Re: What is the EFF doing exactly?

At 08:04 PM 9/3/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:

>The reason this is such a hot button for Cypherpunks is that "responsible
>freedom" and "accountability" are often code words for controlling some
>very basic freedoms. Placing limits on anonymous speech would involve some
>very fundamental restrictions on freedoms of various sorts. Even if
>"safeguards" are built-in, the effect would almost certainly be to
>illegalize remailers (unless they had "escrow" features!). And a wide array
>of other freedoms, too numerous for me to write about here.

The terms "responsibility" and "accountability" are misused, which is
unfortunate, since I think we'd all argue in favor of taking responsibility
for our speech/actions in a positive sense. The negative is in asking me to
sacrifice my freedom because some few behave irresponsibly. This is like
setting an illogical default, assuming that it's a preventive, but it
prevents nothing.

Getting beyond this discussion of EFF, has any global entity discussed
making remailers illegal?

jonl

--
Jon Lebkowsky <jonl@hotwired.com>  FAX (512)444-2693  http://www.well.com/~jonl
Electronic Frontiers Forum, 6PM PDT Thursdays     <http://www.hotwired.com/eff>
"No politician can sit on a hot issue if you make it hot enough."--Saul Alinsky

On Tue, 3 Sep 1996, Jon Lebkowsky wrote:

> Getting beyond this discussion of EFF, has any global entity discussed
> making remailers illegal? 

Others have responded with information about the Church of Scientology and
similar threats to remailers. I would add that global entities haven't
woken up to the threat of anonymous remailers and that remailers aren't
widely deployed yet -- two conditions that when they change will be
sufficient for a global crackdown.

My cover story in last month's issue of _Internet Underground_ magazine
discussed how governments can move quickly to craft international treaties
that could muzzle the Net. This is what we have to be on the lookout for;
in fact, we need to have a "friendly" country introduce an opposing
proposal that countries can bicker over for decades, while the Net matures
and strengthens and improves its defenses against this type of attack.

-Declan


// declan@eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan@well.com //