Ed Carp sez : I understand your objections, but think about it this way: nothing in the world says that you have to put a return address on the envelope. Nothing in the world says that you have to present any form of ID in order to drop a letter into a postal box. Sure, the postal inspectors have to "cooperate", but if you drop a letter with no return address into a box, how could they trace it back to you? Are people going to say to the US postal folks, "hey, it's *your* fault that they didn't put a return address on their envelope!" I think not. Yes, but that's not what anonymous remailers *do*. Anonymous remailers accept mail that comes in an envelope *with a return address* and repackage it in a different envelope without a return address. So, yes, in a way, it *is* the analogical Post Office's fault that the letter arrived without a return address. Similarly, I think that anonymous remailers, like the post office, ma bell, etc., are common carriers. You can't have it both ways - either you are a common carrier and exercise no editorial control over what goes through your remailer, or you are a publisher, and are held to a certain degree of legal responsibility. But if one is a common carrier, one is required to assist. The whole remailer paradigm is designed to prevent such assistance. Therefore, by running a remailer, you are stating that you are *not* willing to assist the appropriate authorities, i.e. that you are not a common carrier. Or so a lawyer could claim. - kitten