Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)

[Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>]

Doug Merritt writes:

> I haven't kept up on this, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that
> BBS's had a choice as to whether to operate as Common Carriers or not,
> as long as they were strictly consistent. If they want to be categorized
> as Common Carriers then they have to have strict policies of hands-off
> privacy, are not liable for the content of messages on their board,
> and the ECPA applies. But if they do not guarantee privacy, do not perform
> any kind of censorship or other control of message contents, then they
> are not Common Carriers and the ECPA does not apply.

ECPA is not limited to common carriers.
 
> Prodigy would be an example of the former, Internet email & news would
> be an example of the latter.
 
ECPA applies both to Prodigy and to Internet message traffic.


--Mike