of him dressed as a Puerto Rican man resurfaced and he was accused of paying less to non-white contributors. James Bennet, the editorial-page editor of the New York Times, had to go after publishing an offending op-ed by Senator Tom Cotton calling for military back-up in response to violent protests (the content of the article, hardly extreme among Republicans, seemed less damning than the admission that it had been published without Mr Bennets reading it). Outlets from Man Repeller, a fashion website, to the Philadelphia Inquirer, a respected daily, have lost their leaders.

Efforts to push out media bosses are not running out of steam. A top executive has been placed on leave at ABC News for alleged racist remarks. At Vogue Anna Wintour faces an attempt to dethrone her from the editorship for not featuring enough black staffers or subjects. Journalists at the Los Angeles Times are pointedly criticising editors for their coverage of the protests and the dearth of well-paid, non-white staffers.

As with the #MeToo movement, executives find themselves taken to task on two counts. One is what are deemed to be blatant examples of prejudice, like dubious Halloween costumes or unexplained inequities in minority pay. The other is insufficient minority representation, whether in organisations newsrooms or in their pages. On that score few media outlets (including this newspaper) measure up. Elite newsrooms are much whiter than the population. Damning statistics on the racial make-up of journalists and quoted sources will probably be tabulated and circulated.

Editors can quickly find themselves caught in a pincer movement, facing internal rebellion and mounting external pressure. The American left thinks corporate culture ought to become actively anti-racistmeaning not just the absence of discrimination but the hiring and promotion of sufficient shares of ethnic minorities.

Non-white bosses are just as rare in the boardrooms of Americas largest companies, which are experiencing rumbles but fewer signs of insurrection than media firms. The incidents there have been more isolated: the former head of diversity at Morgan Stanley is suing the bank over alleged racial bias. The difference might be that nearly 80% of American journalists identify themselves as liberal (and they may be especially moved by the zeitgeist, given their focus on current affairs). Their resemblance to university studentsleft-leaning, outraged by racial injustices, willing to blame the institutions leaders for inadequate minority hiring and representationlooks striking. The cultural battles that roiled college campuses a few years ago may now disturb workplaces, starting with those most sympathetic to the cause. The tech titans, with their somewhat rumbustious Bay Area staffers, look quite vulnerable. Facebook recently announced plans to increase its non-white leadership by 30%.

In another way, too, the debates upending newsrooms resemble those that have shaken universities. Both places are critical to the free exchange of ideas, and, consequently, to the normal functioning of democracy. Ideas that staff deem too dangerous for publicationlike Mr Cottons op-edwill go un-presented to mainstream readers, while the divide between the liberal and conservative factions of Americas media will widen.

The educational pipeline produces fewer minority candidates for sought-after journalism jobs. Until that is fixed, more affirmative-action schemes, which are common at universities, may be needed to achieve the levels of diversity demanded by staff at media firms. That would be controversial, too. All of which suggests that the tumult is unlikely to subside soon.

Read the rest here:

Why race will continue to vex American newsrooms - The Economist

This is the week when the movement to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act got serious. The Justice Department released a substantive report suggesting multiplereforms. I was positive about many of them (my views here). Meanwhile, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) has proposed a somewhat similar set of changes in his bill, introduced this week. Nate Jones and I dig into the provisions, and both of us expect interest from Democrats as well as Republicans.

The National Security Agency has launched a pilot program to provide secure DNS resolver services for US defense contractors. If that's such a good idea, I ask, why doesn't everybody do it, and Nick Weaver tells us they can. Phil Reitinger's Global Cyberalliance offers Quad9 for this purpose.

Gus Hurwitz brings us up to date on a host of European cyberlaw developments, from terror takedowns (Reuters, Tech Crunch) to competition law to the rise of a disturbingly unaccountable and self-confident judiciary. Microsoft's Brad Smith, meanwhile, wins the prize for best marriage of business self-interest and Zeitgeist in the twenty-first century.

Hackers used LinkedIn's private messaging feature to send documents containing malicious code which defense contractor employees were tricked into opening. Nick points out just what a boon LinkedIn is for cyberespionage (including his own), and I caution listeners not to display their tats on LinkedIn.

Speaking of fools who kind of have it coming, Nick tells the story of the now former eBay executives who have been charged with sustained and imaginatively-over-the-top harassment of the owners of a newsletter that had not been deferential to eBay. (Wired, DOJ)

It's hard to like the defendants in that case, I argue, but the law they've been charged under is remarkably sweeping. Apparently it's a felony to intentionally use the internet to cause substantial emotional distress. Who knew? Most of us who use Twitter thought that was its main purpose. I also discover that special protections under the law are extended not only to prevent internet threats and harassment of service animals but also horses of any kind. Other livestock are apparently left unprotected. PETA, call your office.

Child abusers cheered when Zoom buckled to criticism of its limits on end-to-end encryption, but Nick insists that the new policy offers safeguards for policing misuse of the platform. (Ars Technica, Zoom)

I take a minute to roast Republicans in Congress who have announced that no FISA reauthorization will be adopted until John Durham's investigation of FISA abuses is done, which makes sense until you realize that the FISA provisions up for reauthorization have nothing to do with the abuses Durham is investigating.So we're giving international terrorists a break from scrutiny simply because the President can't keep the difference straight.

Nate notes that a story previewed in April has now been confirmed: Team Telecom is recommending the blocking of a Hong Kong-US undersea cable over national security concerns.

Gus reminds us that a bitter trade fight between the US and Europe over taxes on Silicon Valley services is coming. (Politico, Ars Technica)

Nick and I mourn the complete meltdown of mobile phone contact tracing. I argue that from here on out, some portion of coronavirus deaths should be classified as mechanogenic (caused by engineering malpractice).Nick proposes instead a naming convention built around the Therac-25.

And we close with a quick look at the latest data dump from Distributed Denial of Secrets. Nick thinks it's strikingly contemporaneous but also surprisingly unscandalizing.

Download the 321st Episode (mp3).

You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug!

The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Visit link:

Using the internet to cause emotional distress is a felony? - Reason