Before going into the merits of this, let me make two points: One I specifically asked the reporter (Amy Harmon) to quote me as an individual, not as a spokesperson for the EFF. (It was Amy Harmon, and the only address I have for her bounces, but as you can imagine I would like to get in touch with her! Anyone know it?) These are my personal views; EFF has no formal policy on this yet -- precisely because it's a complex issue. Now, speaking personally: I believe there are trade-offs -- which is what I told the LA Times. I assume I was quoted accurately (although the word "enforce" is awkward), but out of context. Anonymity can be dangerous -- as can traceability, especially in/by repressive regimes. Therefore I would favor allowing anonymity -- with some form of traceability only under terms considerably stronger than what are generally required for a wiretap. Anyone who seriously needs anonymity because of a repressive government is likely to use a foreign (outside whatever jurisdiction he fears) server, so that this is not a matter of "local" laws. The tracer would have to pass through what I hope would be tighter hoops than we have now. Please note that this is not the same as the right to *private* conversations and the use of encryption; this is the issue of being accountable for what you publish in public. My assumption is that there will be a wide variety of Net communities with different rules/regulations/attitudes towards anonymity that would apply ex some kind of international sanctions; I think that's appropriate. Yes, I'm aware of the complexities, and of the possibilities for miscarriages of justice. The world isn't yet the way I want it to be. But I wanted to respond reasonably promptly. BTW, I would welcome a chance to read the whole article (or at least a *little* more of the context, under fair use). Speaking for myself, only (and publicly), Esther Dyson At 06:40 AM 9/1/96 -0400, Dave Farber wrote:
Posted-Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 14:59:53 +1000 (EST) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 14:59:53 +1000 (EST) From: Charles Senescall <apache@quux.apana.org.au> To: cypherpunks@toad.com Cc: declan@well.com Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times article on Helsingius and anon.penet.fi Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
On Sat, 31 Aug 1996, Declan McCullagh wrote:
The attached article was reposted to fight-censorship with the permission of the Los Angeles Times, which ran it on the front page today. [snip] Note Esther Dyson's comments:
"The damage that can be done by anonymity is far bigger" than in any other medium, said Esther Dyson, chairwoman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "In the end, you need to be able to get at somebody's identity to enforce accountability, and the question is how do you also enforce freedom of speech and freedom from prosecution for unpopular opinions."
Is this _really_ the EFF policy on anonymopus remailers??
I will check with our local version of the EFF and see what they have to say.
If the EFF is not for anonymity it needs to be publicised. Perhaps the EFF has been in bed with the political pigs too long. *OINK*
-- .////. .// Charles Senescall apache@quux.apana.org.au o:::::::::/// Fuck TEL$TRA
::::::::::\\\ Finger me for PGP PUBKEY Brisbane AUSTRALIA '\\\\\' \\ <A HREF="http://quux.apana.org.au/~apache/">
Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes! EDventure Holdings <edyson@edventure.com> 1 (212) 924-8800 1 (212) 924-0240 fax 104 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10011 USA www.edventure.com High-Tech Forum in Lisbon, October 27-29, 1996 PC Forum in Tucson, Arizona, March 23-26, 1997