Re: News on Congressional Debate on Exon

[Jason Burrell <jburrell@crl.com>]

On Wed, 6 Dec 1995, Timothy C. May wrote:

> 
> I just heard (12:15 EST) that the House has adopted language similar to the
> original Exon-Coates language in the Senate (as opposed to the White
> language, which was less restrictive in that it dealt with material that
> was "harmful" to children, interpreted to mean child porn).
> 
> It looks like Internet Service Providers will soon be held liable for
> "indecent material" passed by their systems. I would expect most ISPs will
> drop the alt.binaries.* newsgroups as a first step, and maybe other groups
> as well.

*Sigh*. Are we really ready to go back to UUCP? It looks like we'll have
to. That is, if someone doesn't set up a couple cryptographically enhanced
subnets first, or come up with some better idea. Interesting prospect,
actually. 

Anyone wish to comment on the prospect of a double blind server, set
outside U.S. borders, that can act as an interface to the rest of the
world, perhaps encrypting or stego'ing the data transfered between it and
the user? Basically, an anonymous remailer that acts as a cross between 
an NNTP, POP3, and SMTP servers.

> If the Exon Bill really does go into effect, and age limits on access are
> imposed, I'll be looking for what we've always joked about: the
> "Information Superhighway Driver's License."

God help us all.

--
Jason Burrell
South Texas Communications