Re: SEVERE undercapacity, we need more remailer servers FAST

[Alex Strasheim <cp@proust.suba.com>]

> > The problem that I think the Scientology postings raise is that the
> > remailers cannot really be used to post copyrighted material.  That is
> > what got the netherlands hacktic remailer shut down.  This shows, BTW,
> > that being outside the United States is no guarantee of immunity.  Most
> > Western countries support copyrights.
> [snip]
> 
> I find this all very odd, since the Dutch court ruled that the use of the
> Fishman affidavit on Karin Spaink's web page was not a copyright
> violation, as Fishman was part of a US judicial record.  I'm assuming
> that the Fishman material is what thay approched Hacktic about, as well, but
> I'm not sure.  Maybe this is about something else (the NOTS materials), or
> maybe the threat of legal action was enough to do Hacktic in, despite what
> would seem to be a favorable precedent.

The problem is more funadmental than copyrights or the specifics of this 
case.  It might be true that Hacktic could win in court, but why should 
Hacktic take the chance?  Or spend the money to prove their case?

The remailer net won't stand up to challenges of any strength because no
one gets anything for running a remailer.  It doesn't matter if the
challenges are strong enough to win, or if they ultimately have any merit. 
If you don't get anything for winning and you'll get burned if you lose,
the expected value of the game is negative no matter how unlikely losing 
is.

If you want the remailer system to stand up you have to make the expected
value positive.  The expected value of bookmaking is positive, even though
it's illegal to take sports bets in most states.  As a consequence it's
not hard to find someone to take a bet.  Individual bookies may come and
go, but the system will always be there.  If the expected value of running
a remailer was positive, the remailer system would thrive even if it was
illegal to run one.

To make the expected value positive, you have to (a) make it profitable to
run a remailer, and (b) set up a protocol that gives someone who runs one
a fighting chance of not getting busted.  (a) is easy enough in theory,
but I don't know how you could do (b), at least not if you wanted to let
people do public things with the remailers (like post to usenet).