- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This time I have opted for a point by point. At 07:59 PM 2/5/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: ... >The kind of effects I'm thinking of are primarily the "military spending" >situations, where: > >1. Large numbers of potentially competent and useful people get put into >useless jobs: "Army, Navy, and Marines, and Air Force" spring to mind. >(Those people who still think military spending is really necessary >obviously haven't read AP.) This point I can not argue with, at least not directly. I do believe that the military way is wasteful of resources. However, this is one area that has actually benefitted the lower-income bracket in that it gives them "inexpensive" (off-chance of death) access to good training. >2. Large amounts of money are spent on military hardware, money which goes >to fund people who would otherwise develop useful products in the >non-government private sector. Three things that promote technological growth, expansion, war, threat of war. As for expansion. we really have no where else to go. As for war and threat of war, the computer was invented during a war, atomic energy was harnessed during war, the internet was created during threat of war. Many advancements, though not all, come to benefit society later. For that matter, steel was probably invented during a war as well, but I can't prove it. >3. The patent system decreases competition, increases profits and prices in >the marketplace due to government actions to allow and enforce monopolies. The patent system gives the innovator a reward for ingenuity, that person can decide what to do with the invention for a short period of time, after which it becomes available to all. (BTW I really think that computer code should be copyrighted and not patented, this allows others to reproduce the work independantly without repercussions, gives the necessary protection, makes it more obviously a form of speech.) >4. Government employees are paid more for their activities than they would >receive in the private sector. Ironically, in this case an >"apples-to-apples" comparison is misleading: It would be wrong to compare a >middle level government manager to his counterpart in private industry, >because to postulate there is such a government-job assumes that the >private-sector would do it post-AP. To this I can't argue, business is certainly leaner than government. Of course most desert plants are more robust than their resource-wasteful wetland counterpart. Where there is a near-bottomless supply of material, as in taxes, true streamlining really doesn't happen. Remember, the automobile really didn't become anywhere near fuel-efficient until after the energy crisis. > >>If you are right then governments would effectively lose the ability to tax, >>with or without representation, as most people do not agree on everything, >>like how their money is spent. However, even now, as pointed out in some >>recent posts, our tax money is used to foreward the goals of a few, these >>few want to eliminate guns, crypto, free speech, ect. Although we are in >>oppostition, our money is still used to foreward the goals. > >Yes, the main effect of AP is the elimination of the ability to tax. Now, >nothing would prevents individuals from continuing to fund an organization >called a "government" so that it could do those (non-coercive) things that >individual wants to see done. But I think it'll be amazing how many of >those heretofore-funded-by-govt projects (previously promoted as being >wanted by a large fraction of the citizenry) that evaporate when the public >is given the option to continue to fund them voluntarily. > > >Let's suppose, hypothetically and for vast simplification, the government >engages in two activities, "A" and "B." Further suppose government taxes >from two groups, let's call them "Alphas" and "Betas." It is traditionally >thought that Alphas like spending on "A", but hate spending on "B". >Likewise, it is figured that Betas like spending on "B", don't like spending >on "A". > >Post-AP, one might innocently suspect that maybe the "Alphas" would simply >fund only "A", while Betas" would donate money for activity "B". Assuming >the amount of funding for those activities was equal, you might think that >things could go on as they already do. But no. The reality is that >"Alphas" merely like spending on "A" _more_ than they do "B", and they will >tolerate their own money being used for both only because the "Betas" are >similarly forced. Add volunteerism to the whole mix, and not only would >these two groups only fund just what they really wanted, they would soon >discover they don't even want the level of spending they previously argued >for, pre-AP. As it is, the "A" group, that's not us, is being promoted with virtually all of the capitol, the "B" group, us, is being attacked in policy and attempts are being made to keep us from getting any bigger. ...

1 0

More on spectrum allocation
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm not sure how much our emphasis on individuals will go along with Phil Agre's (and CPSR's, of which he's a prominent member) emphasis on communities. -Allen From: IN%"rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu" 30-APR-1996 01:47:55.85 From: Phil Agre <pagre(a)weber.ucsd.edu> [The Apple proposal to the FCC is an important initiative for community networking, and may set a precedent for much more dramatic restructuring of telecommunications infrastructure in the future.] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help(a)weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 16:24:44 -0400 From: Heather Boyles <heather(a)farnet.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <cni-announce(a)cni.org> Subject: FARNET's Washington Update FARNET's Washington Update --- April 26, 1996 IN THIS ISSUE: o 1996 Appropriations stalemate finally ends while FY97 appropriations round heats up o FCC proposes free spectrum for community networking ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1996 APPROPRIATIONS STALEMATE FINALLY ENDS WHILE FY97 APPROPRIATIONS ROUND HEATS UP After months of negotiations and two partial government shutdowns, the President and the Republican Congress finally came to agreement this week on an omnibus spending bill for the remaining five months of FY96. The bill includes appropriations for the NSF and Commerce among several other agencies. At the same time, authorization and appropriations bills are being worked through committees in the House for FY97 which begins on Oct. 1. The final FY96 budget for NSF came to $3.22B --- $40M above what the House and Senate had previously agreed upon this year. However, this week also saw the House Science Committee authorize NSF spending for FY97 at only $3.25B, a $75M cut from NSF's $3.325 request, which would give NSF less than a 1% raise over FY96. NSF has generally faired well amidst Republican (specifically House Science Committee Chair Robert Walker (PA)) efforts to cut science spending for all but what they define as "basic science." Democrats protested that the omnibus science authorization bill passed out of the committee this week was done too hastily, bypassing subcommittees for a one-day full committee session. Ranking Science Committee member George Brown (D-CA) complained that, among other things, "The Republican bill would eliminate the Social Science directorate....[and make] arbitrary personnel cuts at the National Science Foundation." The Commerce Department's TIIAP (Information Infrastructure Grants) program scraped by with an (anticipated) $21.5M for FY96. FCC PROPOSES FREE SPECTRUM FOR COMMUNITY NETWORKING Apple's NII Band petition which was filed almost a year ago at the FCC will finally see some action there. The FCC today released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that proposes to make 350 megahertz of spectrum available for use by unlicensed equipment termed "NII/SUPERNet" devices. The Commission voted 4-0 to release the proposal. The proposal comes after Apple Computer petitioned the FCC last year to create a "NII Band" that would permit high-speed data communications available to anyone without licensing or air-time charges. The FCC's NPRM would make spectrum from 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.725-5.875 GHz available to devices that would fall under Part 15 of FCC rules, mandating only minimum technical standards and a basic "listen-before-talk" protocol standard. The FCC would also place power and out-of-band emissions limits on the devices, thus allowing only short-range (probably indoor or within campus) networking. The Apple petition last year advocated allowing users to use the devices for long-range (community-based with particularly emphasis on rural areas) communications. A rival group called the WINForum (made up of a number of telecommunications companies) balked at the idea of long-range use of the spectrum (which might cut into their businesses). Apple's long-range proposal may not be dead yet though. Commissioner Ness, in a separate statement on the NPRM, said she was "intrigued by the Apple long-haul proposal, which contemplates low-cost broadband links from homes to schools and libraries," but pointed to a number of questions that would need to be resolved before the Commission could proceed with such a proposal. The FCC clearly sees this proposal as an effort to help fulfill the President's promise to connect every school in the country to the "information superhighway." The NII/SUPERNet proposal is aimed at helping schools and other institutions do that without having to go to the expense of wiring entire buildings. Furthermore, the proposal may help take the wind out of the sails of those who have recently been pressuring the FCC to include inside wiring of schools in the universal service mechanism for schools and libraries - the Snowe-Rockefeller-Kerry provisions from the new telecom law. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Written from FARNET's Washington office, "FARNET's Washington Update" is a service to FARNET members and other interested subscribers. We gratefully acknowledge EDUCOM's NTTF and the Coalition for Networked Information for additional support. If you would like more information about the Update or would like to offer comments or suggestions, please contact Heather Boyles at heather(a)farnet.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Heather Boyles Director, Policy and Special Projects phone: (202) 331-5342 FARNET, Inc. fax: (202) 872-4318 1112 16th Street, NW Suite 600 email: heather(a)farnet.org Washington, DC 20036 web: http://www.farnet.org -- <HTML><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/~mech/"> Stanton McCandlish </A><HR><A HREF="mailto:mech@eff.org"> mech(a)eff.org </A><P><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/"> Electronic Frontier Foundation </A><P> Online Activist </HTML>

1 0

More on Internet connections
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu" 6-MAY-1996 01:36:44.84 From: Phil Agre <pagre(a)weber.ucsd.edu> Subject: Options for Internet and Broadband Access =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help(a)weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 10:05:08 EST From: Tim Leshan <LESHAN(a)ksgrsch.harvard.edu> To: IIPLIST(a)ksgrsch.harvard.edu Subject: Announcement and Call for Participation Freedom Forum Harvard Information Infrastructure Project National Economic Council U.S. Department of Energy "THE FIRST 100 FEET" OPTIONS FOR INTERNET AND BROADBAND ACCESS October 29-30, 1996 The Freedom Forum Arlington, Virginia Announcement and Call for Participation This conference looks at options for Internet and broadband access from the perspective of home owners, apartment complexes, and small businesses. It will evaluate opportunities and obstacles for "bottom-up" infrastructure development and the implications for traditional and alternative providers at the neighborhood, regional, and national levels. We are seeking original analysis, position papers, and background material for use in the conference program, on the project website, and in a book to be published in early 1997. The conference challenges business and policymakers to rethink fundamental issues in telecommunications policy by recasting the "problem of the last 100 feet" as "opportunities for the first 100 feet." This paradigm shift suggests consumer/property owner investment as an answer to the dilemma of whether there should be one or two wires into the home. The conference will survey alternative options for local connection to the Internet from the perspective of homeowners with high-end needs for data communications, apartment owners, small businesses, and others with an interest in investing in end-user equipment and real estate. It will consider prospects for broadly distributed infrastructure investment and potential roles for utility companies, special assessment districts, municipalities, PCS providers, CAPs, IXCs, LMDS operators, and Internet access providers, as well as telcos and cable companies. It will consider strategies and policies for local interconnection and interoperability among Internet access providers. The conference will investigate constraints on and incentives for user infrastructure investment at federal, state, and local levels; whether and how trenching, conduit, and right- of-ways should be unbundled to promote consumer/property owner investment and competition among heterogeneous providers; and the need for and feasibility of interconnection at third-party or publicly maintained neighborhood access points. It will look at synergy with other policy goals and economic interests, such as intelligent transportation systems (ITS) and energy demand management. Finally, in assessing user investment as a driver for two-way broadband, it asks how scenarios for Internet access will affect broadband scenarios by stimulating demand for high-bandwidth connectivity. Rationale The growth of the Internet has been propelled in significant part by user investments in infrastructure: computers, internal wiring, and the connection (dial-up line, leased line, microwave link) to the Internet service provider. This "bottom-up" investment minimizes the investment burden facing service providers, since customers share the cost of the infrastructure and providers have no obligation to develop the infrastructure out to all potential users. Barriers to entry for service providers are low, and users retain flexibility in choosing among providers. The rapidly growing mass of Internet users, applications, and resources is now shaping demand for underlying infrastructure, so that plans for new infrastructure are driven increasingly by data rather than voice and video. There are opportunities to attract new customers instead of competing head- on for old ones. Unlike voice and video, there are incremental upgrade paths for data users and demand for upgraded access is readily stimulated by experience. Higher bandwidth connections are desired by a wide spectrum of users, from those who work at home to recreational users of the World Wide Web. The value of continuous, rather than dial-up connection to the Internet, is less widely appreciated because it is a qualitative improvement. Continuous connectivity (which can be provided by unswitched technologies) obviates tying up a telephone line, enables instant delivery of email and other time-sensitive information, and allows small businesses to advertise and publish directly to the net. Most importantly, it can enable real-time energy management with attendant cost savings that can support major infrastructure investment, which the advent of residential "wheeling" may induce consumers to make on their own. A personal computer or an inexpensive router could serve as a gateway extending Internet functions to other computers in the home, manage utility demand, operate security systems, and control any lights, sound equipment, and other household appliances. As telecommunications and electric utilities are deregulated, investment decisions will devolve into the hands of consumers, where they can be made with greater knowledge of particular benefits and tradeoffs. At the same time, new technologies, such as wireless and data transmission over power lines, will increase consumer options. There may be a variety of options for configuring "the last mile," with different balances between user-provided and centrally provided facilities. Homeowners and small businesses may have opportunities to connect to different suppliers at the curb, on the roof, on the side of the house, or somewhere in between. The early government role and subsequent commercial practices have facilitated interconnection of Internet service providers, but the limited choices at the local level -- the "last mile" as well as the "last 100 feet" -- may make interconnection an issue. At present, many local Internet access providers do not interconnect directly and traffic is sometimes routed to one of the few national exchange points hundreds of miles away. Opportunities for interconnection, along with policies on access, may determine whether intermediary transport providers, such as utility companies, emerge to link homeowner facilities at the curb with high-bandwidth Internet service providers. This analysis of "the first hundred feet" recognizes that need and demand will naturally vary greatly from home to home and from neighborhood to neighborhood. Much depends on whether there are business or telecommuting needs that can be met by individual investments in upgraded access. While this analysis looks to the Internet, it raises the issue of how the bottom-up model will affect the traditional model of a centrally provided universal service. Given basic technology that is non- proprietary and virtually commoditized, some argue that Internet service is becoming the common denominator platform on which all other services can be carried. The absence of service class priority has hampered use of real-time voice and video on the Internet, but this will soon change with the implementation of protocols that allow bandwidth reservation and packet-level service priority (RSVP and IPv6). **** We encourage submission of position papers as well independent analysis. It is expected that papers will be posted for review and revised promptly after the conference for non-exclusive publication. (The book will be part of the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project series published by MIT Press.) To ensure consideration for the program, please submit abstracts or outlines by June 20, 1996. Please direct submissions and requests for future mailings to: Tim Leshan Coordinator, Information Infrastructure Project Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 617-496-1389; Fax: 617-495-5776 leshan(a)ksgrsch.harvard.edu For additional information and updates see http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/first.html Tim Leshan IIP Project Coordinator http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/

1 0

New Internet peer-reviewed journal released
by rishab＠dxm.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

New Internet Journal Released Paris, France, 1996 May 6: Coinciding with the opening of the International World Wide Web Conference, a new journal dedicated to the Internet was released today by Munksgaard International Publishers. The journal is called "First Monday" and it is a peer-reviewed, electronic journal dedicated to the Internet, and only available on the Internet. It is the first electronic journal from Munksgaard, publishers of over seventy scientific journals in dentistry, medicine, and other fields. "First Monday" will appear on the first Monday of each month. Each issue will contain five to six full-length articles, plus regular features such as interviews and reviews. The inaugural May issue contains articles by notable specialists such as David Johnson and David Post, co-directors of the Cyberspace Law Institute, and John Seely Brown, vice-president and chief scientist of Xerox Corporation and director of Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. The journal is available at http://www.firstmonday.dk The editorial team of "First Monday" is widely experienced in computing, telecommunications, and the Internet. Chief and Managing Editor is Edward J. Valauskas, author and editor of several widely recognized books on computing and the Internet, including "Internet Troubleshooter" and "Internet Initiative." He is joined by Esther Dyson as Consulting Editor and Rishab Aiyer Ghosh as Inter-national Editor. Esther Dyson is president of EDventure Holdings in New York City and chairperson of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Rishab Ghosh, based in New Delhi, is editor and publisher of the Indian Techonomist, a newsletter on India's information industry. The editorial board of "First Monday" includes Vinton G. Cerf, founding President of the Internet Society and is currently Senior Vice-President at MCI; Ed Krol of the University of Illinois, author of several books including the highly popular "The Whole Internet User's Guide & Catalog"; Bonnie Nardi of Apple Computer, author of the book "A Small Matter of Programming" and editor of "Context and Consciousness"; Rich Wiggins of Michigan State University, author of "The Internet for Everyone"; Tony Durham, Multimedia Editor of the Times Higher Education Supplement in London and a member of the team which has developed THESIS, the newspaper's Internet service; Ian Peter, consultant in information technology, media and communications policy, based in Australia; and Robert Hettinga, a digital commerce consultant in Boston. "First Monday" publishes articles on the Internet and the Global Information Infrastructure. It follows the political and regulatory regimes affecting the Internet, and examines economic, technical and social aspects of the use of the Internet on a global scale. There will also be reports on the use of the Internet in specific communities, the development of Internet software and hardware, and the content of the Internet. "First Monday" was released today on diskette, distributed at the International World Wide Web Conference in Paris, and on the First Monday Internet server at http://www.firstmonday.dk. In the future it will appear in three formats: as an electronic mail posting to subscribers; on the World Wide Web; and as an annual CD-ROM archiving all articles that have appeared in "First Monday." Munksgaard was founded in 1917. Over the years Munksgaard has expanded to become a publishing house that is internationally recognized for its scientific journals devoted to servicing the international scientific and scholarly communities. Editorial Office: Editor-in-Chief: Edward J. Valauskas (valauskas(a)firstmonday.dk) First Monday is published monthly by: Munksgaard International Publishers Nxrre Sxgade 35, P.O. Box 2148 DK- 1016 Copenhagen K Denmark e-mail: publishers(a)firstmonday.dk

1 0

Re: PGP, Inc.
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"raph(a)cs.berkeley.edu" "Raph Levien" 5-MAY-1996 13:47:16.83 > "Observers say SMIME's capabilities will let it replace software > based on the PGP code, which is widely used. Unlike SMIME, which uses > a structured certificate heirarchy, PGP relies on pre-certification > of clients and servers for authentication, a limitation SMIME doesn't > face." Can one use a web-of-trust for S/MIME, for the cases when a structured hierarchy is exactly the _wrong_ thing to use? I'd think so, but I don't know anything about it. > Thus, it's a reasonable guess that almost all S/MIME messages that >pass through the wires will offer "virtually no protection," to quote a >phrase from a paper co-authored by the principal designer of S/MIME's >encryption algorithms >(http://www.bsa.org/policy/encryption/cryptographers.html) A public breaking of some S/MIME messages would work to discourage this unsafe mechanism. One wonders if PGP Inc. could sponsor some variety of contest? -Allen

2 1

Georgia Internet
by reagle＠rpcp.mit.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

X-within-URL: http://www.clark.net/pub/rothman/ga.htm [IMAGE] Needed: a first-rate lawyer who'll fight the Internet Police law in court. Click below on the "How We Can Educate" link for more info on constructive actions. Return to NetWorld! Book | Other Musing on Intellectual Property How We Can Educate Pols, Olympic Boosters and Other Georgians | Links of Interest Contest: Write the Best "Night the Lights Went Out in Georgia" Parody The Internet Police Law: The Day the Sites Went Out in Georgia? David H. Rothman | rothman(a)clark.net Linking your Web site to anyone else's without permission? Be glad you're not in Georgia--or be worried if you are. Gov. Zell Miller on the morning of April 18 signed into a law a piece of imbecility that the Marietta Daily Journal had dubbed the Internet Police bill. House Bill 1630 may prevent Webfolk from linking from their homepages against the wishes of the linkees--at least if the other guys' names or logos are used. Is 1630 a belated April Fool's joke? I've heard of Net-dumb pols, but Georgia has out-Exoned Exon--and maybe even out-Doled Dole. Shari Steele, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, wrote Gov. Miller before the signing: "The language of the bill would make it illegal to create a button on our web site with Wired's 'trade name' or 'logo' without first obtaining 'permission or authorization' from Wired magazine." Whoops: oh, please, Wired--don't sue me. Actually that would be the state's job; you see, the law would let Georgia throw your posterior in jail for up to a year. Live out of state? As of this writing it was unclear how much of a danger extradition would pose--maybe none, given the lunacy of the law. Then again, there are rumors that California and other states may replicate Georgia's stupidity. The morning the Guv signed the bill, I dropped by the State of Georgia Home Page. Under "Search Engines and other Web Services" I saw a link to Yahoo. I'm glad the Georgia folks can use Yahoo from down there, rather than having to start their own. Imagine Yahoo needing permission for every link with a trademarked name. And what about a page displaying the results of a Lycos search? Now that would be fun. Can you imagine the Lycos computer e-mailing every site brought up--asking permission--before it listed Web addresses? I visited Zell Miller's Web area. Without the least irony, a headline read: "Governor Miller's Technology Initiatives Thrive." The page bragged about computers in classrooms. Just don't let the little brats grow up to start Yahoo Kudzu. According to the EFF, the same law might make it illegal even to mention a company's name on the Web without permission. True? Just imagine what this could mean to an online newspaper reviewing another publication's Web site. Already a software company outside Georgia has used existing intellectual property law to bully a reviewer. I've said it once, and I'll say it again: The media are damned fools if they support intellectual property zealotry of the kind we've seen out of Capitol Hill recently. Goodbye, First Amendment. These are national issues, alas, not just problems with the Georgia drinking water. If nothing else, I suspect that the good folks at the AT&T Business Network--the ones who run LeadStory.com, a collection of the day's hottest stories from online newspapers--may have some thoughts on the Georgia bill. To add to the fun, when I dropped by Cox Newspapers' big Web site for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, I saw a "Surf Less. Know More" ad from LeadStory.com. At the Atlanta site's Net News I just happened to read a report on a trademark infringement suit that BellSouth had filed against the an Internet directory called the Real InterNet Pages. Hmmm. Any connections here with the new law? And simply because BellSouth's print directories use the trademarked phrase "The Real Yellow Pages," is the company entitled to www.realpages.com--the smaller company's existing Web address? The Real InterNet Pages, after all, isn't saying, "www.realyellowpages.com." In any event one would hardly confuse the Real InterNet Pages with BellSouth; the pigmy tells visitors to its home page: "Not Affiliated, Associated or Connected with BellSouth or any BellSouth-related company." Coincidentally or not, the Internet Police bill was introduced by Don Parsons, a Net-innocent employee of BellSouth. According to the Conservative Policy Caucus in the Georgia House: "During floor debate, Rep. Parsons could not explain the concept of a link on a home page. It was clear to many that he had no idea of what the Internet was all about. Supposedly, his desire was to prevent 'misrepresentation' on the Internet. Parsons admitted that he had never been on the Internet, except looking over a colleague's shoulder at work." One can understand, then, why many Netfolks wonder if Parsons' employer has encouraged him to squelch competition at a time when the Baby Bells envision a Web full of Yellow Pages. Bell South vehemently denies a connection between it and the Parsons bill. Whatever the case, however, the legislation would help the Parsons' employer. Oh, I've read Parsons' stated reasons for his law. But in guarding against fraud and protecting intellectual property rights, do we really want to toss out the First Amendment? Jeff Kuester, a Net-hip attorney of intellectual property in Atlanta, says: "We should certainly strive for effective protection of intellectual property on the Web, but not by destroying this crucial part of the information superhighway. These links let people move seamlessly from Web site to Web site. They're as crucial to the Web as bridges are to our nation's system of concrete-and-asphalt roads. If nothing else, we should avoid denying Netizens the free speech guaranteed outside cyberspace." While Parsons has denied that his law would make unauthorized links illegal, its wording would suggest otherwise. Criticizing Parsons' work, the Conservative Policy Caucus quotes the essence of HB1630 as it could affect links, and I'll pass on a rough extract with some tweaks of my own for the sake of clarity and precision: "It shall be unlawful for any person...knowingly to transmit any data through a computer network...if such data uses any individual name, trade name, registered trademark, logo, legal or official seal or copyrighted symbol to falsely state or imply that such person...has permission or is legally authorized to use such trade name, registered trademark..." Granted, some might say that you could assume implied consent if any material is up on an open medium like the Web and you want to link to it with appropriate identification by name. But the law is still a big threat, given the new legal liabilities it creates for journalists, publishers, activists and many others. Suppose your story online won't read like a puff piece. Will you need your target's goodwill before you can link to the site of a polluter or other recipient of negative publicity? And what about linking privately? Suppose you're on a local area network in the newsroom and want to share information with colleagues by way of an internal Web page. Will you require at least your target's tacit consent before you can do so? Exactly what does HB1630 mean by "a computer network," just the external variety? Not in my extract above was this additional language: "for the purpose of setting up, maintaining, operating, or exchanging data with an electronic mailbox, home page, or any other electronic information storage bank or point of access to electronic information." Sounds as if the Internet Police law won't delight the Society for Professional Journalists, Investigative Reporters and Editors or the Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press. Bill 1630 also contains other goodies, according to the valuable April 17 issue of EFFector Online and the EFF's Steele. For example, Ms. Steele says the bill could criminalize the use of pseudonyms; I'd suspect that's of interest to, say, American Online or to safety-minded parents who want their children to log on with fake names. Besides, just what's a "false" name? Ms. Steele writes of someone with the user name of "elvis" and says: "Even my own user ID, which is ssteele, does not clearly distinguish me from others with the last name of Steele and the first initial 'S.'" I myself am another good example of the identity issues that arise on a global computer network. My publisher insisted on calling my book NetWorld!, and it was logical for me to set up a NetWorld! Web site but guess what? If you do an Alta Vista search, you'll also find thousands of "NetWorld" mentions from unrelated "NetWorld" sites and the rest of the Web. Among the others are Peter's Networld from Peter Heneback, a Swedish foreign exchange student at West Anchorage High School in Alaska; NETWorld Market Place; NetWorld Publishing; NetWorld Systems; Networld +Interop, which, yes, has been known to hold expos down in Atlanta; and NetWorld Limited, a Hong Kong consulting company. And I'm to worry about other "NetWorlds" and "Networlds" from Alaska to Atlanta and Asia? While trademark law has its place, we need to allow for reasonable interpretations. I asked Prima Publishing to consult an attorney before it used NetWorld! on pulped wood. No problem, I heard. But what happens to my book's online version if I'm in Georgia and trademark fanatics prevail in court? There and elsewhere, politicians keep babbling that they'll get government off our backs. What bilge. If Georgia politicans respect citizens' rights, why is the high-tech community talking of a lawsuit against the Internet Police law? Alas, the Georgia state legislature won't meet again until next year, but meanwhile Zell Miller might speak out against his baby before it frightens away millions of dollars of high-tech business. Perhaps he can at least promise to ask his attorney general not to enforce the Internet Police law. As long as the law is still alive, I myself will do everything I can to warn Netfolks that Georgia is a risky place for them to do business right now. Meanwhile, I suspect that the Internet Police law will be like Jim Exon's Communications Decency Act. Many people will just ignore it, furthering breaking down the respect of Generation Net for politicians and bureaucrats in general. Return to Top of Page [IMAGE] HOW TO PROTEST THE SILLINESS _______________________________________________________________ The Internet Police bill--effective July 1, 1996--passed at least partly because politicians kowtowed to Big Bucks. Tell them they were wrong, that the bill will cost Georgia, that it's about as good for the state as Sherman's March was, that you'll tell your high-tech employer to stay the hell out of Georgia to avoid net.stupid regulations, that you'll think twice about attending the Olympics or buying goods that carry the Olympic logo. Let Georgia pols know that most Web sites thrive because of the ease of linking, not in spite of it. Time Magazine has zillions of links all over the Net. And without bureaucratic intervention, Netfolks already enjoy a wealth of phone- and Net-directories such as Yahoo's. Tell the Georgians that the Internet Police bill is a creature of special interests such as phone companies and, yes, politicians trying to crimp uppity rivals, including those in the Conservative Caucus. Some establishmentarians hated the idea of the conservatives' using the official Georgia seal on their Web site. This issue transcends ideology--my own politics are progressive. Protesting, you should avoid obscenity. Be angry in a rational and responsible way. Don't justify the anti-Net stereotypes that technophobes love. Georgia contacts [IMAGE] Gov. Zell Miller. I'd include an email address for Gov. Miller, but I couldn't find one--maybe I'm looking in the wrong locations on the Web, or perhaps in the wrong universe. His office phone number is 404-656-1776. Fax: 404-656-5948. Snail: Governor Zell Miller, State Capitol, Atlanta, Georgia 30334. It's just as well, actually, that you not use electronic mail since I doubt that the governor's office is that Net Aware. Otherwise why the Exon would he have signed this turkey? [IMAGE] Conservative Policy Caucus of the Georgia House of Representatives. You can email Georgia Representative Mitchell Kaye, the Webmaster, at webmaster(a)gahouse.com. Click here for Kaye's report on Parsons and the anti-Net law. Arm the Caucus with letters it can use to fight this atrocity. What the Net needs now, says Representative Kaye, is a court injunction against enforcement of the law. Anyone know a first-rate lawyer willing to work pro bono and make a name for himself or herself? If so, e-mail or phone Mitchell Kaye (770-998-2399), the legislator who so far has spent the most time and energy fighting the Internet Police law. Perhaps this case could be a natural for a group such as the American Civil Liberties Union or the Interactive Services Assocation, whose members include American Online, CompuServe and Prodigy, among others. One legislator has talked of corrective legislation, but according to Kaye's current thinking, a court challenge at this point would be more effective, since other politicians could water down a bill. At any rate, a bill couldn't be formally introduced until January 1996; and, says, Kaye, a court case could be the best approach. Stay tuned. Foes of the law are still sorting out their options as far as the best way to proceed. [IMAGE] E-mail addresses of members of the Georgia House, via the Conservative Policy Caucus. Remember, some of the people listed may be supporters of the Police Bill. [IMAGE] Names, addresses, home, office, and FAX numbers of state legislators. Click here and scroll down the list for contact information for Georgia House Speaker Thomas B. Murphy. Do not harass him--it'll just backfire. If you can manage, try instead to educate him; see if you can't save your anger for posts on the Net. [IMAGE] Don Parsons' phone number (770-728-8506) and FAX number (770-528-5754) and other contact info. Again, please avoid harassment! But do give him a piece of your mind; ideally you can fax Parsons, then email a cc: to Rep. Mitchell Kaye (mkaye(a)gahouse.com) a vehement critic of the Net Police law. First, read Don Parsons' defense of his baby. Among other things he writes that "Internet users - consumers, children, business people, clergy, etc., - have a right to expect that the Internet pages they visit are what they are presented to be." My response? Word on the Net circulates pretty quickly about frauds, and existing laws cover many situations. New, Internet-specific laws--against fraud or copyright violations--need to be much better crafted than HB1630 was. Above all, they must be infinitely more respectful of the First Amendment. [IMAGE] Georgia Attorney General Michael Bowers. His phone number is 404-656-4585; his fax number, 404-657-8733; and his snail address is: Judicial Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30334. [IMAGE] State of Georgia Home Page. Poke around. Look for pressure points--people associated with tourism and other business. See below. [IMAGE] Georgia Department of Industry, Trade & Tourism, "Georgia's official state agency for developing new jobs and creating capital investment." Sign the guest book; register your company's lack of interest in relocating there while the Internet Police bill is in effect. Use the "Description of Business" field and ask that the Webmaster forward your opinion to policymakers. [IMAGE] Yahoo listings for 1996 Olympic Games. Use the "mailto's" (where you click to start writing a letter) and sign the guest books with protests against Georgia's medieval information policies. [IMAGE] 1996 Olympic Games Home Page. Give 'em a piece of your mind on the feedback page. [IMAGE] BellSouth's Olympic links. Yes, BellSouth is an official sponsor. So if the Olympic folks take awhile to get the point, you'll know why. Of course you might try complaining to BellSouth itself--the president is Carl E. Swearington, telephone 770-391-2424; fax, 770-399-6355. [IMAGE] Cable News Network (CNN), whose Web site will be directly affected by the imbecility out of the state legislature. The feedback address is cnn.feedback(a)cnn.com. Give 'em permission to use your name and address on the feedback page. Oh, and while you're at it, you might ask CNN to forward your sentiments to Scott Woelfel, editor in chief of CNN Interactive. Tell him it's ok to link to this page, and suggest that the video part of CNN just might want to warn the world about the Internet Police bill. [IMAGE] E-mail, fax and snail addresses and phone numbers for the Georgia media--including the Atlanta papers and the Associated Press down there. From the Conservative Caucus. [IMAGE] Georgia Media List from Harden Political InfoSystems. Newspapers, magazines and broadcasters. Looks extremely comprehensive. [IMAGE] Thinking Right, a reader comment area of the Atlanta Journal. Speak up! Let Atlanta know that Georgia's on your mind! The "Piney Pete Sez" column of April 20 says of the Internet Police bill: "What prompted this action was not widespread abuse. It was one little gadfly, Rep. Mitchell Kaye, who's been using the great seal of Georgia on his conservative Website. Needless to say, Kaye is a Republican and consequently shut out of any highway largess, concrete or electronic." Return to Top of Page [IMAGE] MORE LINKS _______________________________________________________________ [IMAGE] Full text of the Internet Police bill. [IMAGE] Electronic Frontier Foundation. [IMAGE] April 17 EFF newsletter with details on the Internet Police bill. [IMAGE] Bell South Denies Lobbying for the Police Law. Rep. Don Parsons, sponsor of House Bill 1630, works for BellSouth; but the company wrote attorney Jeff Kuester a letter saying Parsons does not serve as a lobbyist--and that the actual lobbyists were "totally unaware" of the company's suit against the Real InterNet Pages. The letter said, "Bell South did not draft, sponsor, promote or lobby for 1630. Bell South took no position on the legislation whatsoever other than, when it was brought to our attention, to recommend an exemption from liability for telephone companies and Internet access providers who provide transmission services for their customers." BellSouth did say that "it is probably probably overkill and unduly complicating to make the act of trademark infringement, misrepresentation and passing off on the Internet a crime under state law." The company also offered observations on the law's effects on links--thoughts with which the Electronic Frontier Foundation would undoubtedly disagree. [IMAGE] The Prize-winning Web Page of Jeff Kuester, the Net-hip intellectual property attorney mentioned earlier, who also has an engineering background and is active in groups such as IEEE. You can bet that like Kuester, scads of other Georgians love the Net and are just as surprised and disappointed by the Internet Police law as the rest of us were. He has a page with relevant links about the law. Kuester (kuester(a)kuesterlaw.com) is working to bring state pols up to speed on Net law and technology, and he would like to expand his efforts at the national level. Send him a note if you're interested in helping out. A good cause! Note, too, the existence of a Congressional Internet Caucus. Education of policymakers is the best protection against Net-stupid legislation like HB1630. Perhaps even Parsons will see the light someday. Meanwhile, if you want to check out some first-class resources on the Net and intellectual property law, drop on by Kuester's site! [IMAGE] The Real InterNet Pages, the Net directory that the $18-billion BellSouth conglomerate is suing for alleged trademark infringement. BellSouth holds a trademark on the phrase "The Real Yellow Pages," but does that automatically entitle the company to "realpages.com" on the Net? Read why a BellSouth triumph could hurt you. The boys at realpages.com have put together a nice Web page with a yellow background ("we don't think they own the color yellow either"). E-mail your support to Don Madey at dmadey(a)realpages.com. Any lawyers out there willing to do pro bono? Publicity from such a case could be an excellent career-enhancer. [IMAGE] c|net News Article on the Police Law. [IMAGE] Georgia Cyberphobes, the Augusta Chronicle's editorial against the Net police bill--written just before Gov. Miller signed it. The Chronicle didn't see the HR1630's trademark-related language as a threat but objected to the attack on online anonymity. It called for Miller to vero the bill. [IMAGE] Editor and Publisher. He explains how links help electronic newspapers. Note: The just-supplied link will soon disappear, but when that happens, you might be able to find the column in his archives. Return to Top of Page [IMAGE] YOUR OWN "NIGHT THE LIGHTS WENT OUT" PARODY? I'M LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT ONE _______________________________________________________________ Who can come up with the best "Night the Lights Went Out in Georgia" parody-in the spirit of this site? Give it a shot. May 18 is the contest deadline, and I may extend it if Netfolks are too angry to concentrate long enough come up with a quotable parody. No prizes, just some exquisite notoriety. Please do not enter, of course, if you mind having scads of other Web sites link to your words. -David H. Rothman, rothman(a)clark.net _______________________________________________________________ Top of Page | Return to NetWorld! [IMAGE] Linking Encouraged. No Permission Needed from Me, Especially if You're in Georgia! \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ | / / / / / / / / / / _______ ________ _____ _____ _____ /// \\\ ||| \\\ /// \\\ |||\\\///||| ||| ~~ ||| /// ||| ||| ||| \\// ||| ||| __ |||~~~\\\ |||~~~||| ||| ~~ ||| \\\ /// ||| \\\ ||| ||| ||| ||| ~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ / / / / / / / / / | \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ C y b e r s p a t i a l R e a l i t y A d v a n c e m e n t M o v e m e n t --****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION*** Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED. Please, report inappropriate use to abuse(a)anon.penet.fi For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to help(a)anon.penet.fi If you have any problems, address them to admin(a)anon.penet.fi

1 0

Re: Internet telephony report
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:58 PM 5/6/96 -0400, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > While they _probably_ aren't going to start trying to charge for >Internet phone service, the FCC still thinks it should be able to regulate >the Internet - with the egalitarian excuse of equal access as among the >reasons. Hmph... bureaucracy. Well, now we know where they are going to levy the taxes when most commerce goes on the net. They'll hit up the guys with lots of cable/fiber etc. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Bug in NOISE.SYS v0.5.5 w/fix...
by wlkngowl＠UNiX.asb.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There's a bug in the API in NOISE.SYS v0.5.5. I've uploaded a fix as noise056.zip to ftp.funet.fi, so keep an eye out for it. The fix is easy. In the file "multiplex.inc" you'll see the @ReturnOk LABEL where it restores the ds, si and bp registers... at the @ReturnErr hook it only fixes the ds and si registers. Add a "pop bp" appropriately and remake the file. Sorry for the inconvenience. --Rob

1 0

Re: misunderstandings of PICS
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:48 PM 5/6/96 -0700, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >please read the PICS proposal (sorry the >URL is not handy, could someone post it?) http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/PICS/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: CryptoAnarchy: What's wrong with this picture?
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jimbell(a)pacifier.com" "jim bell" 6-MAY-1996 19:08:19.78 >At 01:44 PM 5/6/96 EDT, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > >>On Sun, 28 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote: >> >>[...] >> >>>While strong cryptography is powerful, and secure communications >>>liberating, unplugging the phones would about cripple that 'weapon' for a >>>while. Any group rebelling based only on high technology communication is >>>an extremely vulnerable group, both to widespread denial of service, and >>>more specific 'surgical' attacks. (Motorola stock anyone?) >The attribution above is in error. I didn't type those lines above. Whoops. Sorry, I believe that was Black Unicorn. My apologies to both of you. -Allen

1 0