Responding to msg by perry@imsi.com (Perry E. Metzger) on Sat, 31 Dec 12:39 PM Perry makes an astute critique about the Peter Lewis article today on anonymity. I hope that he or someone takes the time to write The Times with polite corrections or a cataclysmic attack. I would note that the two law professors quoted are active on mail list Cyberia-L, where many of the cypherpunks issues are debated from a legal perspective. Peter Lewis is a subscriber to that list. Peter Lewis wrote yesterday about the LaMacchia case dismissal. The article was reprinted verbatim today. It too focussed on the need for legislation. (Todd posted Reuter's version.) Is it any wonder that lawyers are quoted when enhanced law and order are immanent? Mike Godwin, of EFF and also a Cyberia-L subscriber, takes a dissenting view from that presented by those quoted by Lewis. Or so I would judge from his posts on the LaMacchia case. My one-cent's worth to the anonymity topic is that The NYT may be drum-beating for legislation to regulate anonymity -- a characteristicly paternalistic role of the self-important power-brokering running-dog mad-dog yellow-dog hyenia-slobbering anarchy-hating media. Oops, sorry for that anonymous slip. Back to totally disinterested objectivity, eye-of-god, slug-under-rock-safety. Say, if anyone wants the Lewis article on LaMacchia, send blank message with subject: LAM_not