----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fight-Censorship Dispatch #13 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Second Great Net Panic ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- By Declan McCullagh / declan@well.com / Redistribute freely ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- In this dispatch: The Second Great Net Panic grips Washington, DC Bruce Taylor tries a "finger" gambit DFC online copyright action alert, press conference Deputy Atty General slams Net, calls for central control Al Gore decries "unwarranted censorship?" June 9, 1996 WASHINGTON, DC -- As a wet spring steams into a muggy summer, the Second Great Net Panic has gripped the nation's capital. It could be the humidity. The same waterlogged air that makes my keyboard stick about this time every year forces lobbyists and legislators indoors to catered receptions and air-conditioned hearing rooms where they catalog the dangers of the Net. Or perhaps election year politics lends this scaremongering rhetoric its rough, serrated edge. Whatever the cause, it's clear that last year's cyberporn scare -- centering around online smut and leading to the passage of the Communications Decency Act -- is dwarfed by this year's fevered attempts to control the Net. That is, you ain't seen nothin' yet. In the last two weeks: * The Federal Trade Commission held two days of hearings to decide how to regulate web sites that collect personal information about children. * Sen. Sam Nunn (D-GA) announced at a Senate investigations subcommittee hearing that his suspicions of evil cryptohackers lurking on the Net mean the CIA and NSA must be permitted to snoop domestically, a practice long prohibited by law. * The Clinton administration responded to Congressional attempts to liberalize export controls on strong encryption with a "Clipper III" white paper, and a blue-ribbon NRC report recommended only minor changes in U.S. crypto export policy. * The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings where witnesses from the Hollywood copyright lobby testified that copyright thieves plague the Net. * A House Judiciary subcommittee is planning a final markup of HR2441, a terribly restrictive online copyright bill similar to one the Senate is considering, this Wednesday. * The Defense Information Systems Agency released a report claiming that hackers tried to break into Pentagon systems 250,000 times in 1995. * The 1997 Defense Authorization Bill will give the White House six months to report on "the national policy on protecting the national information infrastructure from strategic attack." * At the first-ever "CyberCongress" hearing held by a House committee, representatives complained about being flamed through anonymous remailers and said there should be accountability online. * Today's Sunday Washington Post featured an article by Richard Leiby on the first page of the Outlook section bashing "self-indulgent dross" and "crap" on the Net: "I took out the Internet trash and found there wasn't much left." * Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), chair of Senate Judiciary, held a hearing on June 4 where family values activists testified in support of Hatch's bill that gives you 15 years for creating or viewing a GIF that "appears to be" or is said to be kiddie porn -- even if it's actually a morphed photo of an adult. * Journalist Lew Koch unearthed an alarmist speech by Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick slamming not just nonescrowed crypto but the "social problems" of the Net -- and calling for a new "Manhattan Project" and even a new Federal agency to start "devising and implementing solutions." That's the bad news, and the good news is far from reassuring. Some Congressperns are starting to learn about the Net and the Internet Caucus' membership is growing. The computer industry has begun to become more involved in the legislative process, but they're up against well-entrenched opposition. The EFF's Mike Godwin had it right when he wrote to me earlier today: "Every agency wants a bite of jurisdiction over the Internet." I'm not placing any bets on the eventual outcome of the Second Great Net Panic, especially when protect-our-children rhetoric comes laced with protect-our-country slogans. But I know the summer's starting and some of the keys on my workstation are starting to stick. Yesterday I spent a sweaty afternoon performing open-keyboard surgery to try and get my home row working again. So I'm not too optimistic... +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ BRUCE TAYLOR TRIES A "FINGER" GAMBIT +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ Bruce Taylor, the former Federal smut-buster and chief architect of the CDA, is at it again. This time the Brucester is weighing in on the New York CDA case with an expanded copy of the amicus brief he first filed in the Philly lawsuit in which I'm a plaintiff. When I spoke with him last Thursday, Taylor sketched out his latest argument in favor of the CDA -- that it's constitutional because the "finger" service can be modified to return info about whether someone's an adult or a child. "I just learned about 'finger' a few weeks ago," Taylor said. His brief reads: Though the testimony is disputed between the parties, there is evidence in the record to show that there ways to comply with the CDA that are presently available, other means that are possible and trivial to institute, and there will undoubtedly be more and easier ways to comply in the future. Potential mechanisms of compliance include... agreement on an -L18 or digital or access provider user or some other mechanism or combination of devices which allow content providers to identify adult visitors to their sites, pages, or GIFs and thereby exclude children (such as refinement of the PRESENT METHOD OF FINGERING to identify the name of a visitor so that the visitor's access provider or ISP releases the users age as well as his or her identity -- a fact no less anonymous), [Emphasis mine. --DBM] Of course, Taylor's suggestion of putting an "A" or "C" (adult or child) flag in the info returned by finger creates more problems than it solves. Most online services don't provide information about users via finger daemons. More to the point, such a proposal would let any unscrupulous net.lurker troll for "C" flags -- not exactly the best way to protect children! +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ DIGITAL FUTURE COALITION ACTION ALERT, PRESS CONFERENCE +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ In response to a planned House subcommittee markup of its ill-bred copyright legislation this Wednesday, the Digital Future Coalition is planning a press conference at 9:30 am this Tuesday, June 11, at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. Presenters at the press conference include the Consumer Federation of America, the National Education Association, the American Committee for Interoperable Systems (including Sun Microsystems and America Online), and the Home Recording Rights Coalition. Other members of the DFC include the American Library Association, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, People for the American Way, and the Electronic Privacy Information Center. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- DIGITAL FUTURE COALITION ACTION ALERT From dfc@alawash.org Imminent Congressional action on NII copyright bill threatens consumers, students, and other Internet users Your immediate contacts with key House Judiciary Subcommittee Members critical! The House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property will meet in the next few days to vote on H.R. 2441, the NII Copyright Protection Act. Call subcommittee members who represent you or to your institution NOW and tell them that this badly imbalanced bill shouldn't be voted on unless and until all of the following problems are addressed. If passed in its current form, H.R. 2441 would: * Make it a crime to manufacture the next generation of VCRs, personal computers and other digital devices needed for recreational and educational use by adding a sweeping and overbroad new Section 1201 to the Copyright Act; * Make simply browsing the Internet a violation of the law without a license from copyright owners; * Prevent teachers from using computers to their full potential in "distance education" efforts that bring electronic classrooms to kids, especially in rural communities and for the disabled; * Subject computer system operators -- including online services and networks at schools and libraries -- to potentially crippling liability for the copyright violations of their users. Please immediately fax a letter to -- AND CALL -- all members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property who represent you or an institution with which you are affiliated. These contacts must be made NO LATER THAN Tuesday, June 11 and preferably sooner. Address contacts to the Congressperson, but direct your letter or call to the appropriate staffer. [URL at the end. -DBM] +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ DEPUTY ATTY GENERAL SLAMS NET, CALLS FOR CENTRAL CONTROL +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ It's scaremongering at its finest. That's all I can think after I read the text of a speech Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick gave earlier this year at the Air Force Academy. Gorelick starts with the time-honored horror gambit of terrorists, child pornographers, organized crime groups, and hackers -- but then moves on to rail against the social problems she's found on the Net. "Email flames" and "faceless" chat rooms are threats to family values, she claims. Then she calls for a centralized government agency to deal with the problem of the Internet. Clearly, she says, we need a "Manhattan Project" to fight cybernastiness and net.terrorists: We clearly need one focal point in the government to take the lead in addressing this issue comprehensively -- to develop national policy, coordinate the necessary other agencies, and with industry on developing solutions. We need the equivalent of the "Manhattan Project" to address the technological issues and to help us harden our infrastructures against attack. It might be that we can just designate an existing agency to take the lead. Or we may need a new agency or some interagency body to perform the task... Jeanne Devoto (jdevoto@well.com) writes: [It's an] attempt to conflate the threat of computer intrusion with the "threat" of open access to a mass medium. If such a conflation is widely successful, we could see "We must pass this measure to license Internet users/ban indecent language/impose FCC regulation on ISPs - in order to combat the threat of computer crime!" Computers are the equivalent of nuclear weapons? Maybe treating software as a munition makes sense after all. +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ AL GORE DECRIES "UNWARRANTED CENSORSHIP?" +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ Al Gore sure knows how to play to an audience -- even if it's a bunch of computer geeks who don't like how the White House has embraced and defended the Communications Decency Act. During his commencement address at MIT on June 7, Gore said: But let me also state my clear and unequivocal view that a fear of chaos cannot justify unwarranted censorship of free speech, whether that speech occurs in newspapers, on the broadcast airwaves -- or over the Internet. Our best reaction to the speech we loathe is to speak out, to reject, to respond, even with emotion and fervor, but to censor -- no. That has not been our way for 200 years, and it must not become our way now. Talk is cheap. It's now possible for Washington politicians to speak out against the CDA -- but only because so many mainstream industry and academic groups coalesced around the ALA/CIEC lawsuit. When it counted, Gore did nothing to halt the morality crusaders who pushed the "indecency" standard through Congress. In fact, he embraced the bill, saying in an interview with the Wall Street Journal: This is an early Christmas for consumers. It's a terrific bill... Every concern the president expressed about the initial legislation has been dealt with on a bipartisan basis. He also issued a statement on December 20, 1996: Today we had a victory for the American economy and the American consumer with the bipartisan agreement to create a telecommunications industry for the 21st Century in a way that will lower prices, increase and improve services in telecommunications and preserve the diversity of voices and viewpoints in television and radio that are essential to our democracy. Stay tuned for more reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- A clarification to Dispatch #12: Cherry v. Reno has not yet been formally consolidated with Shea v. Reno. Mentioned in this CDA update: Deputy Atty Gen Jamie Gorelick's speech slamming Net, calling for controls: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2733 Complete DFC copyright Action Alert, with legislator contact info: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2740 Declan McCullagh on "LolitaWatch" and -L18 -- July '96 Internet World: http://www.internetworld.com/iw-online/July96/news.html Declan McCullagh on CDA hearings -- June '96 Internet World: http://www.internetworld.com/iw-online/June96/news.html Bruce Taylor's amicus "finger" brief in NYC CDA lawsuit: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2736 NRC crypto report now online, thanks to John Young: http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/nrcindex.htm Brock Meeks on Sen. Sam Nunn's plans for domestic snooping: http://www.hotwired.com/netizen/96/23/campaign_dispatch3a.html Al Gore speaks at MIT about dangers of net.censorship: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2737 Al Gore's 12/95 statement on Telecommunications Act of 1996: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=478 Al Gore calls Telecommunications Act "early Christmas" present: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=469 Al Gore speaks at Penn, greeted by anti-CDA protests: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=1170 Creative Incentive Coalition on copyright, pro-HR2441: http://www.cic.org/ Digital Future Coalition on copyright, anti-HR2441: http://www.ari.net/dfc/ Brock Meeks on online copyright: http://www.hotwired.com/muckraker/96/20/index3a.html U.S. Congressional Internet Caucus: http://www.house.gov/white/internet_caucus/netcauc.html Fight-Censorship list <http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/top/> Rimm ethics critique <http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~declan/rimm/> Int'l Net-Censorship <http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~declan/international/> Justice on Campus <http://joc.mit.edu/> This document and previous Fight-Censorship Dispatches are archived at: <http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/top/> To subscribe to future Fight-Censorship Dispatches and related announcements, send "subscribe fight-censorship-announce" in the body of a message addressed to: majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu Other relevant web sites: <http://www.vtw.org/> <http://www.epic.org/> <http://www.aclu.org/> <http://www.cdt.org/> <http://www.ala.org/> <http://www.eff.org/> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------