online campaign to pressure BlueHost to change its policies. 16 Neither the explanatory
e-mails nor public campaign swayed BlueHost or their CEO Matt Heaton. Burrell
reports that Heaton communicated with her directly on the matter of the campaign,
telling her that her supporters were ‘‘spamming’’ him and that he was unwilling to
help her resolve the situation given this external pressure. 17
Pressure from the Treasury Department, however, was ultimately successful. Burrell
received an e-mail from BlueHost on February 18 stating:
Per request from the Treasury Dept, we have reactivated your account with Bluehost. With the release from the Treasury Department received today from Rachel Nagle of the Treasury Department
via telephone and email confirming on February, 18, 2009 that you do not appear on OFAC’s list
of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons we will continue hosting your website.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you.
Burrell and Kubatana decided that the ‘‘inconvenience’’ was significant enough that
they moved their Web sites to a hosting company based in New Zealand and exempt
from U.S. Treasury Department sanctions—the managing director of that company
was alerted to Kubatana’s status as a Zimbabwean nonprofit and affirmed his willingness to host their Web sites.
Zimbabwean human rights organizations were not the only ones affected by BlueHost’s interpretation of U.S. Treasury regulations. Yaraslau Kryvoi, a Belarusian activist
based in Washington, DC, saw his blog, promoting the Belarusian American Association, taken down by BlueHost. 18 1 Fathi, a prominent Persian blogger, reported that
his blog, as well as several other Persian blogs, were being removed by BlueHost as
they contravened Section 13 of the company’s terms of service. 19
Evgeny Morozov, reporting on the situation in Newsweek, suggests that BlueHost’s
decision was based on expediency: ‘‘Although BlueHost is one of the world’s biggest
hosting companies, it probably does not have the time or resources to match the
OFAC list with its own customer ranks. Banning everyone from Belarus takes much
less time and effort.’’ He notes that BlueHost’s terms of service are surprisingly
sloppy—there’s no nation called ‘‘the Balkans,’’ and Morozov wonders whether BlueHost plans on removing Romanian and Slovenian sites as well. 20 It is worth noting
that, despite Burrell’s successful protest and Morozov’s article, BlueHost’s terms of service still include a blanket block on usage from 11 nations, one region, and one longdeposed regime.
The removal of Iranian, Belarusian, and Zimbabwean content is deeply ironic, given
that the sites that were removed were critical of the governments being sanctioned by
the United States. The actions taken by BlueHost, either at the encouragement of the
Treasury Department or because of their misinterpretation of Treasury regulations,
had an effect opposite to what was intended by those sanctions—by silencing criticism, the removal of these sites benefits the sanctioned governments.
76
Ethan Zuckerman
e-mails nor public campaign swayed BlueHost or their CEO Matt Heaton. Burrell
reports that Heaton communicated with her directly on the matter of the campaign,
telling her that her supporters were ‘‘spamming’’ him and that he was unwilling to
help her resolve the situation given this external pressure. 17
Pressure from the Treasury Department, however, was ultimately successful. Burrell
received an e-mail from BlueHost on February 18 stating:
Per request from the Treasury Dept, we have reactivated your account with Bluehost. With the release from the Treasury Department received today from Rachel Nagle of the Treasury Department
via telephone and email confirming on February, 18, 2009 that you do not appear on OFAC’s list
of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons we will continue hosting your website.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you.
Burrell and Kubatana decided that the ‘‘inconvenience’’ was significant enough that
they moved their Web sites to a hosting company based in New Zealand and exempt
from U.S. Treasury Department sanctions—the managing director of that company
was alerted to Kubatana’s status as a Zimbabwean nonprofit and affirmed his willingness to host their Web sites.
Zimbabwean human rights organizations were not the only ones affected by BlueHost’s interpretation of U.S. Treasury regulations. Yaraslau Kryvoi, a Belarusian activist
based in Washington, DC, saw his blog, promoting the Belarusian American Association, taken down by BlueHost. 18 1 Fathi, a prominent Persian blogger, reported that
his blog, as well as several other Persian blogs, were being removed by BlueHost as
they contravened Section 13 of the company’s terms of service. 19
Evgeny Morozov, reporting on the situation in Newsweek, suggests that BlueHost’s
decision was based on expediency: ‘‘Although BlueHost is one of the world’s biggest
hosting companies, it probably does not have the time or resources to match the
OFAC list with its own customer ranks. Banning everyone from Belarus takes much
less time and effort.’’ He notes that BlueHost’s terms of service are surprisingly
sloppy—there’s no nation called ‘‘the Balkans,’’ and Morozov wonders whether BlueHost plans on removing Romanian and Slovenian sites as well. 20 It is worth noting
that, despite Burrell’s successful protest and Morozov’s article, BlueHost’s terms of service still include a blanket block on usage from 11 nations, one region, and one longdeposed regime.
The removal of Iranian, Belarusian, and Zimbabwean content is deeply ironic, given
that the sites that were removed were critical of the governments being sanctioned by
the United States. The actions taken by BlueHost, either at the encouragement of the
Treasury Department or because of their misinterpretation of Treasury regulations,
had an effect opposite to what was intended by those sanctions—by silencing criticism, the removal of these sites benefits the sanctioned governments.
76
Ethan Zuckerman