FIDONet Mail filtering - a course of action

FIDONet mail filtering came up many months ago. It is indeed an
atrocious policy. Are these people in the same cyberspace we are? This
is like hearing neanderthals inhabit many houses in the neighborhood.

As for what *we* can do, well, if premier cyberspatial laywer Mike
Godwin considers himself a hardcore cypherpunk, I'd expect that a
letter on EFF stationary would have a pretty significant effect. It
wouldn't have to be hostile or intimidating, just something along the
tone of `please join the cyberspatial community and your concerned
peers.' It could mention the strict legal significance of the ECPA --
that a strong case can be made that *any* filtering is in violation of
it, and that one cannot screen encrypted mail without breaking it. In
fact, ideally the letter would be general enough to give to anyone who
is engaged in unwholesome activities along the same lines.

If this is all too much work, I think just quoting his cypherpunk-list
letters that suggest the ECPA does not exactly condone their behavior
might have an effect too...

Hee, hee, though I'd say the actual letter would be worth a coveted
L.D. Cypherpunk of the Week award <g>  I'm just waiting for an excuse
to give M.G. one. I don't think everyone realizes how lucky we are to
have him and Gilmore in the same room with us!

According to L. Detweiler:
> 
> As for what *we* can do, well, if premier cyberspatial laywer Mike
> Godwin considers himself a hardcore cypherpunk, I'd expect that a
> letter on EFF stationary would have a pretty significant effect. It
> wouldn't have to be hostile or intimidating, just something along the
> tone of `please join the cyberspatial community and your concerned
> peers.' It could mention the strict legal significance of the ECPA --
> that a strong case can be made that *any* filtering is in violation of
> it, and that one cannot screen encrypted mail without breaking it. In
> fact, ideally the letter would be general enough to give to anyone who
> is engaged in unwholesome activities along the same lines.

Well, I have no ethical problems with giving out the guy's name...

> Hee, hee, though I'd say the actual letter would be worth a coveted
> L.D. Cypherpunk of the Week award <g>  I'm just waiting for an excuse
> to give M.G. one. I don't think everyone realizes how lucky we are to
> have him and Gilmore in the same room with us!

We are indeed lucky people.  There are a lot of "quality people" on this list.
I am very gratefull to all of you.


J. Michael Diehl   ;^)  |*The 2nd Amendment is there in case the 
mdiehl@triton.unm.edu   | Government forgets about the 1st!  <RL>
Mike.Diehl@f29.n301.z1  |*God is a good Physicist, and an even 
    .fidonet.org        | better Mathematician.  <Me>
al945@cwns9.ins.cwru.edu|*I'm just looking for the opportunity to 
 (505) 299-2282 (voice) | be Politically Incorrect! <Me>
Can we impeach him yet? |*Protected by 18 USC 2511 and 18 USC 2703. 
PGP Key = 7C06F1 = A6 27 E1 1D 5F B2 F2 F1  12 E7 53 2D 85 A2 10 5D

Lance writes:

> As for what *we* can do, well, if premier cyberspatial laywer Mike
> Godwin considers himself a hardcore cypherpunk, I'd expect that a
> letter on EFF stationary would have a pretty significant effect.

This is a possibility, but perhaps we could do something subtler. I
suggest that someone forward my cypherpunk-list letters to this sysop
along with my phone number (202-347-5400) and let the guy know that he can
call me to discuss the possible legal liability he is creating for
himself.

Outside of the issue of passing encrypted information, it seems common
among Fido sysops to screen for other kinds of content. That can be
way uncool, legally.


--Mike

Mike Godwin writes:
 > Outside of the issue of passing encrypted information, it seems common
 > among Fido sysops to screen for other kinds of content. That can be
 > way uncool, legally.

So how do I prevent what happened to SJG, killer, etc from happening
to me?  How do I prevent the LE types from showing up one day and
saying 'hey, did you know there's a meg of kiddie porn on your machine
and we're taking it all away'?

Do I have pull my machine off the net and go back to pre-bangnet
times?

J. Eric writes:

> So how do I prevent what happened to SJG, killer, etc from happening
> to me?

What gives you the impression that there is *anything* you can do to
prevent it? The BBS seized in the SJG case did not have illegal material
on it. 

> How do I prevent the LE types from showing up one day and
> saying 'hey, did you know there's a meg of kiddie porn on your machine
> and we're taking it all away'?

You can't prevent it. You can minimize the risk of it by destroying any
kiddie porn you find uploaded to your system. Unless the kiddie porn has
been included as part of an electronic communication, it's just a file,
and not covered by ECPA. Nothing in ECPA prevents you from looking at any
GIFs uploaded to your system, but ECPA does prevent your interception or
disclosure of electronic messages that pass through your system if you're
not the intended recipient.

> Do I have pull my machine off the net and go back to pre-bangnet
> times?

Pulling your system off the net does not eliminate the possibility that it
will be seized. Nothing does.


--Mike