@mmasnick@mastodon.socialSo, a couple months back we wrote about how Appin, an Indian company, had forced Reuters to remove an article that presented evidence of Appin's connections to "hack for hire" operations. Appin demanded we remove it. We will not do so.
Thanks to @eff and @davidgreene for sending a letter on our behalf, along with @muckrock, who has written about this separately. https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2024/feb/01/global-censorship-appin-reuters/
In addition, @agreenberg has written a thorough piece for @WIRED about it as well: https://www.wired.com/story/appin-training-centers-lawsuits-censorship/
@mmasnick Maybe my brain's parser has been damaged by reading too much AI-generated text, but this sentence isn't working for me, grammatically: "However, the court’s order by its very terms is an interim order, that the defendants’ evidence has not yet been considered, and that a final determination of the defamatory character of the article has not been made."
@mmasnick It’s weird how hard Appin works to keep its name and the name of its founder, Rajat Khare, out of the public eye. Appin. Raiat Khare. Hack for hire.
@mmasnick Think Appin will try to crack into their CMS and delete the article?