The Wikileaks is turning out to be quite the debacle. What's your take? Does it make sense that a judge can order the closure of a website because of a piece of information which is being displayed on it? This is a complicated case, as it involves not only banking law, but constitutional law as well. Furthermore, it shows the limits of the law when it comes to websites which are hosted and served from different countries and jurisdictions. Personally I don't have an opinion yet, I can vaguely understand both sides of the argument, but I don't know enough about law to have an opinion about the merits of each.
