December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:50 PM 2/27/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >I predict that within the next five years these >slander/libel laws will be used by some organization to prosecute defamation >of their Internet presence (eg web page graffitti). Within 10 years this >area will be one of the hotest areas of the new communications law. Civil actions against people doing "graffiti" are only interesting where the defendant has assets worth suing for. This economic dimension substantially limits the number of suits which will be brought. Corporate plaintiffs, if they chose to bring suit, would in many cases prefer to sue in federal court. (Federal juries tend to be more conservative and hence pro-corporate; they're also more likely to be friendly to an out-of-town corporation suing a local individual). To sue in federal court, the plaintiff needs to find a federal question or diversity jurisdiction. Other causes of action (like copyright infringement, trademark dilution, or false designation of origin) would provide a federal question and hence federal jurisdiction. Criminal prosecutions for defamation (in the case of "graffiti") are still unlikely - a much more straightforward charge would be unauthorized access to a computer or some flavor of fraud, depending on the facts. Confusion aids defendants, so I predict prosecutors will avoid defamation law (and its tar pits of actual malice and the defense of truth) when they are able to do so and still have a reasonable chance of conviction. >If they don't >understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly >accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand >what is best, let along convince anyone else? There's a world of difference between understanding technology and screwing up once in awhile. Perhaps you've never screwed anything up (although your summary of US defamation law ought to count), but the rest of us do, from time to time. Were I involved in computer-related litigation, I'd choose an attorney who could talk to a jury over an attorney who was good with computers, hands down. Not even a question. And I'd pick an attorney who owned up to making mistakes sometimes over someone who imagined him or herself somehow superior to people who fuck up now and then. >It has been proposed by at least one party that a district attorney or other >public prosecutor would not act on such events. This is also naive. I was that "party", and I guess that in trying to be civil I was actually unclear. If you were a politically important person or organization, and if Toto's message had caused you real damage, and if Toto were reasonably available to prosecute, a prosecutor might get interested. But you're not important, Toto would be difficult to extradite, and you weren't harmed. So you picked a crappy example to make your point(s) with. Change the facts, and you'll get a different answer. Duh. >The >ramifications for their political opponents to use this 'insensitive and >clearly self-interested' refusal to act as a perfect example of how that >prosecutor is interested in their own political career and not in the >interest of the people they are charged with protecting as well as a good >demonstration of their technological ignorance. It would be very difficult >to get re-elected in such an environment. Yeah, I'll bet that your local prosecutor's failure to prosecute Toto is going to cost them dearly in the next election. You picked a hypothetical which did a poor job of illustrating the points you're making in this later message. Do you want to talk about whether or not Toto is criminally liable for making fun of you while making a point about ownership of networks and its relationship to freedom of speech, or do you want to talk about the more general case of liability for misattribution? If it's the latter, yes, there are some issues there, but I still think that defamation law is a poor way to address them. You seem to be having an "I've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail" problem. And all of this seems a bit contrived if the real crypto-relevant point is "use digital signatures to avoid misattribution". >All that I ask is that instead of jumping the gun and saying 'it ain't so' >you simply consider the ramifications from 'their' perspective. It truly is >amazing what one can learn by walking a mile in another mans shoes. For if >there is one truth to be learned it is that this discussion is not about how >it is, but rather how it will be and how it should be. Despite your closing, I haven't seen you write anything about "how it should be", beyond the idea that people should learn more about digital signatures. You've forwarded lots of information from other people's web pages about defamation liability in different jurisdictions, but no discussion about why the rules we've got now are good ones (or bad ones). Other commentators have suggested that defamation law is obsolete (Tim May) or should be reconsidered in light of a victim's ability (via the net) to reply to a defamer (Mike Godwin). Do you have a proposal along these lines? Your message suggests to me that you're very pro-plaintiff with respect to defamation (at least when you're the plaintiff), but you haven't explained why other people should adopt your perspective. You did suggest that juries are also likely to think it's in their best interests to find for plaintiffs (because they might find themselves in similar circumstances someday); but it's unclear to me why that reasoning wouldn't make them equally likely to side with defendants (because they might be wrongfully accused of doing something bad), or why your logic wouldn't apply to every case, not just defamation cases. And, for what it's worth, juries aren't supposed to consider "what is in our best interest" either as individuals nor as a community, nor is that a legitimate topic for argument to the jury with respect to questions about liability or guilt. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

(((( Cool new marketing technique discovered, cheap & very effec
by jlkmiec＠concentric.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following should be of interest to you, if not please disregard you are NOT on a list and will not receive future mailings. AMAZING DIRECT MARKETING TECHNIQUE DISCOVERED We have after spending years researching developed a way for a company to sell ANY product more effectively. It is not bulk E-mail, it is much more effective. It is ideal for anyone in MLM who needs to contact only interested MLM partys or any other company for that matter. All you need to do is say how many people you want us to contact and we will give you a rate and implement the system. You get qualified leads that are easy to close. You can sample this for as little as $20 which will put your product directly in touch with 5000 people. All you need to do is E-mail us a little about your target audience and we will take care of the rest. From the information we relay to you, you should have a list of very qualified cantidates for your product. Special 50,000 contacts only $100!!!!!! Copyright 1997 Innovative Concepts

1 0

(( New marketing technique discovered, cheap & very effective)))
by jlkmiec＠concentric.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following should be of general interest to you. If it is not please excuse the intrusion. You are NOT on a list and will NOT be contacted again. AMAZING DIRECT MARKETING TECHNIQUE DISCOVERED We have after spending years researching developed a way for a company to sell ANY product more effectively. It is not bulk E-mail, it is much more effective. It is ideal for anyone in MLM who needs to contact only interested MLM partys or any other company for that matter. All you need to do is say how many people you want us to contact and we will give you a rate and implement the system. You get qualified leads that are easy to close. You can sample this for as little as $20 which will put your product directly in touch with 5000 people. All you need to do is E-mail us a little about your target audience and we will take care of the rest. From the information we relay to you, you should have a list of very qualified cantidates for your product. Special 50,000 contacts only $100 (Save $100)!! Copyright 1997 Innovative Concepts

1 0

How to subscribe
by Theodor.SCHLICKMANN＠BXL.DG13.cec.be 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have learned from the discussions in this list that there are other lists related to this one. Can anybody send me information on what is available and when this confusion created by having different lists will stop. cypherpunks : unmoderated and uncensored cypherpunks : unmoderated and censored cypherpunks : moderated and uncensored cypherpunks : moderated and censored cypherpunks : US eyes only -- export restrictions cypherpunks : Europe cypherpunks : private mail Theodor W. Schlickmann

3 2

FW: Cyphernomicon by Tim May
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(meant to send this to the list earlier) From: Toto Personally, I could care less when people want to play footsie-games with flaming, but I think it points out the ludicrousness of having a moderator limiting people to 'childish' insults. I prefer someone screaming at me what a cocksucker I am. ................................................... Now, you know it has to do with proportion: if Jim Choate, in the course of an ADD-induced discourse on the reprehensability of libelous indiscretions, happens to let out a "Bessie", it's going to be less disconcerting than to read continuous content-less alerts consisting of nothing but declarations against your personal virtue. At the very least, the one provides some cause for educated clarification, while the other leaves nothing to say, but only to filter. However, it's 3:00 a.m. PST and Sandy's asleep right now, so if you really feel like flaming somebody uninhibitedly, now's the time to get past the flame-bot (hee-hee). = Ray Hettinga forwards these long, literate missives advertising this-or-that million dollar a plate conferences, but when he chose to insult me with his own words, the result was an immature blathering which showed questionable literary skills. ............................................. Bad, Ray - Bad! = It would be nice, however, to try to twist the rest of the list around to my own world-view. It gets lonely here in the 'rubber room' at the Home, and I could use some company. ............................................. You're at liberty to try. Why don't you start with Messrs. Jim and Jim. (but, wait - let me set up my Inbox Rules.....) .. Blanc

1 0

[ITAR] Key Security Question
by winsock＠rigel.cyberpass.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Decoy L[esbian] Vagina K[ankersore]OTM uses an Adolf Hitler action figure as a dildo. O |'| /\ | | Dr.Decoy L[esbian] Vagina K[ankersore]OTM /\ \-------| / / |-------|

1 0

[DSS] overview.htm
by winsock＠rigel.cyberpass.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dimitri Vehement K[arcinogen] Of The Month's wee-wee is so tiny that only his mommy is allowed to touch it. /\ \ / /\ //\\ .. //\\ Dimitri Vehement K[arcinogen] Of The Month //\(( ))/\\ / < `' > \

1 0

Re: [FWD] Making OCR'ed code transfer easier
by winsock＠rigel.cyberpass.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dopefiend Liar Villain Kondom Of The Moment will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own son's prepubescent body. _ O O _ \-|-\_/-|-/ Dopefiend Liar Villain Kondom Of The Moment /^\ /^\ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^

1 0

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Steve Schear I sincerely doubt that many would use AP to right small slights, anymore than many now kill others for the same reasons. The world has always been inhabited by bullies and tyrants who cared little of what harm they caused others. An AP system would quickly eliminate bullies and tyrants. .................................................... Some of them. But like an infection which can be potentialy killed with antibiotics, ignoring the unhealthy conditions which made it possible to establish itself will frustrate the attempts to prevent the phenomena of its recurrence. .. Blanc

1 0

About: My Departure, Moderation, and "Ownership of the List"
by lwjohnson＠grill.sk.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For what it's worth, I think that this Tim May, not being a user of the list, has no place to talk. His type, to me, characterate those who quit something and complain later, knowing that some people will listen to them. So what, if he decided to leave? It was his own choice and he can't just come back and say everyone who stayed is now impelled to listen to him, just because he used to do a bunch of posts. I don't think that hardly any of you would listened to me later if I left the list.

1 0