Unmuzzy Explained

Laszlo Vecsey master at internexus.net
Wed Jan 3 19:10:00 PST 1996


> >So is the idea beyond this that if file or a group of files were to 
> >be distributed over many computers (possibly hundreds or more) then 
> >none of the computers would be "responsible" for their content? I would 
> >think that any participant in the network would have to claim full 
> >responsibility for the content, assuming the file(s) could be accessed 
> >from any of the participating servers.
> >
> Okay.  So what if serveral groups of computers, in public FTP directories,
> allowed anonymous ftp uploads of "parts" of a file that would be construde
> as bad content.  The only way to assemble the file is to download several
> parts of it from serveral diffrent servers and assemble the file on your
> system.  Thus the illegal file isn't illegal until its assembled.  Sorta
> like switchblade knives.  Lots of places can sell the parts legally, they
> just can't sell the assembled product.  Would the servers that contain
> "parts" of the file be responsible for the content?

PGP encrypting a file and putting it on an ftp site is unusable unless 
you have the key to unlock it.. in this sense the file is only partly 
on-line and therefore there would be no need to even split the file apart 
to various servers! Would the site containing this PGP encrypted data 
be responsible for it's content?






More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list