Historical scandals are constantly being rewritten (largely by deletion) on the internet. It's even very hard to find details on the robosigning scandals from 2008, which were huge and recent.
It's rich (pun intended) for the WP to be posting this, where one of the richest men in the world, with several huge interests and government deals to promote, paid to own it...
Sent down the memory hole <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_hole" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_hole</a>
Sure sounds like, this time, Betteridge is wrong and the answer is "yes". If so...well, it was both legal and cheap, and plenty of people with money would have had good (as in "self-serving") reason to do it.<p>Sadly - but predictably - the Washington Post story ends with "whoever did this horrible thing had a good lawyer, and covered their tracks well". Zero hint that anything could actually be done to guard against more such bad things happening. Let alone that anyone should get off their "click headline, read story, get angry, repeat" butt and try to do something.<p>Pro Tip: If you're selling / downsizing / closing a web site that's full of important information (for history, public interest, etc.), then you should consider donating it to a library with the resources to keep it on-line. Or at least keeping a copy, and put in a clause into the sale contract about free & easy public access having to continue. Or any public library being allowed to also host it, free, if they chose to do so.
If anyone bothers to RTFA, there's a blurb in there about the 2004 UVA rape case and a hint that a former victim of the false accusation (now an investment banker) bought the archive, DMCA'd links to the archive, and then took it all down.
Dare I say, dangerously based.