Re: The Crisis with Remailers

[tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)]

 More on what is adding to the current crisis:

* Fact: For _most_ people, there is no compelling (or even casual) need for
remailers.

(No, I'm not arguing against remailers. Just pointing out a basic economic
fact, to be factored in.)

* Fact: The value of having remailers goes up when certain kinds of
activities (which do not yet exist in any significant form) become more
available.

* Fact: The danger to remailer operators goes up when these kinds of
activities become more widespread.

(Another way of putting these last two points is this: The more valuable a
remailing function is, the more danger or liability a remailer faces.)

* Fact: Most remailers are being operated in the United States, and by
persons with only casual commitment to their continued operation. ("Casual"
should not be construed in a derogatory way.)

* Fact: There have been no definitive court rulings in the U.S. clarifying
the role of remailers. (In fact, no court cases involving remailers at all,
yet.) Until this is decided, remailer sites which appear to be the
emanation point (the last link) for the posting of, say, copyrighted
material, will find themselves ordered to cease and desist.

(The Church of Scientology involvement is beside the point. Brad Templeton
of Clarinet would likely do much the same thing if Clarinet-carried
articles were being posted to Usenet through remailers. So would "Time,"
and so, probably, would "Wired." We always knew that _something_ like this
would put remailers to a severe test.)

Conclusions:

- Remailers will continue to disappear as pressures are applied. Absent a
basic court ruling that remailer operators are not responsible or liable
for what is sent through their sites, they will fall under attack. Once one
falls, and a new site is used, it will become the target.

- Very few ordinary people use remailers. This will change as remailers
continue to get easier to use, but clearly most people feel little
need/threat.

- Ironically, if some sort of more restrictive regime comes to the fore,
and more people feel the need to use remailers (e.g., CDA is upheld and
abortion information becomes illegal to send over the Net), then this will
make the operators of remailers feel even more heat.

Is there an "equilibrium" point in all this, a "market clearing" point at
which remailers are badly enough needed, despite threats and pressures, so
as to provide a market for them?

An interesting question.

--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."