884 lines
48 KiB
Plaintext
884 lines
48 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
Computer underground Digest Mon June 29, 1992 Volume 4 : Issue 28
|
||
|
||
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
|
||
Associate Editor: Etaion Shrdlu, Jr.
|
||
Newest Authormeister: B. Kehoe
|
||
Ex-Arcmeister: Bob Kusumoto
|
||
Downundermeister: Dan Carosone
|
||
|
||
CONTENTS, #4.28 (June 29, 1992)
|
||
File 1--Proposal: A Market Mechanism for Information Age Goods
|
||
File 2--EFF on GEnie's RoundTable
|
||
|
||
Back issues of CuD can be found in the Usenet alt.society.cu-digest
|
||
news group, on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
|
||
LAWSIG, and DL0 and DL12 of TELECOM, on Genie in the PF*NPC RT
|
||
libraries, on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210, and by anonymous ftp
|
||
from ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) and ftp.ee.mu.oz.au
|
||
European distributor: ComNet in Luxembourg BBS (++352) 466893.
|
||
|
||
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
|
||
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
|
||
diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted as long as the source
|
||
is cited. Some authors do copyright their material, and they should
|
||
be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that non-personal
|
||
mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise specified.
|
||
Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles relating to
|
||
computer culture and communication. Articles are preferred to short
|
||
responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts unless absolutely
|
||
necessary.
|
||
|
||
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
|
||
the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
|
||
responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
|
||
violate copyright protections.
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 92 12:39:51 0
|
||
From: infoage!bradcox@hsi.hsi.com (Brad Cox, Ph.D.)
|
||
Subject: File 1--Proposal: A Market Mechanism for Information Age Goods
|
||
|
||
The enclosed article, which was written as a column for an
|
||
object-oriented programming magazine, proposes an initiative that has
|
||
great potential for both good and for harm. I believe that
|
||
superdistribution, as discussed in this paper, should be relevant to
|
||
EFF's interests, even though it looks at privacy from a viewpoint
|
||
contrary to the one that EFF generally endorses.
|
||
|
||
++++++++++++++
|
||
|
||
"WHAT IF THERE *IS* A SILVER BULLET...AND THE COMPETITION GETS IT FIRST?"
|
||
(Invited Column; Journal of Object-oriented Programming; June 1992)
|
||
|
||
Few programmers could develop a compiler, word processor or spreadsheet
|
||
to compete in today's crowded software market The cost and complexity
|
||
of modern-day applications far exceed the financial and intellectual
|
||
capacity of even the rarest of individuals. Even large-granularity
|
||
sub-components like window systems, persistent object databases and
|
||
communication facilities can be larger than most individuals could
|
||
handle. But nearly any of us could provide smaller (so-called
|
||
'reusable') software components that others could assemble into larger
|
||
objects; components as small as Stacks and Queues.
|
||
|
||
So why don't we? Why do we drudge away our lives in companies with the
|
||
financial, technical, and marketing muscle to build the huge objects we
|
||
call applications? Why don't we start software companies, like Intel,
|
||
to invent, build, test, document, and market small-granularity objects
|
||
for other companies to buy? Think of the reduction in auto emission
|
||
pollution if more of us stayed home to build small-granularity
|
||
components for sale! Think of not having to get along with the boss!
|
||
|
||
Object-oriented programming technologies have brought us tantalizingly
|
||
close to making this dream technically, if not economically, feasible.
|
||
Subroutines have long been able to encapsulate functionality into
|
||
modules that others can use without needing to look inside, just as
|
||
with Intel's silicon components. Object-oriented programming languages
|
||
have extended our ability to encapsulate functionality within
|
||
Software-ICs<1> that can support higher-level objects than subroutines
|
||
ever could<2>. Such languages have already made the use of
|
||
pre-fabricated data structure and graphical user interface classes a
|
||
viable alternative to fabricating cut-to-fit components for each
|
||
application. All this is technically feasible already, even though the
|
||
software industrial revolution has hardly begun<3>.
|
||
|
||
Yet these technical advances have not really changed the way we
|
||
organize to build software. They've just providing better tools for
|
||
building software just as we've done in the past. The pre-fabricated
|
||
small components of today are not bought and sold as assets in their
|
||
own right, but are bundled (given away) inside something much larger
|
||
than any individual could build. Sometimes they are bundled to inflate
|
||
the value (and price!) of some cheap commodity item, as in Apple's ROM
|
||
software that turns a $50 CPU chip into a $5000 Macintosh computer.
|
||
Sometimes they play the same role with respect to software objects, as
|
||
in the libraries that come with object-oriented compilers.
|
||
|
||
There is no way of marketing the small active objects that we call
|
||
reusable software components, at least not today. The same is true of
|
||
the passive objects we call data. For example, nearly 50% of the bulk
|
||
waste in our landfills is newspapers and magazines. Nearly half of our
|
||
bulk waste problem could be eliminated if we could break the habit of
|
||
fondling the macerated remains of some forest critter's home as we
|
||
drink our morning coffee. But this is far more than a bad habit from
|
||
the viewpoint of newspaper publishers. If they distributed news
|
||
electronically, how would they charge for their labor?
|
||
|
||
Paper-based information distribution makes certain kinds of information
|
||
unavailable even when the information is easily obtainable. For
|
||
example, I hate price-comparison shopping and would gladly pay for
|
||
high-quality information as to where to buy groceries and gasoline
|
||
cheaply within driving distance of my home. This information is avidly
|
||
collected by various silver-haired ladies in my community, but solely
|
||
for their own use. There is no incentive for them to electronically
|
||
distribute their expertise to customers like myself.
|
||
|
||
What if entrepreneurs could market electronic information objects for
|
||
other people to buy? Couldn't geographically specialized but broadly
|
||
relevant objects like my gasoline price example be the 'killer apps'
|
||
that the hardware vendors are so desperately seeking? Think of what it
|
||
could it mean to today's saturated market if everyone who buys gasoline
|
||
and groceries bought a computer simply to benefit from Aunt Nellie's
|
||
coupon-clipping acumen?
|
||
|
||
Information Age Economics
|
||
|
||
These questions outline the fundamental obstacle of the manufacturing
|
||
age to information age transition. The human race is adept at selling
|
||
tangible goods such as Twinkies, automobiles, and newspapers. But we've
|
||
never developed a commercially robust way of buying and selling easily
|
||
copied intangible goods like electronic data and software.
|
||
|
||
Of course, there are more obstacles to building a robust market in
|
||
electronic objects than I could ever mention here. Many of them are
|
||
technological deficiencies that could easily be corrected, such as the
|
||
lack of suitably diverse encapsulation and binding mechanisms in
|
||
today's object-oriented programming languages, insufficient
|
||
telecommunications bandwidth and reliability, and the dearth of capable
|
||
browsers, repositories and software classification schemes. My second
|
||
book, Object Technologies; A Revolutionary Approach, <Cox2> considers
|
||
these technical obstacles in detail to show how each one could be
|
||
overcome if suitable economic incentives were in place.
|
||
|
||
The biggest obstacle is that electronic objects can be copied so easily
|
||
that there is no way to collect revenue the way Intel does, by
|
||
collecting a fee each time another copy of a silicon object is needed.
|
||
More than any other reason, this is why nobody would ever quit their
|
||
day job to build small-granularity software components for a living.
|
||
|
||
A striking vestige of manufacturing age thinking is the still-dominant
|
||
practice of charging for information age goods like software by the
|
||
copy. Since electronic goods can be copied easily by every consumer,
|
||
the producers must inhibit copying with such abominations as shrinkwrap
|
||
license agreements and copy protection dongles. Since these are not
|
||
reliable and are increasingly rejected by software consumers, SPA
|
||
(Software Publishers Association) and BSA (Business Software Alliance)
|
||
have even started using handcuffs and jail sentences as copy protection
|
||
technologies that actually do work even for information age products
|
||
like software.
|
||
|
||
The lack of robust information age incentives explains why so many
|
||
corporate reuse library initiatives have collapsed under a hail of user
|
||
complaints. "Poorly documented. Poorly tested. Too hard to find what I
|
||
need. Does not address my specific requirements." Except for the often
|
||
rumored "Not invented here" syndrome, the problem is only occasionally
|
||
a demand side problem. The big problems are on the supply side. There
|
||
are no robust incentives to encourage producers to provide minutely
|
||
specialized, tested, documented and (dare I hope?) guaranteed
|
||
components that quality-conscious engineers might pay good money to
|
||
buy. As long as these "repositories" are waste disposal dumps where we
|
||
throw poorly tested and undocumented trash for garbage pickers to
|
||
"reuse", quality-conscious engineers will rightly insist, "Not in my
|
||
backyard!"
|
||
|
||
Paying for software by the copy (or "reusing" it for free) is so
|
||
widespread today that it may seem like the only option. But think of it
|
||
in object-oriented terms. Where is it written that we should pay for an
|
||
object's instance variables (data) according to usage (in the form of
|
||
network access charges) yet pay for methods (software) by the copy?
|
||
Shouldn't we also consider incentive structures that could motivate
|
||
people to buy and sell electronic objects in which the historical
|
||
distinction between program and data are altogether hidden from view?
|
||
|
||
Superdistribution
|
||
|
||
Lets consider a different approach that might work for any form of
|
||
computer-based information. It is based on the following observation.
|
||
Software objects differ from tangible objects in being fundamentally
|
||
unable to monitor their copying but trivially able to monitor their
|
||
use. For example, it is easy to make software count how many times it
|
||
has been invoked, but hard to make it count how many times it has been
|
||
copied.
|
||
|
||
So why not build an information age market economy around this
|
||
difference between manufacturing age and information age goods? If
|
||
revenue collection were based on monitoring the use of software inside
|
||
a computer, vendors could dispense with copy protection altogether.
|
||
They could distribute electronic objects for free in expectation of a
|
||
usage-based revenue stream.
|
||
|
||
Legal precedents for this approach already exist. The distinction
|
||
between copyright (the right to copy or distribute) and useright (the
|
||
right to 'perform', or to use a copy once obtained) are both provided
|
||
by existing copyright laws. They were stringently tested in court a
|
||
century ago as the music publishers were sorting out the implications
|
||
of the emerging music broadcasting industry.
|
||
|
||
When we buy a record, we acquire ownership of a physical copy
|
||
(copyright), but only a limited useright; just the right to use the
|
||
music for personal enjoyment. Conversely, large television and radio
|
||
companies get the very same records for free, but pay substantial fees
|
||
for the useright to play the music on the air. The fees are
|
||
administered by ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and
|
||
Publishers) and BMI (Broadcasting Musicians Institute) by monitoring
|
||
how often each record is broadcast to how large a listening audience.
|
||
|
||
A Japanese industry-wide consortium, JEIDA (Japanese Electronics
|
||
Industrial Development Association) is developing an analogous approach
|
||
that analogizes each computer to a station that broadcasts to an
|
||
audience of one<4>. Called super%distribution, its premise is that copy
|
||
protection is exactly the wrong idea for software. Instead,
|
||
superdistribution allows software to be freely distributed and freely
|
||
acquired via whatever distribution mechanism you please. You are
|
||
specifically encouraged to download superdistribution software from
|
||
networks, give copies to your friends, or send it as junk mail to
|
||
people you've never met. Spray my software from airplanes if you want.
|
||
Please!
|
||
|
||
This generosity is possible because this software is 'meterware'. It
|
||
has strings attached that effectively make revenue collection
|
||
completely independent of software distribution. The software contains
|
||
embedded instructions that make it useless except on machines that are
|
||
equipped for this new kind of revenue collection.
|
||
|
||
The computers that can run superdistribution software are otherwise
|
||
quite ordinary. In particular, they will run ordinary pay-by-copy
|
||
software just fine. They just have additional capabilities that only
|
||
superdistribution software uses. In JEIDA's current prototype, these
|
||
services are provided by a silicon chip that plugs into a Macintosh
|
||
coprocessor slot.
|
||
|
||
Electronic objects (not just applications, but active and/or passive
|
||
objects of every granularity) that are intended for superdistribution
|
||
invoke this hardware to ensure that the revenue collection hardware is
|
||
present, that prior usage reports have been uploaded, and that prior
|
||
usage fees have been paid.
|
||
|
||
The hardware is not complicated (the main complexities are
|
||
tamper-proofing, not base functionality). It merely provides several
|
||
instructions that must be present before superdistribution software can
|
||
run. The instructions count how many times they have been invoked by
|
||
the software, storing these usage counts temporarily in a tamper-proof
|
||
persistent RAM. Periodically (say monthly) this usage information is
|
||
uploaded to an administrative organization for billing, using public
|
||
key encryption technology to discourage tampering and to protect the
|
||
secrecy of this information.
|
||
|
||
The end-user gets a monthly bill for their usage of each top-level
|
||
component. Their payments are credited to each component's owner in
|
||
proportion to the component's usage. These accounts are then debited
|
||
according to each application's usage of any sub-components. These are
|
||
credited to the sub-component owners, again in proportion to usage. In
|
||
other words, the end-user's payments are recursively distributed
|
||
through the producer-consumer hierarchy. The distribution is governed
|
||
by usage metering information collected from each end-user's machine,
|
||
plus usage pricing data that is provided to the administrative
|
||
organization by each component vendor.
|
||
|
||
Since communication is infrequent and involves only a small amount of
|
||
metering information, the communication channel could be as simple as a
|
||
modem that autodials a hardwired 800 number each month. Many other
|
||
solutions are viable, such as flash cards or even floppy disks to be
|
||
mailed back and forth each month in the mails.
|
||
|
||
A Revolutionary Approach
|
||
|
||
Whereas software's ease of replication is a liability today,
|
||
superdistribution makes it an asset. Whereas software vendors must
|
||
spend heavily to overcome software's invisibility, superdistribution
|
||
thrusts software out into the world to serve as its own advertisement.
|
||
Whereas the personal computer revolution isolates individuals inside a
|
||
standalone personal computer, superdistribution establishes a
|
||
cooperative/competitive community around an information age market
|
||
economy.
|
||
|
||
Of course, there are many obstacles to this ever happening for real. A
|
||
big one is the information privacy issues raised by usage monitors in
|
||
every computer from video games to workstations to mainframes. Although
|
||
we are accustomed to usage monitoring for electricity, telephone, gas,
|
||
water and electronic data services, information privacy is an explosive
|
||
political issue. Superdistribution could easily be legislated into
|
||
oblivion out of the fear that the usage information would be used for
|
||
other than billing purposes.
|
||
|
||
A second obstacle is the problem of adding usage monitoring hardware to
|
||
a critical number of computers. This is where today's computing
|
||
establishment could be gravely exposed to those less inclined to
|
||
maintain the status quo.
|
||
|
||
It is significant that superdistribution was not developed by the
|
||
American computer establishment, who presently controls 70% of the
|
||
world software market. It was developed by JEIDA, an industry-wide
|
||
consortium of Japanese computer manufacturers. The Japanese are clearly
|
||
capable of building world-class computers. Suppose that they were to
|
||
simply build superdistribution capabilities into every one of them, not
|
||
as an extra-price option but as a ubiquitous capability of every
|
||
computer they build?
|
||
|
||
Review the benefits I've discussed in this column and then ask: Whose
|
||
computers would you buy? Whose computers would Aunt Nellie and her
|
||
friends buy? What if superdistribution really is a Silver Bullet for
|
||
the information age issues I've raised in this column? And what if the
|
||
competition builds it first?
|
||
|
||
[Footnotes]
|
||
|
||
<1> ) Software-IC is a registered trademark of The Stepstone
|
||
Corporation.
|
||
|
||
<2> Brad J. Cox; Object-oriented Programming; An Evolutionary Approach;
|
||
Addison Wesley; 1986.
|
||
|
||
<3> Brad J. Cox; Object Technologies; A Revolutionary Approach; Addison
|
||
Wesley; late 1992. Also see Planning the Software Industrial
|
||
Revolution; IEEE Software; November 1990, and There is a Silver Bullet;
|
||
Byte magazine; October 1990.
|
||
|
||
<4> Ryoichi Mori and Masaji Kawahara; Superdistribution: An Overview
|
||
and the Current Status; ISEC 89-44; and Superdistribution: The Concept
|
||
and the Architecture; The Transactions of the IEICE Vol. E 73 No 7 July
|
||
1990. Also seeWhat lies ahead; Byte 1989 January; pp 346-348 and On
|
||
Superdistribution; Byte 1990; September; p 346.
|
||
* * * * *
|
||
Brad Cox, Ph.D. (203) 868-9182 voice / -0780 fax
|
||
Information Age Consulting Best: infoage!bradcox@hsi.com
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Date: 21 Jun 92 19:49:14 EDT
|
||
From: Gordon Meyer <72307.1502@COMPUSERVE.COM>
|
||
Subject: File 2--EFF on GEnie's RoundTable
|
||
|
||
______________________________________________________
|
||
| |
|
||
| The Public Forum * NonProfit Connection RoundTable |______
|
||
|______________________________________________________| |
|
||
| Sysops' GE Mail: PF$ RTC Sunday 9pm EDT: MOVE 545;2 |______
|
||
|___________________________________________________________| |
|
||
| News, Current Events, Government, Societal Issues, Nonprofits |
|
||
|________________________________________________________________|
|
||
|
||
|
||
__________________________________________________________________
|
||
| Rights & responsibilities, government, politics, minority civil |_
|
||
| rights, volunteerism, nonprofit management, the media, the | |
|
||
| environment, international issues, gay/lesbian/bisexual issues, | |
|
||
| women & men, parenting, youth organizations and more! | |
|
||
|__________________________________________________________________| |
|
||
|__________________________________________________________________|
|
||
|
||
________ PF$ PF*NPC Sysops _____________
|
||
| |_ | Weekly RTC: |_
|
||
| The | | SHERMAN Tom Sherman | 9pm Eastern | |
|
||
| PF*NPC | | SCOTT Scott Reed | on Sundays! | |
|
||
| Staff: | | CHERNOFF Paul Chernoff | Type M545;2 | |
|
||
|________| | GRAFFITI Ric Helton |_____________| |
|
||
|________| SHERRY Sherry |_____________|
|
||
|
||
|
||
Real-time Conference: Free Speech Online
|
||
with
|
||
Jerry Berman
|
||
(May 31, 1992)
|
||
====================================================================
|
||
(C) 1992 by GEnie (R) and Public Forum*NonProfit Connection
|
||
This file may be distributed only in its entirety
|
||
and with this notice intact.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Who gets to control the content of electronic communication
|
||
and the telephone system through which it travels?
|
||
|
||
Is the First Amendment well-served by current public policy
|
||
and legislation?
|
||
|
||
On May 31, at 9 pm ET, Jerry Berman, formerly chief legislative counsel for
|
||
the ACLU, joined us in RealTime Conference to talk about electronic free
|
||
speech. Founder of the ACLU Privacy and Technology Project, Jerry currently
|
||
directs the Washington, DC, office of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
|
||
|
||
Don't miss lively discussion of Science, Technology and Society in bulletin
|
||
board category 7, and check out the files on technology and society in our
|
||
library. See Cat 7/Topic 1 for details.
|
||
|
||
-=-=-=-=-
|
||
|
||
An electronic meeting place for friends, family and national "town
|
||
meetings," GEnie is an international online computer network for
|
||
information, education and entertainment. For under $5.00/month, GEnie
|
||
offers over 50 special interest bulletin boards and unlimited electronic
|
||
mail at no extra charge during evenings, weekends and holidays. GEnie is
|
||
offered by GE Information Services, a division of General Electric Company.
|
||
|
||
In the Public Forum*NonProfit Connection, thousands of people every day
|
||
discuss politics and a wide range of social and nonprofit issues. A neutral
|
||
arena for all points of view, the PF*NPC is presented by Public Interest
|
||
Media, a nonprofit organization devoted to empowering people through the
|
||
socially productive use of information and communication technology.
|
||
For more information about GEnie or the Public Forum, call 1-800-638-9636
|
||
or send electronic mail to tsherman@igc.org.
|
||
|
||
To sign up for GEnie service, call (with modem in HALF DUPLEX) 800-638-8369.
|
||
Upon connection, type HHH. At the U#= prompt, type XTX88367,GENIE <RETURN>.
|
||
The system will prompt you for information.
|
||
|
||
__________________________________________________________
|
||
-=(( The Public Forum * NonProfit Connection RoundTable ))=-
|
||
-==((( GEnie Page 545 - Keywords PF or NPC )))==-
|
||
-=((__________________________________________________________))=-
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> Welcome to the last in this month's series of
|
||
realtime conferences on Technology and Society!
|
||
These RTCs raise important issues for the future.
|
||
You'll find these issues discussed in our bulletin
|
||
board, especially in Category 7, and in many
|
||
excellent files in the Public Forum library.
|
||
|
||
Before we get started, a word about the process: So
|
||
that everyone gets a turn at the beginning, only our
|
||
guests and people asking questions will be able to
|
||
talk. When you have a question, type /RAI to raise
|
||
your hand. I'll call on you in order. Please type
|
||
your question, but DON'T hit <return> to send it.
|
||
When you're called on, THEN hit <return> to send
|
||
your question quickly. It's good to use three
|
||
periods if you have more to say and to put GA for
|
||
"go ahead" at the end of a final phrase.
|
||
|
||
And now it's our pleasure to introduce tonight's
|
||
special guests: Jerry Berman was chief legislative
|
||
counsel for the ACLU and founded its Privacy and
|
||
Technology Project. He now directs the Washington
|
||
D.C. office of the Electronic Frontier Foundation,
|
||
and is joined here tonight by his EFF colleague
|
||
Sheri Steele. They're here to talk with you about
|
||
general issues of free speech online. For example:
|
||
Who gets to control the content of electronic
|
||
communication and the telephone system through which
|
||
it travels? Is the First Amendment well-served by
|
||
current public policy and legislation?
|
||
|
||
I also want to announce that EFF and Computer
|
||
Professionals for Social Responsibility are both
|
||
getting GEnie accounts so that they can participate
|
||
in discussions like this in the BB and provide
|
||
information in our file library
|
||
|
||
Welcome, Jerry and Shari! Would you like to make any
|
||
introductory remarks?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Good to be here! Shari and I are at EFF Washington
|
||
Office on Capitol Hill in D.C. so we're inside the
|
||
beltway, trying to protect civil liberties for
|
||
cyberspace. Does anyone have any questions?
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> Please type /RAI if you have a question and I'll
|
||
call on you. Jerry, maybe you'd like to add a few
|
||
words about the EFF server?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> EFF is a new advocacy organization that is trying to
|
||
achieve the democratic potential of new technology.
|
||
We opened our Washington Office in January of this
|
||
year (EFF started a year before)... We are working
|
||
on a range of civil liberties issues. For example,
|
||
opposing the FBI's efforts to control digital
|
||
telephone technology to make wiretapping easier. We
|
||
are trying to get Congress, the FCC and the states
|
||
to make this telephone network digital to make all
|
||
of this democracy we are engaged in easier and less
|
||
savage.
|
||
|
||
<[Randy] R.DYKHUIS> Does the EFF work with e-mail systems inside
|
||
companies or does it focus exclusively on "public"
|
||
networks like GEnie?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> We consider GENIE a "private" network even though it
|
||
is open to the "public." On the other hand, the
|
||
telephone network is a public regulated network. Do
|
||
you get the distinction?
|
||
|
||
<[Randy] R.DYKHUIS> Yes, I understand.
|
||
|
||
<[gene] G.STOVER> In our current Information Revolution, like in the
|
||
Industrial Revolution, rights and other legal issues
|
||
are being juggled and rearranged. A lot of freedoms
|
||
and privileges are at stake. Are you optimistic
|
||
about the outcome? Will future generations thank us
|
||
for the world we are creating?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> A big issue in the electronic age is insuring
|
||
that the public network carries all speech and does
|
||
not censor. Like telephone calls. It is not clear
|
||
that this is the current regime... I am optimistic
|
||
if we can join together to make sure rights are
|
||
guaranteed and extended in cyberspace or the
|
||
electronic age.
|
||
|
||
<[Ric] GRAFFITI> Thanks for coming tonight! We archive all of the
|
||
EFFector online issues here in the public forum
|
||
library, and I have read a lot about Operation Sun
|
||
Devil. Where does that stand, now? What is the EFF
|
||
doing?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> We have brought a civil suit against the government
|
||
and the case is in currently in the discovery phase
|
||
in Texas. It'll take time, but we hope to establish
|
||
new privacy rights for bulletin board users.
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> Jerry, you might say a few words to describe Sun
|
||
Devil for those who don't know about it.
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Lots of people know that the Secret service and FBI
|
||
conducted a sweeping and overbroad search looking
|
||
for suspected computer hackers. We need to focus,
|
||
even tonight, on other pressing issues that confront
|
||
us. For example, Are we going to continue to let the
|
||
government control encryption so that we can never
|
||
have real privacy either against law enforcement
|
||
agencies or against others who want to violate ojur
|
||
communication privacy.
|
||
|
||
<[Ric] GRAFFITI> One of the most disturbing aspects of Sun Devil was
|
||
the confiscation of private property - computers and
|
||
related equipment and supplies - without charges
|
||
being brought OR the return of the stuff. They can
|
||
easily silence us, apparently, by taking away our
|
||
modems and terminals. What can be done?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> We have to establish new investigative law
|
||
enforcement warrant requirements for computer crime
|
||
investigations where First amendment rights may be
|
||
involved. There are precedents... The FBI must use
|
||
special procedures to conduct undercover operations
|
||
when it may be targeted against a newspaper or
|
||
university or political group to protect against
|
||
interfering with free speech... Congress almost
|
||
passed legislation after Watergate to limit in
|
||
statute how the FBI investigates political groups.
|
||
Guidelines do exist, even though the bill did not
|
||
pass... We have to do the same for BBS type
|
||
investigations.
|
||
|
||
<[Branch] H.HAINES3> What would probably be your biggest concern
|
||
regarding current electronic freedom, or the biggest
|
||
threat you are aware of?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> We need to insure that this telephone network that
|
||
GEnie is on MUST carry all speech, and not be able
|
||
to discriminate on the basis of content. Telephone
|
||
companies are not carrying certain political "900"
|
||
number accounts because they think they don't have
|
||
to carry all services just like telephone calls.
|
||
This could come to serve as a precedent for not
|
||
carrying a controversial BBS service. These rules
|
||
need to be worked out in law now before the Jesse
|
||
Helms' of the world get into this technology when
|
||
it is easier and see what's going on...
|
||
|
||
<[Branch] H.HAINES3> I hear a lot of reports that *P* (Tom PF knows this
|
||
term I'm sure) is very restrictive about what can be
|
||
said by its users. Would that be part of the problem
|
||
you describe?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Good question. Prodigy is a private service. It is
|
||
not big enough to be regulated like a public
|
||
institution. So they can discriminate and make
|
||
editorial decisions not to carry speech. We think
|
||
this is a misguided policy and have told Prodigy so
|
||
publically and privately. However, we want Prodigy
|
||
to have rights. We think the best answer is to make
|
||
the telephone network better so there can be many
|
||
Prodigy's and similar services and make it easier
|
||
for everyone to use a GEnie or some other provider
|
||
that has a more open policy. We need to make the
|
||
telephone network digital now. We can do this well
|
||
before we get to fiber optics and other 21st century
|
||
technologies. But it will require political action.
|
||
It is EFF's highest priority now.
|
||
|
||
<[gene] G.STOVER> Are BBS operators currently held responsible for the
|
||
information on their BBSes? Should they be held
|
||
responsible?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> It depends. There is very little case law. But if a
|
||
BBS has a forum like this one open to all, it should
|
||
not be liable if, for example, I libel one of you or
|
||
commit a crime on line... But today, we are not sure
|
||
what responsibilities BBSs have. Some case law
|
||
suggests that it is limited and that a BBS is like a
|
||
newsstand, and newsstand operators don't have to
|
||
know everything in every mag or book on the stand.
|
||
|
||
<[gene] G.STOVER> So if someone posts something illegal on a BBS and
|
||
is prosecuted, is the sysop prosecuted, too?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> It could be charged. The operator would argue that
|
||
it is not reasonable under the circumstances to say
|
||
it knew of or should have known the crime was being
|
||
committed. This will be a factual issue. The legal
|
||
issue is to get the Courts or the Congress to give
|
||
BBS operators a lot of freedom to err or not to
|
||
censor. Like a newspaper is not liable to public
|
||
figures for defamation unless it acts recklessly in
|
||
disregard of the truth.
|
||
|
||
<[Charlie] VASSILOPOULO> How large is the movement in Washington to legislate
|
||
morality in general and specifically in electronic
|
||
media, and who spearheads that movement?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Today, all sides--but especially the right--want to
|
||
legislate one kind of morality or another. Our job
|
||
is to make sure it is not inconsistent with the
|
||
constitution when electronic technology is involved.
|
||
We have had Congress several years ago try to outlaw
|
||
certain gay BBS systems because of possible child
|
||
pornography. Such bills will come up again when this
|
||
technology is more widely used. You can be sure that
|
||
the morality gang in Congress will try to regulate
|
||
adult, political BBSs when they are really in a
|
||
majority of American homes. And as you know, this is
|
||
not far off. We need to establish the rules now
|
||
before we have Congress looking at very
|
||
controversial siutuations with no rules in mind, or
|
||
a precedent.
|
||
|
||
<[Darla] KUBY> Won't there be sort of a 'conflict of interest' with
|
||
you having a free account on GEnie? I mean, would
|
||
Compuserve give you a free account? Or Prodigy?
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> Let me step in here. EFF is not getting a free
|
||
account; they're paying just like everyone else
|
||
except that we're giving them free access to the
|
||
Public Forum because they are helping with the
|
||
discussion and library files.
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Darla, we are paying.
|
||
|
||
<[Darla] KUBY> Would you accept the same from Compuserve or
|
||
Prodigy?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Of course, we would love to pay them also. We are
|
||
on Compuserve and we have a Prodigy account. What,
|
||
by the way, is the conflict if we had a free
|
||
account--which we don't?
|
||
|
||
<[Connie] C.RIFENBURG> A question recently came up on one of the boards
|
||
concerning reposting of a deleted post. The original
|
||
poster had deleted a post. It was captured by
|
||
another person in a buffer and reposted to the BBS.
|
||
People said it was against copyright laws...? Who
|
||
"owns" the BB post once posted?
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> Connie, I'm afraid you're asking a question that has
|
||
partly to do with GEnie rules. But Jerry can
|
||
certainly answer the general question
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Again, it depends. I dont think it is covered by
|
||
copyright law unless the posting was from, say, a
|
||
book or magazine and wasmnore than fair use.
|
||
|
||
<[Connie] C.RIFENBURG> Then copyright is only book or magazine?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> No. But when I send this message I do not expect to
|
||
be covered by copyright even though I may say
|
||
something very original. I could I guess put a THIS
|
||
IS COPYRIGHTED here. But it would be difficult to
|
||
enforce... Copyright does apply to more than books or
|
||
magazines, however, like film, etc.
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> Jerry, I think your comment conflicts with those of
|
||
another RTC guest, Gerry Elman, Esq. But that's why
|
||
we have courts, I guess :)
|
||
|
||
<[Ric] GRAFFITI> It may be too fine a distinction, but all online
|
||
systems are actually store & forward messaging
|
||
systems (voice mail & pager systems, too), instead
|
||
of direct communications channels like the phone
|
||
lines. That seems to make the BBS or online service
|
||
a publisher, by re-broadcasting (or narrowcasting,
|
||
to one person) the messages as if it had originated
|
||
the message, even though system operators had
|
||
nothing to do with the content. That seems to be
|
||
where confusion over liability for defamation and
|
||
criminal conduct occurs. Any comment?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Yes. Analogies break down but the store and forward
|
||
does not always mean the ability to edit or know of
|
||
the contents in such a way as to be liable. For
|
||
example, under current law, a service that offers
|
||
E-mail to its users violates the law if it reads a
|
||
stored message (email) before it is forwarded or
|
||
while it is stored. In fact the FBI has to get a
|
||
warrant from a court to get such a message. This is
|
||
one of the issues in Steve Jackson case. Did they
|
||
have a warrant for all the emial in Jackson's
|
||
system?
|
||
|
||
<[Ric] GRAFFITI> They got it, didn't they? :) Seriously, then, online
|
||
and BBS systems are not liable for the contents of
|
||
email?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> That is correct. Thus, one could shield a BBS from
|
||
liability by encouraging anything controversial be
|
||
carried as email between those who wanted to send
|
||
and receive the messages.
|
||
|
||
<[gene] G.STOVER> Do you think the proposed(?) partial deregulation to
|
||
allow the telcos to produce TV is a good idea? Could
|
||
this produce abuses like those with the old railroad
|
||
tycoons? Comments?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Good question. The issue is whether a carrier (like
|
||
the telcos) can also publish content and not
|
||
discriminate against other information providers.
|
||
There is good reason to worry, but did you know that
|
||
while the telcos can't do cable TV yet over their
|
||
lines, they NOW can do information services and
|
||
compete with others?
|
||
|
||
<[gene] G.STOVER> Where could I find more info on this?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Send Shari Steele E-Mail at Eff.org
|
||
(ssteele@eff.org)
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> And you'll see the EFF GEnie address pretty soon!
|
||
|
||
<[T.C.] WIDMO> What is the danger of public BBS messages being
|
||
gathered by gov't, to suppress individual political
|
||
action?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Not much right now. Since the Watergate scandals
|
||
and Hoover revelations, government has not been
|
||
collecting gobs of info from political groups. They
|
||
used to gather everything using informants and
|
||
wiretaps, etc.... also attend public meetings.
|
||
Today, if a police officer joined this conference,
|
||
we would have a hard time arguing that he or she
|
||
could not. Does any one disagree?
|
||
|
||
<[T.C.] WIDMO> Could they pressure co's with gov't contracts to
|
||
forward to them anything questionable?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Sure they could. They could ask BBS services to give
|
||
them transcripts of public forums like this and it
|
||
would break no law. (Perhaps a contract between BBS
|
||
and subscriber but NO LAW.)
|
||
|
||
<POLICE> I just came in on this a short time ago so I may
|
||
have missed this, but does an online service such as
|
||
GEnie or Prodigy have a right to censor public
|
||
messages on the BB's?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> The answer is Yes. For example, if GEnie did not
|
||
want a DAVID DUKE conference it could turn Duke
|
||
down. Or it could end the conference. GEnie is a
|
||
private publisher and its BBS conferences are like
|
||
letters to the editor in some respects. GEnie is not
|
||
the government. We want GEnie to have the right to
|
||
editorialize so that we all have similar rights to
|
||
choose how we speek. We need a diversity of BBSs to
|
||
cover political diversity. Does anyone disagree?
|
||
|
||
<[Ric] GRAFFITI> I imagine you run into the misperception about
|
||
public vs. private data networks often. However,
|
||
moving on...... Could you comment on the FBI's
|
||
"demand" to be let in and given free access to the
|
||
plaintext of the digital phone network? Why did they
|
||
publish editorials and go on TV with this request to
|
||
massively re-engineer modern phone & data equipment?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Good question. The FBI is worried that fiber optic
|
||
networks, services like Call-Forwarding, etc. will
|
||
make it difficult for them to conduct lawful
|
||
warrants. This is a real concern, but we do not
|
||
believe the solution is to allow them backdoors to
|
||
all networks or easy access to encryption keys.
|
||
There are narrower solutions. They went on TV and
|
||
radio because they are engaged in political
|
||
persuasion to get the law changed in their favor. We
|
||
are doing the same from the other side. CPSR, EFF,
|
||
ACLU and industry are opposing this proposal.
|
||
|
||
<[Ric] GRAFFITI> Is the day of the phone bug, wire tap and easy
|
||
access to private communications coming to a close?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> No. Some of the technology is better for privacy but
|
||
software changes can give law enforcement access to
|
||
more info than ever.
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> Jerry, what would you suggest that people, who are
|
||
concerned about free speech online, do to insure
|
||
that corporate or government interests won't impose
|
||
limitations?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> Citizens on the electronic frontier need to organize
|
||
to protect their rights. Keeping informed--like here
|
||
on GEnie--is a good step. Joining organizations like
|
||
CPSR, EFF, and ACLU (I try to be catholic) also will
|
||
help. We are trying to put together at EFF an
|
||
advocacy organization that can make our voices heard
|
||
on these issues. We are amping up our membership
|
||
effort. We now already have 4 full professionals
|
||
here in DC working on legal and policy issues
|
||
involving technology, free speech, privacy, access to
|
||
information, improving the telephone network,
|
||
creating a BBS rights and responsibilities book,
|
||
etc...
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> You said something about these issues being settled
|
||
in the courts or in Congress. Which would you
|
||
prefer? Is working through EFF, CPSR, ACLU etc the
|
||
best way to influence the outcome?
|
||
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20> I do not think we can solve large technology issues
|
||
in the courts. It took the courts 40 years to figure
|
||
out that wiretapping violated privacy. Bad cases,
|
||
like national security threats, tend to make bad
|
||
law... and this is not a liberal Supreme Court, is
|
||
it? We need broader technology policy and that
|
||
requires working out new relationships between
|
||
converging technologies, like computers, telephones,
|
||
cable, mass media... Congress and state legislatures
|
||
are the appropriate forums. And we can have an
|
||
influence and not let the courts do the elitist
|
||
solution routine.
|
||
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN> A perfect closing answer! Thanks to Jerry Berman and
|
||
Shari Steele for joining us tonight, and thanks to
|
||
the EFF for joining GEnie to improve our discussion
|
||
of these crucial issues for the future. I also want
|
||
to thank all the participants who asked great
|
||
questions tonight and to encourage all those reading
|
||
this transcript to join us! <grin>
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----# Participants #-----
|
||
|
||
|
||
<[Connie] C.RIFENBURG>
|
||
<[gene] G.STOVER>
|
||
<[Ric] GRAFFITI>
|
||
<[Branch] H.HAINES3>
|
||
<[Darla] KUBY>
|
||
<POLICE>
|
||
<[JERRY BERMAN] PRESS20>
|
||
<[Randy] R.DYKHUIS>
|
||
<[Tom PF*NPC] SHERMAN>
|
||
<[Charlie] VASSILOPOULO>
|
||
<[T.C.] WIDMO>
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
| This listing was generated by LRTC Version 1.00
|
||
| (C)opyright by Hartmut W. Malzahn, 1991. All rights reserved.
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
______________________________________________________
|
||
| |
|
||
| The Public Forum * NonProfit Connection RoundTable |______
|
||
|______________________________________________________| |
|
||
| Sysops' GE Mail: PF$ RTC Sunday 9pm EDT: MOVE 545;2 |______
|
||
|___________________________________________________________| |
|
||
| News, Current Events, Government, Societal Issues, Nonprofits |
|
||
|________________________________________________________________|
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
End of Computer Underground Digest #4.28
|
||
************************************
|
||
|
||
|