At 4:14 AM -0700 6/2/97, Michael Froomkin wrote:
I don't understand this. Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other than the ACLU itself. And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole (although the ACLU is quite clued-up too). It is true that EPIC is not absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good.
Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list. Instead, canabalism. Weird. Very weird.
That does it. When I get back to the US, I'm sending EPIC a donation.
Cannibalism? You overstate the level of crititcism here. Granted, my initial thread title, "Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy," was provocative...deliberately so. Provocative titles get attention (yes, I congratulate Rotenberg on choosing the current thread title!). When a leading privacy spokesman makes soothing noises on CNN about the need to control spam by looking into how spammers gather their information, and when CDT, EPIC, etc., have still not withdrawn their support for SAFE despite the "use a cipher, go to prison" language, they deserve our criticism. (In fact, CDT's latest press release on the status of SAFE makes not a single mention of the criminalization of crypto language.) EPIC is not being singled out for especially harsh criticism, at least not by me. I would reserve worse criticism for CDT. (Yes, I said that EFF is fucked up. So sue me. Fact is, EFF is a shadow of its former self, and is missing in action on this and most other leglislative debates. Yes, I was once a dues-paying member of the EFF, back when they were active. At least in legislative areas, that is. All of the alphabet soupers are doing nice work on court cases, e.g., CDA, Bernstein, etc., but the focus of the discussion here is on SAFE and the Internet regulation proposals, not on their lawyers.) Frankly, we've got the alphabet soup of privacy orgs in D.C. working on various compromises, and almost no strong voices in opposition. Or at least the strong voices in opposition are not being quoted. Certainly neither Cato nor the Libertarian Party are being heard widely on the SAFE and anti-spam issues. (I attribute this at least partly to lack of presence in D.C., lack of a machine to crank out press releases, lack of shmoozing with the reporters. A reporter asked me in e-mail for a comment on SAFE; she wanted to know who I was and what my affiliation was. I told her I had no affiliation, that I was just a guy out in Calfornia. She may have been expecting "Policy Director, Center for Cyberspatial Liberty Studies," or somesuch. She never got back to me. I surmise journalists and others are hung up on officious-sounding titles, which is why every lobbyist in D.C. is either a Policy Director or a President of something.) In my article/rant last night I outlined why these legislative juggernauts are rolling across America. I regret that EPIC, EFF, CDT, etc., are not doing more to oppose them. For my part, I'll donate to Bell's defense fund long before I'll donate to one of the alphabet soup. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."