July 2018 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....
by Lee Howard 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

> -----Original Message----- > From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen@delong.com] > > That won't help. Think about it this way. A session state log entry is roughly 512 bytes. [math redacted] > you're still looking at roughly 85 Petabytes of > storage required to meet CALEA standards. I've done my share of shoveling dirt on the CGN coffin, but in the interest of fact-based decision-making: nobody is going to create a separate log entry for every session/flow. You do bulk port assignment or deterministic NAT, so whenever you assign an address, you know what ports you'll be mapping that address to. One entry per Lease_Time. Doesn't matter, because the servers aren't logging port number, so nobody will ever need to see those logs. * Unless Geoff Huston's wackiness finds support, and somebody will pay you to keep that kind of log. Although if somebody would pay, I'd expect them to be paying for DPI deployment already. Lee ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

[i2p] weekly status notes [mar 1]
by jrandom 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi y'all, time for our status update * Index 1) 0.5.0.1 2) roadmap 3) addressbook editor and config 4) i2p-bt 5) ??? * 1) 0.5.0.1 As discussed last week, a few hours after the meeting we pushed out a new 0.5.0.1 release fixing the bugs in 0.5 that had caused the massive number of tunnels being built (among other things). Generally, this rev has improved things, but under wider testing, we've come across some additional bugs that have been hitting a few people. In particular, the 0.5.0.1 rev can gobble tons of CPU if you have a slow machine or your router's tunnels fail in bulk, and some long lived I2PTunnel servers can gobble up RAM until it OOMs. There has also been a long standing bug in the streaming lib, where we can fail to establish a connection if just the right failures happen. Most of these (among others) have been fixed in cvs, but some remain outstanding. Once they're all fixed, we'll package 'er up and ship it as a 0.5.0.2 release. I'm not exactly sure when that'll be, hopefully this week, but we'll see. * 2) roadmap After major releases, the roadmap [1] seems to get... adjusted. The 0.5 release was no different. That page reflects what I think is reasonable and appropriate for the way forward, but of course, if more people jump on to help out with things, it can certainly be adjusted. You'll notice the substantial break between 0.6 and 0.6.1, and while this does reflect lots of work, it also reflects the fact that I'll be moving (its that time of the year again). [1] http://www.i2p.net/roadmap * 3) addressbook editor and config Detonate has started some work on a web based interface to manage the addressbook entries (hosts.txt), and its looking pretty promising. Perhaps we can get an update from detonate during the meeting? In addition, smeghead has been doing some work on a web based interface to manage the addressbook configuration (the subscriptions.txt, config.txt). Perhaps we can get an update from smeghead during the meeting? * 4) i2p-bt There's been some progress on the i2p-bt front, with a new 0.1.8 release addressing the azneti2p compatability issues as discussed in last week's meeting. Perhaps we can get an update from duck or smeghead during the meeting? Legion has also created a fork off the i2p-bt rev, merged in some other code, patched up some things, and has a windows binary available on his eepsite. The announcement [2] seems to suggest that source may be made available, though its not up on the eepsite at the moment. The i2p devs haven't audited (or even seen) the code to that client, so those who need anonymity may want to get and review a copy of the code first. [2] http://forum.i2p.net/viewtopic.php?t=382 There's also work on a version 2 of Legion's BT client, though I don't know the status of that. Perhaps we can get an update from Legion during the meeting? * 5) ??? Thats about all I have to say atm, lots and lots going on. Anyone else working on things that perhaps we can get an update for during the meeting? =jr -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCJNebGnFL2th344YRAobNAJ4lfCULXX7WAGZxOlh/NzTuV1eNwgCg1eV/ /h5I4b/h0SPpmq/GVKZsLns= =EEkH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ i2p mailing list i2p(a)i2p.net http://i2p.dnsalias.net/mailman/listinfo/i2p ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]

1 0

Re: [silk] Bitcoin
by Alaric Snell-Pym 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On 05/18/11 07:40, Eugen Leitl wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from lodewijk andri de la porte <lodewijkadlp(a)gmail.com> ----- > > From: lodewijk andri de la porte <lodewijkadlp(a)gmail.com> > Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:12:14 +0200 > To: Eugen Leitl <eugen(a)leitl.org> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net, info(a)postbiota.org > Subject: Re: [silk] Bitcoin > > It is possible for any current governmental agency to hijack the entire > system, due to their access to supercomputer infrastructures and/or immense > budgets. This will however become less and less possible while bitcoin > continues to grow and is already a massive and technological challenge which > I do not see any governmental institutions execute proper. Yep. Should interference be detected, there is also scope to ban the big supercomputers and then edit it out of history - given consensus that this should be done. > It is also strange to say these transactions are "untraceable". Nothing is > less true. Governments have complete transcripts of all sent data (USA, GB > and AUS have a neat little system for this set up, catch all emails too), > and every transaction is signed by the money's owner, it needs to be > processed. Sure one could create many different unique signatures (bitcoin > adresses) but those could all be traced moving out of the house. It's just > immensely more tedious to do than tracking, say, bank transactions and so > many agencies will just not be technical enough to do this. Yep. I've written about this, and many people have suggested that Tor is a way around that: see http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/archives/2011/05/12/bitcoin-security/ ABS -- Alaric Snell-Pym http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Re: [silk] Bitcoin
by Alaric Snell-Pym 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On 05/18/11 07:40, Eugen Leitl wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from lodewijk andri de la porte <lodewijkadlp(a)gmail.com> ----- > > From: lodewijk andri de la porte <lodewijkadlp(a)gmail.com> > Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:12:14 +0200 > To: Eugen Leitl <eugen(a)leitl.org> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net, info(a)postbiota.org > Subject: Re: [silk] Bitcoin > > It is possible for any current governmental agency to hijack the entire > system, due to their access to supercomputer infrastructures and/or immense > budgets. This will however become less and less possible while bitcoin > continues to grow and is already a massive and technological challenge which > I do not see any governmental institutions execute proper. Yep. Should interference be detected, there is also scope to ban the big supercomputers and then edit it out of history - given consensus that this should be done. > It is also strange to say these transactions are "untraceable". Nothing is > less true. Governments have complete transcripts of all sent data (USA, GB > and AUS have a neat little system for this set up, catch all emails too), > and every transaction is signed by the money's owner, it needs to be > processed. Sure one could create many different unique signatures (bitcoin > adresses) but those could all be traced moving out of the house. It's just > immensely more tedious to do than tracking, say, bank transactions and so > many agencies will just not be technical enough to do this. Yep. I've written about this, and many people have suggested that Tor is a way around that: see http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/archives/2011/05/12/bitcoin-security/ ABS -- Alaric Snell-Pym http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

[i2p] weekly status notes [mar 1]
by jrandom 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi y'all, time for our status update * Index 1) 0.5.0.1 2) roadmap 3) addressbook editor and config 4) i2p-bt 5) ??? * 1) 0.5.0.1 As discussed last week, a few hours after the meeting we pushed out a new 0.5.0.1 release fixing the bugs in 0.5 that had caused the massive number of tunnels being built (among other things). Generally, this rev has improved things, but under wider testing, we've come across some additional bugs that have been hitting a few people. In particular, the 0.5.0.1 rev can gobble tons of CPU if you have a slow machine or your router's tunnels fail in bulk, and some long lived I2PTunnel servers can gobble up RAM until it OOMs. There has also been a long standing bug in the streaming lib, where we can fail to establish a connection if just the right failures happen. Most of these (among others) have been fixed in cvs, but some remain outstanding. Once they're all fixed, we'll package 'er up and ship it as a 0.5.0.2 release. I'm not exactly sure when that'll be, hopefully this week, but we'll see. * 2) roadmap After major releases, the roadmap [1] seems to get... adjusted. The 0.5 release was no different. That page reflects what I think is reasonable and appropriate for the way forward, but of course, if more people jump on to help out with things, it can certainly be adjusted. You'll notice the substantial break between 0.6 and 0.6.1, and while this does reflect lots of work, it also reflects the fact that I'll be moving (its that time of the year again). [1] http://www.i2p.net/roadmap * 3) addressbook editor and config Detonate has started some work on a web based interface to manage the addressbook entries (hosts.txt), and its looking pretty promising. Perhaps we can get an update from detonate during the meeting? In addition, smeghead has been doing some work on a web based interface to manage the addressbook configuration (the subscriptions.txt, config.txt). Perhaps we can get an update from smeghead during the meeting? * 4) i2p-bt There's been some progress on the i2p-bt front, with a new 0.1.8 release addressing the azneti2p compatability issues as discussed in last week's meeting. Perhaps we can get an update from duck or smeghead during the meeting? Legion has also created a fork off the i2p-bt rev, merged in some other code, patched up some things, and has a windows binary available on his eepsite. The announcement [2] seems to suggest that source may be made available, though its not up on the eepsite at the moment. The i2p devs haven't audited (or even seen) the code to that client, so those who need anonymity may want to get and review a copy of the code first. [2] http://forum.i2p.net/viewtopic.php?t=382 There's also work on a version 2 of Legion's BT client, though I don't know the status of that. Perhaps we can get an update from Legion during the meeting? * 5) ??? Thats about all I have to say atm, lots and lots going on. Anyone else working on things that perhaps we can get an update for during the meeting? =jr -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCJNebGnFL2th344YRAobNAJ4lfCULXX7WAGZxOlh/NzTuV1eNwgCg1eV/ /h5I4b/h0SPpmq/GVKZsLns= =EEkH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ i2p mailing list i2p(a)i2p.net http://i2p.dnsalias.net/mailman/listinfo/i2p ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]

1 0

Abortion Assasination Politics likely going to Supremes
by A. Melon 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

> > So when is APster coming out, which lets > you trade lists of deserving people? > > > > Tuesday September 12 5:11 AM ET > Abortion Web Site Verdict Appealed > > By WILLIAM McCALL, Associated Press Writer > > PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Anti-abortion activists are > asking a federal appeals court to overturn a $109 million > verdict by a jury that decided a Web site and posters listing > the names of abortion doctors and clinics were threats that > went beyond free speech. > > The case is widely seen as a test of a Supreme Court ruling that defined a threat as > explicit language likely to cause imminent lawless action - and a measure of how > far anti-abortion activists can go in harrying doctors and clinics. > > Oral arguments in the appeal are scheduled Tuesday before a panel of the 9th U.S. > Circuit Court of Appeals. > > At issue is a Web site called The Nuremberg Files that listed hundreds of abortion > doctors accused of committing crimes against humanity and invited readers to > send in doctors addresses, license plate numbers and even the names of their > children. > > Last year, the dozen anti-abortion activists argued the posters and Web site were > free speech protected under the First Amendment. Critics called it a hit list. > > The jury was told by U.S. District Judge Robert Jones to consider the history of > violence in the anti-abortion movement, including three doctors killed after their > names appeared on the lists. > > One was Dr. Barnett Slepian, who was gunned down by a sniper in October 1998 at > his home near Buffalo, N.Y. Slepians name was crossed out on The Nuremberg > Files Web site later that day. > > In 1995, Planned Parenthood and four doctors sued the anti-abortion activists under > federal racketeering statutes and the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances > Act, which makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors and their > patients. > > Jones told the jury the Wanted-style posters and Web site were not free speech if > a reasonable person could perceive them as threats. > > But a number of legal experts have criticized the February 1999 jury verdict and > those instructions, saying a threat must be explicit. > > If youre looking for a case likely to go to the Supreme Court, this is one, said Lee > Tornquist, a law professor who specializes in the First Amendment at Willamette > University in Salem, Ore. > > Others consider the jury decision sound. > > Margie Kelly, spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in > New York, said Jones correctly told the jury to weigh any threat in context. > > This is a case that is built on history, Kelly said. You have had years of arson, > shootings, death threats. How can that context be considered anything but a threat? > > The Georgia computer programmer who ran the Nuremberg Files was not a > defendant in the lawsuit. After the verdict, his Internet provider pulled the plug on > the site. > > Among the anti-abortion activists appealing the ruling is Michael Bray of Bowie, > Md., author of a book that justifies killing doctors to stop abortions. Bray served > time in federal prison from 1985 to 1989 for his role in arson attacks and bombings > of seven clinics. > >

1 0

Abortion Assasination Politics likely going to Supremes
by A. Melon 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

> > So when is APster coming out, which lets > you trade lists of deserving people? > > > > Tuesday September 12 5:11 AM ET > Abortion Web Site Verdict Appealed > > By WILLIAM McCALL, Associated Press Writer > > PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Anti-abortion activists are > asking a federal appeals court to overturn a $109 million > verdict by a jury that decided a Web site and posters listing > the names of abortion doctors and clinics were threats that > went beyond free speech. > > The case is widely seen as a test of a Supreme Court ruling that defined a threat as > explicit language likely to cause imminent lawless action - and a measure of how > far anti-abortion activists can go in harrying doctors and clinics. > > Oral arguments in the appeal are scheduled Tuesday before a panel of the 9th U.S. > Circuit Court of Appeals. > > At issue is a Web site called The Nuremberg Files that listed hundreds of abortion > doctors accused of committing crimes against humanity and invited readers to > send in doctors addresses, license plate numbers and even the names of their > children. > > Last year, the dozen anti-abortion activists argued the posters and Web site were > free speech protected under the First Amendment. Critics called it a hit list. > > The jury was told by U.S. District Judge Robert Jones to consider the history of > violence in the anti-abortion movement, including three doctors killed after their > names appeared on the lists. > > One was Dr. Barnett Slepian, who was gunned down by a sniper in October 1998 at > his home near Buffalo, N.Y. Slepians name was crossed out on The Nuremberg > Files Web site later that day. > > In 1995, Planned Parenthood and four doctors sued the anti-abortion activists under > federal racketeering statutes and the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances > Act, which makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors and their > patients. > > Jones told the jury the Wanted-style posters and Web site were not free speech if > a reasonable person could perceive them as threats. > > But a number of legal experts have criticized the February 1999 jury verdict and > those instructions, saying a threat must be explicit. > > If youre looking for a case likely to go to the Supreme Court, this is one, said Lee > Tornquist, a law professor who specializes in the First Amendment at Willamette > University in Salem, Ore. > > Others consider the jury decision sound. > > Margie Kelly, spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in > New York, said Jones correctly told the jury to weigh any threat in context. > > This is a case that is built on history, Kelly said. You have had years of arson, > shootings, death threats. How can that context be considered anything but a threat? > > The Georgia computer programmer who ran the Nuremberg Files was not a > defendant in the lawsuit. After the verdict, his Internet provider pulled the plug on > the site. > > Among the anti-abortion activists appealing the ruling is Michael Bray of Bowie, > Md., author of a book that justifies killing doctors to stop abortions. Bray served > time in federal prison from 1985 to 1989 for his role in arson attacks and bombings > of seven clinics. > >

1 0

Abortion Assasination Politics likely going to Supremes
by A. Melon 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

> > So when is APster coming out, which lets > you trade lists of deserving people? > > > > Tuesday September 12 5:11 AM ET > Abortion Web Site Verdict Appealed > > By WILLIAM McCALL, Associated Press Writer > > PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Anti-abortion activists are > asking a federal appeals court to overturn a $109 million > verdict by a jury that decided a Web site and posters listing > the names of abortion doctors and clinics were threats that > went beyond free speech. > > The case is widely seen as a test of a Supreme Court ruling that defined a threat as > explicit language likely to cause imminent lawless action - and a measure of how > far anti-abortion activists can go in harrying doctors and clinics. > > Oral arguments in the appeal are scheduled Tuesday before a panel of the 9th U.S. > Circuit Court of Appeals. > > At issue is a Web site called The Nuremberg Files that listed hundreds of abortion > doctors accused of committing crimes against humanity and invited readers to > send in doctors addresses, license plate numbers and even the names of their > children. > > Last year, the dozen anti-abortion activists argued the posters and Web site were > free speech protected under the First Amendment. Critics called it a hit list. > > The jury was told by U.S. District Judge Robert Jones to consider the history of > violence in the anti-abortion movement, including three doctors killed after their > names appeared on the lists. > > One was Dr. Barnett Slepian, who was gunned down by a sniper in October 1998 at > his home near Buffalo, N.Y. Slepians name was crossed out on The Nuremberg > Files Web site later that day. > > In 1995, Planned Parenthood and four doctors sued the anti-abortion activists under > federal racketeering statutes and the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances > Act, which makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors and their > patients. > > Jones told the jury the Wanted-style posters and Web site were not free speech if > a reasonable person could perceive them as threats. > > But a number of legal experts have criticized the February 1999 jury verdict and > those instructions, saying a threat must be explicit. > > If youre looking for a case likely to go to the Supreme Court, this is one, said Lee > Tornquist, a law professor who specializes in the First Amendment at Willamette > University in Salem, Ore. > > Others consider the jury decision sound. > > Margie Kelly, spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in > New York, said Jones correctly told the jury to weigh any threat in context. > > This is a case that is built on history, Kelly said. You have had years of arson, > shootings, death threats. How can that context be considered anything but a threat? > > The Georgia computer programmer who ran the Nuremberg Files was not a > defendant in the lawsuit. After the verdict, his Internet provider pulled the plug on > the site. > > Among the anti-abortion activists appealing the ruling is Michael Bray of Bowie, > Md., author of a book that justifies killing doctors to stop abortions. Bray served > time in federal prison from 1985 to 1989 for his role in arson attacks and bombings > of seven clinics. > >

1 0

Abortion Assasination Politics likely going to Supremes
by A. Melon 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

> > So when is APster coming out, which lets > you trade lists of deserving people? > > > > Tuesday September 12 5:11 AM ET > Abortion Web Site Verdict Appealed > > By WILLIAM McCALL, Associated Press Writer > > PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Anti-abortion activists are > asking a federal appeals court to overturn a $109 million > verdict by a jury that decided a Web site and posters listing > the names of abortion doctors and clinics were threats that > went beyond free speech. > > The case is widely seen as a test of a Supreme Court ruling that defined a threat as > explicit language likely to cause imminent lawless action - and a measure of how > far anti-abortion activists can go in harrying doctors and clinics. > > Oral arguments in the appeal are scheduled Tuesday before a panel of the 9th U.S. > Circuit Court of Appeals. > > At issue is a Web site called The Nuremberg Files that listed hundreds of abortion > doctors accused of committing crimes against humanity and invited readers to > send in doctors addresses, license plate numbers and even the names of their > children. > > Last year, the dozen anti-abortion activists argued the posters and Web site were > free speech protected under the First Amendment. Critics called it a hit list. > > The jury was told by U.S. District Judge Robert Jones to consider the history of > violence in the anti-abortion movement, including three doctors killed after their > names appeared on the lists. > > One was Dr. Barnett Slepian, who was gunned down by a sniper in October 1998 at > his home near Buffalo, N.Y. Slepians name was crossed out on The Nuremberg > Files Web site later that day. > > In 1995, Planned Parenthood and four doctors sued the anti-abortion activists under > federal racketeering statutes and the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances > Act, which makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors and their > patients. > > Jones told the jury the Wanted-style posters and Web site were not free speech if > a reasonable person could perceive them as threats. > > But a number of legal experts have criticized the February 1999 jury verdict and > those instructions, saying a threat must be explicit. > > If youre looking for a case likely to go to the Supreme Court, this is one, said Lee > Tornquist, a law professor who specializes in the First Amendment at Willamette > University in Salem, Ore. > > Others consider the jury decision sound. > > Margie Kelly, spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in > New York, said Jones correctly told the jury to weigh any threat in context. > > This is a case that is built on history, Kelly said. You have had years of arson, > shootings, death threats. How can that context be considered anything but a threat? > > The Georgia computer programmer who ran the Nuremberg Files was not a > defendant in the lawsuit. After the verdict, his Internet provider pulled the plug on > the site. > > Among the anti-abortion activists appealing the ruling is Michael Bray of Bowie, > Md., author of a book that justifies killing doctors to stop abortions. Bray served > time in federal prison from 1985 to 1989 for his role in arson attacks and bombings > of seven clinics. > >

1 0

Abortion Assasination Politics likely going to Supremes
by A. Melon 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

> > So when is APster coming out, which lets > you trade lists of deserving people? > > > > Tuesday September 12 5:11 AM ET > Abortion Web Site Verdict Appealed > > By WILLIAM McCALL, Associated Press Writer > > PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Anti-abortion activists are > asking a federal appeals court to overturn a $109 million > verdict by a jury that decided a Web site and posters listing > the names of abortion doctors and clinics were threats that > went beyond free speech. > > The case is widely seen as a test of a Supreme Court ruling that defined a threat as > explicit language likely to cause imminent lawless action - and a measure of how > far anti-abortion activists can go in harrying doctors and clinics. > > Oral arguments in the appeal are scheduled Tuesday before a panel of the 9th U.S. > Circuit Court of Appeals. > > At issue is a Web site called The Nuremberg Files that listed hundreds of abortion > doctors accused of committing crimes against humanity and invited readers to > send in doctors addresses, license plate numbers and even the names of their > children. > > Last year, the dozen anti-abortion activists argued the posters and Web site were > free speech protected under the First Amendment. Critics called it a hit list. > > The jury was told by U.S. District Judge Robert Jones to consider the history of > violence in the anti-abortion movement, including three doctors killed after their > names appeared on the lists. > > One was Dr. Barnett Slepian, who was gunned down by a sniper in October 1998 at > his home near Buffalo, N.Y. Slepians name was crossed out on The Nuremberg > Files Web site later that day. > > In 1995, Planned Parenthood and four doctors sued the anti-abortion activists under > federal racketeering statutes and the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances > Act, which makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors and their > patients. > > Jones told the jury the Wanted-style posters and Web site were not free speech if > a reasonable person could perceive them as threats. > > But a number of legal experts have criticized the February 1999 jury verdict and > those instructions, saying a threat must be explicit. > > If youre looking for a case likely to go to the Supreme Court, this is one, said Lee > Tornquist, a law professor who specializes in the First Amendment at Willamette > University in Salem, Ore. > > Others consider the jury decision sound. > > Margie Kelly, spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in > New York, said Jones correctly told the jury to weigh any threat in context. > > This is a case that is built on history, Kelly said. You have had years of arson, > shootings, death threats. How can that context be considered anything but a threat? > > The Georgia computer programmer who ran the Nuremberg Files was not a > defendant in the lawsuit. After the verdict, his Internet provider pulled the plug on > the site. > > Among the anti-abortion activists appealing the ruling is Michael Bray of Bowie, > Md., author of a book that justifies killing doctors to stop abortions. Bray served > time in federal prison from 1985 to 1989 for his role in arson attacks and bombings > of seven clinics. > >

1 0