Mark Terka, of Toronto, wrote:

Well, I think it will be the trigger hopefully generates more remailer's in Europe. So far we only (since the evident demise of wein) have usura's excellent remailers in the Netherlands. It would be nice if more were placed overseas, beyond the reach of U.S. pressure.

More on why non-U.S. remailers are so important. Last Saturday night, after the Cypherpunks meeting and dinner, I was giving Colin Plumb (a Toronto person) a ride to the hotel he was staying at in Los Gatos. We stopped at a mega bookstore (Barnes and Noble, Santa Clara) and ran immediately into yet another Toronto person (ex, actually), Brad Templeton, well-known as the operator of ClariNet. (I've met Brad many times, but he still doesn't remember my name or what I do, which says something interesting about one of us.) Brad heard the word "Cypherpunks" and gave his views on things. I'll summarize in bullet form, as I lack the time to formulate his points in full paragraphs. * Brad was initially unaware that "fully anonymous" remailers exist ("fully" in the sense of no records of who is who, not in the sense of perfect security against NSA type of opponents). He thought Cypherpunks remailers were some variant of Julf's type. * When he grasped the basic idea, of chained mixes, he got quite upset and said they were "threats" to his business. (Anonymous forwarding of ClariNet articles happens, of course. Brad was expecting that he could get a court order, if it came down to that, and was shocked to hear that the Cypherpunks model does not make this possible.) * I shrugged, and said that, longterm, copyright was dead as we know it today. I pointed out that dozens of Cypherpunks-style remailers are operational, including many in Europe and elsewhere. * Brad: "Then they'll be outlawed." * As we debated this in the aisles of the bookstore (a true Silicon Valley scene!), he formulated the view that a person like him probably needs to file lawsuits to get them declared illegal on the basis of being "attractive nuisances." As he put it, "like unfenced swimming pools in back yards." * "And what about the non-U.S. sites?," I asked. He had no good answer, except that maybe laws restricting access to non-U.S. sites would have to be considered. (I didn't get into the obvious issues about the impossibility of doing this, of stego, etc.) * Brad also expressed the view that the recently passed Digital Telephony Act would "force" remailer operators to make their traffic available to the proper authorities. (I disagree, from my reading of the DT Act, but didn't debate it with Brad. And of course it's real hard to get those sites in Russia, Holland, and other countries to obey U.S. rules. Not impossible, hence our need for vigilance and for proliferating sites as rapidly as possible.) I debated not writing an "incident report" to you folks, being as how Brad is not on this list and is basically uninformed on the details of our remailers, but I feel that a "heads up" is warranted. Brad and ClariNet have already caused one remailer to go down (the operator of it has commented here before and of course can do so again if he sees this), and his comments Saturday night cause me to think he may be considering a test case of some sort. (He is fearful of losing his Associate Press/etc. franchise if he fails to enforce his rights.) So, I draw several conclusions from this, and from the comments in this thread: 1. Get as many _remailer accounts_ offshore as quickly as possible. 2. Separate the "ownership of a machine" from "remailer accounts." There is no good reason for the owner of a machine that does remailing to actually be doing the remailing. And many good reasons why a particular machine should have _many_ separate "mail accounts" that actually are the remailes. (This is the "remailer-in-a-box" I've been pushing.) (For one thing, the ECPA protects the mail, and allows the machine owner to adopt a "hands off" stance. For another, an "abused account" can simply and quickly be killed, with new ones taking its place! Think of the benefits.) 3. I think the "intellectual property" industry (Brad and Friends) will be looking at remailers and anonymous systems more carefully. Legislation _could_ come out of this. I don't expect anything soon, as Brad is just now realizing the implications.... 4. However, I think it's impossible to stop all these things, for reasons well known to all of us. Brad's "attractive nuisance" idea won't fly, not if it means that e-mail must be written on "postcards," and not if it means Americans can't send e-mail outside the U.S. (These are standard Cypherpunks issues. I didn't try to educate Brad about the impossibility of banning encryption, about the alternatives available, about steganography, etc. He seemed so wrapped up in the idea of "doing something!" that arguing the CP agenda would have been a waste. Plus, I was tired.) So, not a cause for panic, as he will probably do nothing. But just as Adm. Bobby Inman's comments give some insight into the position of the intelligence community, Brad Templeton's comments give insights into the coming battles over intellectual property. --Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Cypherpunks list: majordomo@toad.com with body message of only: subscribe cypherpunks. FAQ available at ftp.netcom.com in pub/tcmay

In article <199411220020.QAA08980@netcom6.netcom.com>, Timothy C. May <tcmay@netcom.com> wrote:

* I shrugged, and said that, longterm, copyright was dead as we know it today. I pointed out that dozens of Cypherpunks-style remailers are operational, including many in Europe and elsewhere.

* Brad: "Then they'll be outlawed."

* "And what about the non-U.S. sites?," I asked. He had no good answer...

This is why GATT bothers me. Once we have have an alignment of property laws, particularly IP laws, there's no telling how things will fall. It's a bad set of failure modes.

* Brad also expressed the view that the recently passed Digital Telephony Act would "force" remailer operators to make their traffic available to the proper authorities.

Brad's very wrong. The Senate hearings were very explicit on this point: Internet providers (as well as people like AOL and Compuserv) are exempt from DT requirements. -- Todd Masco | According to the US dept of Justice Stats, 3.98% of the US cactus@hks.net | population is in prison, the highest count in the world. We cactus@bb.com | live in a police state and are lulled by notions of normalcy.

Tim May wrote>

* I shrugged, and said that, longterm, copyright was dead as we know it today. I pointed out that dozens of Cypherpunks-style remailers are

Still waving red flags at bulls, eh Tim? I vaguely remember something like this controversy occurring when the Xerox machine was new. Can anyone refresh my memory? JJH -- "It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that the thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion."

Timothy C. May writes:

So, not a cause for panic, as he will probably do nothing.

I agree that panic is uncalled for, but I don't agree that he will probably do nothing. Eventually, Mr. Templeton or someone in a similar position is certain to "do something"; this is an inevitable result of the clash between traditional (since the 16th century, anyway) views of copyright and what "we" think of the meaning(lessness) of copyright in an online digital world. Put yourself in his place. Mr. Templeton's attitude makes perfect sense. The entire fabric of his business is based upon state-supported protection of the "property" that's his stock in trade. I would think very little of him as a businessperson were he to simple roll over and give up. Indeed, it might actually be advantageous for the "something" to happen sooner rather than later; clumsy attacks on freedom of electronic communication could backfire, resulting in favorable (to e-freedom) judgements that would stand as precedent later on. | GOOD TIME FOR MOVIE - GOING ||| Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com> | | TAKE TWA TO CAIRO. ||| Tivoli Systems, Austin, TX: | | (actual fortune cookie) ||| "Like A Little Bit of Semi-Heaven" |