At 4:26 PM 04/19/94 -0600, juola@bruno.cs.colorado.edu wrote:
X-Authentication-Warning: bruno.cs.colorado.edu: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
Just thought I'd let you know about this heading, in case you are debugging anything...
Subject: Re: Remailer Musings Date: Tue, 19 Apr 94 16:26:24 MDT From: juola@bruno.cs.colorado.edu
On the other hand, part of the rules of being a common carrier are that one is *required* to cooperate with appropriate authorities to prevent this sort of abuse and to catch said abusers if/when it happens. I suspect that Mr. Templeton's lawyer could make a case that by setting up a remailer where one cannot "trace calls," one is violating the requirements of being a common carrier, and thus is responsible for content.
- kitten
I wonder how this would jive with the factoid someone on this list (don't have the original handy) found a while back about the court ruling in favor of the right to operate under an alias in (constitutionally?) protected, at least in terms of publishing, etc.? I remember the case happening in L.A., I think. Anyway, what are the odds a case could be made that my 'anonymous identity' "fooperson" is a legal pseudonym? Stretching it some, but a possibility, and one case where similarities with publishing can work in favor of privacy. jamie -- "Sure, people mistake me for straight, but when I do get someone in bed,that's when being a femme *really* pays off." -Bryna Bank, on Butch/Femme jamie lawrence jamiel@sybase.com