FIDOnet troglodyte MIND RAPISTS _unrepentant_!

[an12070@anon.penet.fi (S. Boxx)]

Perry Metzger writes:

>The depths of human folly never cease to amaze me. This case is as if
>a group of bankers, deciding that they were scared that they might be
>held liable if one of their clients were a drug dealer (which they
>aren't) decides to embezzle all the client accounts instead to "keep
>themselves safe".

nah. I propose we call 'em TROGLODYTE MIND RAPISTS.

please cut out the following message and send it to every FIDONET operator
in existence. also, try comp.org.fidonet. moderation complicates the
posting.

===


Subject: STOP THE TROGLODYTE FIDONET MIND-RAPISTS *NOW*!


does routine FIDOnet email INVASION by operators VIOLATE the U.S. 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act? EFF's lawyer M. Godwin speaks
with FIDOnet operator Al Billings <mimir@u.washington.edu> on the 
cypherpunks mailing list. Resident list crank Perry Metzger offers
his own whitehot flame.

this forward brought to you by

cypherpunks
Cyberspatial Reality Advancement Movement (CRAM)
Information Liberation Front (ILF)
Blacknet


===

From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
Subject: Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1993 16:40:09 -0400 (EDT)
 
Al Billings writes:

> On Thu, 30 Sep 1993, Mike Godwin wrote:
> > 
> > My question is this: how does he know that the mail is encrypted if he's
> > not examining the mail that passes through his system? If he *is*
> > examining the mail that passes through his system, it seems likely that he
> > is violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
> 
>  Only if he has stated that he allows private mail. Most sysops have
> specifically worded policy statements for their systems that say that the
> sysop can read any and all messages on the system and may do so at any
> time.

That's all very nice, but it doesn't enable a FIDO sysop to intercept
messages from people who are not users of his or her particular system.
Those people did not waive their rights to privacy under the ECPA.

> Bulletin boards do not normally offer truely private mail because of
> some of the legal implications.

This is a common myth. First of all, there are many BBSs that do
offer truly private mail, or whose sysops, as a matter of policy, do not
read others' private mail. Secondly, there's no legal liability associated
with allowing e-mail privacy. Third, federal law (the ECPA) bars
sysops from examining mail except under some very precisely defined
circumstances.

I suggest that you inform sysops who tell you otherwise that they can
contact me at the Legal Services Department of EFF. You've got my e-mail
address already--my phone number is 202-347-5400.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin@anon.penet.fi.