Website pulled on US church that wants to burn Korans [by Rackspace]

I don't get all the fuss here: The site was against their TOS and Rackspace had to pull it off.

You may not publish, transmit or store on or via the Rackspace Cloud's network and equipment any content or links to any content that the Rackspace Cloud reasonably believes:

- Constitutes, depicts, fosters, promotes or relates in any manner to child pornography, bestiality, or non-consensual sex acts;

- is excessively violent, incites violence, threatens violence or contains harassing content or hate speech;

- is unfair or deceptive under the consumer protection laws of any jurisdiction, including chain letters and pyramid schemes;

- is defamatory or violates a person's privacy;

- creates a risk to a person's safety or health, creates a risk to public safety or health, compromises national security or interferes with a investigation by law enforcement;

- improperly exposes trade secrets or other confidential or proprietary information of another person; - is intended to assist others in defeating technical copyright protections;

- infringes on another person's copyright, trade or service mark, patent or other property right;

- promotes illegal drugs, violates export control laws, relates to illegal gambling or illegal arms trafficking;

- is otherwise illegal or solicits conduct that is illegal under laws applicable to you or to the Rackspace Cloud;

- is otherwise malicious, fraudulent or may result in retaliation against the Rackspace Cloud by offended viewers.

Content "published or transmitted" via the Rackspace Cloud's network or equipment includes Web content, email, bulletin board postings, chat and any other type of posting or transmission that relies on the Internet.

I think that site was in clear contradiction with point no. 2

Keep in mind that this likely isn't just a political move, but a strategic move to prevent impact to other customers. This sort of site will commonly draw attacks that have a major negative impact on the hosting provider, while generating minimal revenue for the hosting provider. This sort of customer is likely to cost a hosting company money rather than make them money.

That AUP sounds kind of ridiculous. I don't plan to burn any Korans, but I don't want my hosting provider to decide what content of mine might offend its personal sensibilities, either. One of many reasons to use https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/ imo.

My immediate response was: Ha! Good!

..but that's the problem with all these sorts of debates, isn't it? Everyone is acting on their first, almost instinctual response and never stopping to think beyond their own selfish beliefs and desires. Somehow that seems ironic.

Rackspace is within their rights as a private entity to make this decision, but I'm also within my rights as a consumer never to purchase hosting from them again.

On an Internet in which I can easily watch the video of Daniel Pearl's beheading or any number of other beheadings, stonings, or floggings in the name of Islam - I have a slightly different threshold for what constitutes actual "hate speech".

I agree with the concern about Rackspace pulling down sites, but I can't help but be pleased with their decision on this one.

It's not Rackspace's job to preserve the freedom of speech – that role belongs to congress.

The business relationship is a two way street. Fortunately for Rackspace, they're in a position where they can pick their customers.

Regardless of how you feel about burning Qurans, Rackspace has the right to recognize that one of their hosting customers is doing stupid things as a result of religion – and to decide they want no part of it. For simple liability reasons alone this may be a good idea – who knows what violence this idiocy will inspire.

If I were running a hosting company, I'd be wary of permitting religious content of any sort, much less the "my religion is better than your religion and you should get out of my country/planet" sort.

This is the second article in a week and a half that I've read about rackspace yanking a site. The other instance was even more ridiculous that this one...

Here's the link: Rely your web startup on Rackspace Cloud? Think again. http://bencheng.net/rely-your-web-startup-on-rackspace-cloud...

I'm actually a current Rackspace Cloud customer, but this type of news makes me reconsider whether I want to be.

Good on Rackspace. Free speech doesn't mean the freedom to say whatever you want on someone else's private infrastructure. You are free to burn books, spout hate speech, or do whatever other ridiculous stuff, but you're not entitled to use somebody else's private communication medium to do so.

Rackspace has spent millions in establishing a private infrastructure on which to conduct their private business--hosting web sites. Your right to free speech is not the same as Rackspace's right to do whatever they like on the infrastructure they wholly own.

If you want to make a website about burning Korans or whatever other hateful propaganda, purchase your own server, install it in your own datacenter, and pay for your own uplink. Then you'll be free to do whatever you want on your own servers. That's freedom of speech.

Edit: And if you don't like that Rackspace is pulling sites for whatever reason, then you too are free to host your own server in your own datacenter, maybe even on land you yourself have purchased. Or hell, get another host that explicitly allows that kind of stuff. Then you won't be constrained by what is in truth a business relationship, not an infringement on any constitutional right.

Regarding the actual content of the offensive material on the site, I'm always surprised at how many "Christians" don't follow the basic tenets of the religion. The entire New Testament teaches tolerance and love, even for one's enemies. It's not even subtle about it. Many of the parables and scriptures are explicit about the "commandment" (i.e., requirement from God) to "love thy neighbor" and "turn the other cheek".

From what I've read, the Qu'ran teaches very similar principles, including the commandment "Thou shalt not kill."

Basically what we're seeing are two religious groups fighting against one another while clearly ignoring their own religious principals.

Disclosure: I'm a practicing Christian in the LDS church

Given that it actually violates the policy mentioned, Rackspace absolutely has the right to do this, and I don't hold it against them. They did what they thought was right for this situation. Unfortunately it won't have any effect on the Koran burning event.

Personally this makes me more likely to purchase hosting from them (unless I wanted to make something offensive like this).

Counting the minutes until we hear a politician claim that this violates first amendment rights ...

What if media had ignored Terry Jones?

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-mike-thomas-q...

Is just it me or does anyone else see parallels with this and the 1970's Skokie, IL Nazi parade incident? Fanatics fan the flames of hate, passion, and free speech to make a media circus of the whole debate.

My initial response is "great", but it makes me wonder about other situations.

What if a hosting provider refused to serve another group based on a more popular viewpoint? Would there still be support for rackspace if they refused service to planned parenthood? Many organizations "incite" the devout of various religions.

This does nothing except give more free publicity to the Koran burners. They'll just find another company to host their site, which will have even more traffic now.

I know we probably can't, but could we just ignore them, hope they get bored when no one pays attention to them and go away?

If you owned a store, and someone, say a regular customer, came into your store and started insulting thuggish-looking passers-by from inside your store, would you kick them out?

I know this is different. This is like a store where you pay to yell at people from inside, I guess. But still, you own it, you have the right to draw the line.

That said, if Rackspace had decided to make this their fight, I would hold them in high regard. There is far too much fear of "Muslim outrage", and too many in the press have shown a lot of cowardice.

This preacher is an irrational man, but progress depends on the irrational man. G'Shaw!

One sure fire way to make a backwoods idiot look semi-sane is to go and pull something like this. One of the great pillars of the internet is free speech and Rackspace can hide behind an AUP all day but in the end they have decided to move into the realm of politics with this move. Sad.

For the record, I am pissed that some church wants to go off an incite Muslims in this way but this is America and while I will shout at the top of my lungs 'this is stupid' I will also defend to the cost of life and limb their right to do it.

The whole Koran burning business reaks of violence and provocation. Let's take the high road and give the terrorists a better example than that.

I am sure Rackspace thought long and hard before doing so. They may have wanted to pull the site out of ideological conviction but I am sure they did once they were convinced they were legally alllowed to do so.

Freedom of speech is only good as long as it doesn't turn into a violent provocation match in my opinion.

Jones and his 50-strong congregation… – an interesting way to describe the lingering half of the congregation which hasn't abandoned him in the past 12 months.

I find it hard to believe that the Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan and the President of the United States would both criticize this church in public, yet neither would think to pick up a phone and call Rackspace. I am assuming that a year or 2 from now we will learn that Rackspace did receive a call from some branch of government. I can believe that the call was perhaps informal in nature. Perhaps an old friend, now in government, called an old friend who works at Rackspace. Perhaps they had a friendly chat. I'm suddenly curious if anyone in Rackspace management spent any time in the military. If so, it becomes easy to imagine how such informal contacts might be made.

And, then, I wonder if any part of the Federal government is a customer of Rackspace?

I say all this simply because it seems unlikely that the the Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan and the President of the United States would both focus their attention on this church, and describe their planned event as being a danger to the troops, and yet they didn't think to call Rackspace? Shutting down the website seems like an obvious pressure point, though, of course, not an especially powerful one.

I can recommend nearlyfreespeech.net for hosting. They allow any legal material to be posted. The one downside is it's Unix with a ssh, and there is no hand holding. But if you have the know-how, great service!

Why is burning Qurans offensive? I could see it being offensive if done in someone else's yard, but as a symbolic act of free speech it's no different than flag burning, which I also support.

I wonder how many people cheering this are in favor of net neutrality.

Well I guess I won't be doing anymore business with Rackspace, since their idiot executives who cleared this decision clearly do not respect the rights given by the American constitution, nor understand the point of net neutrality, nor any of the rights they themselves benefit from as a common carrier. It's tragic that the FCC does not have the authority nor the clear legislative framework to prosecute violations of net neutrality.

This is absolutely outrageous coming from one of the largest web hosting providers in the world. They are supposed to lead by example here. Rackspace has no business censoring any of their customers content just because the don't like what it says, and are scared others won't like it. And who the fuck cares about their TOS/AUS—more than half of it goes well outside the boundaries of what any court would allow to be legally binding. If I put in my TOS that "I can revoke your account anytime because I don't like you", I cannot legally get away with it. At least in circumstances and for business contracts that matter—perhaps not web hosting.

No laws were broken. No law enforcement or court orders were submitted requesting the site be taken offline. Rackspace pulled the plug just because they didn't like their customer's content and feared backlash by association.

The entire reason this matters is because it leads to a slippery slope that becomes the exact opposite of the Constitutional principles upon which America was founded. Where does the slippery slope stop? Can the electric company shut off this pastor's account because they don't want to be known as "his electricity provider"? Can his bank cancel his home loan too? Why stop there—can every entity he does business with in the public market do likewise, and turn this man into a true outcast and force him to live off the grid? Is that what the American constitution says can happen with freedom of speech? No, it doesn't.

First they came for the religious holy book burners, next they came for..., then they came for me etc, etc.

So the line must be drawn somewhere, and online public speech is a pretty damned good and early enough spot to draw it.

I think it's a horrible idea to burn Korans, but this is certainly not the answer. This is effectively just another form of violence, that's not the way to elevate a debate.