CDR: Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?

Declan McCullagh declan at well.com
Fri Sep 15 12:08:08 PDT 2000


May I humbly suggest that the below legal opinion may be something less 
than complete and reliable?

-Declan


At 22:32 9/14/2000 -0500, Neil Johnson wrote:

>Of course being considered an ISP or "provider" may mean you have to comply
>with CALEA and provide LEO's wiretap access.
>
>Between a rock and a hard place ?
>
>Of course wiretap access to data encrypted elsewhere wouldn't do anyone much
>good.
>Maybe traffic analysis.
>
>Neil M. Johnson
>njohnson at interl.net
>http://www.interl.net/~njohnson
>PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7  CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "L. Sassaman" <rabbi at quickie.net>
>To: <cypherpunks at einstein.ssz.com>
>Cc: "Jay Holovacs" <holovacs at idt.net>; "Jodi Hoffman"
><jlhoffm at attglobal.net>; <fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu>;
><declan at well.com>
>Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 4:52 PM
>Subject: Re: CDR: Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
>
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > I've been running an anonymous remailer since DefCon, when a certain
> > speaker motivated me to set one up. I get on average 1 threat of bodily
> > harm and 3 threats of lawsuits per day because of this.
> >
> > To attempt to answer the question "why do you run a remailer", I put up
> > the page http://www.melontraffickers.com/remailer.html.
> >
> > This seems to have the effect of further annoying those who would have
> > anonymous remailers outlawed.
> >
> > I don't enjoy the fact that some people are being harassed through my
> > remailer. But I cannot prevent that without limiting the effectiveness of
> > the remailer.
> >
> > Have there been any court rulings that define the level of liability for
> > remops whose remailers are used to facilitate criminal actions?
> >
> > Is someone like myself, running a public remailer, considered an ISP? (I'm
> > thinking of the Prodigy ruling, where Prodigy was deemed not responsible
> > for content posted on its BBS system.)
> >
> > - --Len.
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> >
> > > Perhaps an analogy might help make the general case for support of free
> > > speech.
> > >
> > > We may not like what our neighbor is doing with his lawn or house. But
>it
> > > is in our best interests, generally speaking, to defend his property
> > > rights from new laws and regulations because tomorrow our home could be
>at
> > > risk.
> > >
> > > -Declan
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Jay Holovacs wrote:
> > >
> > > > How many times do I have to say this. I am *not* protecting them. I am
> > > > protecting free speech... my free speech, your free speech.
> > > >
> > > > This is much more dangerous than you seem to realize. It's tempting to
>let
> > > > them get 'theirs' because their ideas are ugly to many of us. But if
>they
> > > > can be held liable for a vicious murder (which they did not advocate
>or
> > > > instigate) on the part of someone who read their site... what keeps
>you from
> > > > being held accountable for someone who reads your site then kills a
>gay?
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > __
> >
> > L. Sassaman
> >
> > Security Architect             |  "Lose your dreams and you
> > Technology Consultant          |   will lose your mind."
> >                                |
> > http://sion.quickie.net        |       --The Rolling Stones
> >
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred.
> >
> > iD8DBQE5wUiWPYrxsgmsCmoRAuapAKDUQEz8mN67NnioFD2Q2YP/Gfe4zwCgwFZE
> > 6ncZVIbwMu5a7dL2ASr2NQY=
> > =5U53
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list