Could Iceland really become an "Information Haven"?

ChristianV

I don't think so, maybe let's check it out soon. But one thing for sure is that Stern will replace Cowell in the American idol. I don't think anything official is in place, but it appears Simon Cowell is likely to be replaced by the King of All Media. Howard Stern on American Idol – this is going to be a riot. I'd get payday loans to go see it in person – Baba Booey! Stern DID say that much on his show – but who knows? You never know in these sorts of things. When I see the press conference, I'll start believing it. That said, if Stern DOES replace Simon...this will get interesting. There will be bababooey.

Rhoda Klapp

Can we do anything about stories which are not secret but which some media organisations just won't run?

Albert M. Bankment

I think this brave and exciting idea will get nipped in the bud, precisely because it is brave and exciting. Iceland would still like to join the EU, although that's necessarily conditional on the result of the refund referendum, and I very much doubt that our masters would contemplate allowing Iceland to join if it were 'hosting' Wikileaks. Imagine the danger of us discovering uncomfortable truths about ... well ... the EU, for example. It's inconceivable that a site which would be politically and/or legally unacceptable if it were hosted in Germany, France or the UK would be tolerated in another EU member; certainly not in an applicant country, which needs all the friends it can get.

Naomi Muse

Maybe it could also be a haven where banks go to avoid international bank taxes.?

Jon Rosenberg

Neal Stephonson's excellent novel Cryptonomicon, dealt with the difficulties and possibilities inherent in such a project. He seemed to be convinced that it's main function would, eventually, be to provide banking services for drug runners and third world kelptocrats. A formalization of the various money laundering schemes already in existence. The people in his book who were creating the Data Haven were prepared to accept that in order to frustrate major governments controlling information resources and avenues of dissemination.
Whether this sort of thing will ever happen is problematic on so many fronts, not least as Iceland, independent country though it is can and has bowed to pressure from the international community before now. That being the case there's no reason to think that a data haven there would be any more secure from prosecution and government interference than one built anywhere else.

call me dave

Are the Grauniad & Spectator ever going to publish the Danish Mohammed cartoons?

Ulfur, Reykjavik

An Icelander myself, I seriously doubt that Iceland will join the EU. There simply isn't enough support for such a move. Yes, talks are being held, but the Icelandic government knows that unless something changes dramatically, membership will be rejected by the electorate.

Thus we will, for the foreseeable future, retain our own libel and privacy laws, as well as a rather effective courts system which has not yet awarded damages to the insane levels seen in the UK.

I do, however, share Mr. Rosenberg's misgivings about the independence of Icelandic authorities in relation to outside influences. Icelandic politicians are unfortunately as incompetent and crooked as such people are everywhere else in the world.

Beer Moth

Ulfur

It's your haddock they're after. And in return they'll fill your towns with the scum of eastern Europe.

Herbert Thornton

I wouldn't be optimistic that opinions and information expressed in Iceland - whether in speech, print, or on the Internet - will necessarily be available for people in, say Britain or Canada, to listen to, or to read as a newspaper or on a computer screen.

The problem is that the Human Rights Industry and others determined to suppress what they regard as undesirable opinion will make it dangerous, or at least burdened with quite draconian financial penalties, not merely to express such opinions in Britain or Canada, but to in any way facilitate the opinions being disseminated. It is not surprising that Canadian Human Rights Commissions are often referred to as the Canadian Thought Police.

Proceedings of this sort have actually been brought in Canada. One example is that of a Canadian-based Internet website where the website owner was not shown to be in agreement with the opinion, or even to be aware of its existence. It has also happened in the case of Canadian magazines. In one case the costs of the proceedings were so burdensome that the owner was forced out of business. In another, more recent example, proceedings were brought against Macleans Magazine. Macleans were sufficiently wealthy that they were able to successfully resist the proceedings against them, but despite that, their costs of resisting were enormous and they received no reimbursement of their costs.

From this sort of regulation, it is a very short step indeed to making both Internet Service Providers and bookshops subject to severe penalties for allowing the transmission of prohibited opinions and for having for sale books, magazines and newspapers containing articles expressing prohibited opinions - even if they disagree with the opinions. The Thought Police are without doubt eager to increase their power to suppress free speech and the dissemination of ideas even further.