From telstar@wired.comSun Jun 9 23:13:19 1996
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 20:48:29 -0800
From: telstar@wired.com
To: declan@eff.org
Cc: telstar@wired.com
Subject: UPDATE: The Second Great Net Panic
THE CDA DISASTER NETWORK
June 9, 1996
Still no word from the control tower in Philadelphia on the CDA decision...
but while we circle in this holding pattern, Comrade Declan McCullagh has
put together an excellent inflight presentation of Fight-Censorship
Dispatch.
Speaking of the Internet hi-jinks now taking place in Washington D.C.,
Declan reports:
"Whatever the cause, it's clear that last year's cyberporn scare --
centering around online smut and leading to the passage of the
Communications Decency Act -- is dwarfed by this year's fevered
attempts to control the Net."
Declan also brings news of Al Gore's recent speech at MIT, in which the
Vice President was heard to pontificate:
"But let me also state my clear and unequivocal view that a fear of
chaos cannot justify unwarranted censorship of free speech, whether
that speech occurs in newspapers, on the broadcast airwaves -- or
over the Internet."
This, from the same administration that signed the CDA into law!
Personally, I want the Clinton administration go ON RECORD with a pledge to
*veto any and all* pending attempts to create Internet content prohibitions
that would be unconstitutional if applied equally to the print medium.
ONLY THEN will I begin to take the administration's "unequivocal"
committment to free speech seriously.
Sure would be mighty nice if one of them presidential candidates pandered
to *us* for a change.
"Contract with the Internet," anyone? All suitors are welcome... serious
candidates only, please.
Keep your seatbelt fastened...
More turbulence follows below.
Work the network!
--Todd Lappin-->
Section Editor
WIRED Magazine
===========================================
Fight-Censorship Dispatch #13
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Second Great Net Panic
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Declan McCullagh / declan@well.com / Redistribute freely
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this dispatch: The Second Great Net Panic grips Washington, DC
Bruce Taylor tries a "finger" gambit
DFC online copyright action alert, press conference
Deputy Atty General slams Net, calls for central control
Al Gore decries "unwarranted censorship?"
June 9, 1996
WASHINGTON, DC -- As a wet spring steams into a muggy summer, the
Second Great Net Panic has gripped the nation's capital.
It could be the humidity. The same waterlogged air that makes my
keyboard stick about this time every year forces lobbyists and
legislators indoors to catered receptions and air-conditioned
hearing rooms where they catalog the dangers of the Net. Or perhaps
election year politics lends this scaremongering rhetoric its
rough, serrated edge.
Whatever the cause, it's clear that last year's cyberporn scare --
centering around online smut and leading to the passage of the
Communications Decency Act -- is dwarfed by this year's fevered
attempts to control the Net.
That is, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
In the last two weeks:
* The Federal Trade Commission held two days of hearings to decide
how to regulate web sites that collect personal information about
children.
* Sen. Sam Nunn (D-GA) announced at a Senate investigations
subcommittee hearing that his suspicions of evil cryptohackers
lurking on the Net mean the CIA and NSA must be permitted to
snoop domestically, a practice long prohibited by law.
* The Clinton administration responded to Congressional attempts to
liberalize export controls on strong encryption with a "Clipper
III" white paper, and a blue-ribbon NRC report recommended only
minor changes in U.S. crypto export policy.
* The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings where witnesses from
the Hollywood copyright lobby testified that copyright thieves
plague the Net.
* A House Judiciary subcommittee is planning a final markup of
HR2441, a terribly restrictive online copyright bill similar to
one the Senate is considering, this Wednesday.
* The Defense Information Systems Agency released a report claiming
that hackers tried to break into Pentagon systems 250,000 times in
1995.
* The 1997 Defense Authorization Bill will give the White House six
months to report on "the national policy on protecting the
national information infrastructure from strategic attack."
* At the first-ever "CyberCongress" hearing held by a House
committee, representatives complained about being flamed through
anonymous remailers and said there should be accountability online.
* Today's Sunday Washington Post featured an article by Richard Leiby
on the first page of the Outlook section bashing "self-indulgent
dross" and "crap" on the Net: "I took out the Internet trash
and found there wasn't much left."
* Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), chair of Senate Judiciary, held a hearing
on June 4 where family values activists testified in support of
Hatch's bill that gives you 15 years for creating or viewing a
GIF that "appears to be" or is said to be kiddie porn -- even if
it's actually a morphed photo of an adult.
* Journalist Lew Koch unearthed an alarmist speech by Deputy
Attorney General Jamie Gorelick slamming not just nonescrowed
crypto but the "social problems" of the Net -- and calling for a
new "Manhattan Project" and even a new Federal agency to start
"devising and implementing solutions."
That's the bad news, and the good news is far from reassuring. Some
Congressperns are starting to learn about the Net and the Internet
Caucus' membership is growing. The computer industry has begun to
become more involved in the legislative process, but they're up
against well-entrenched opposition.
The EFF's Mike Godwin had it right when he wrote to me earlier today:
"Every agency wants a bite of jurisdiction over the Internet."
I'm not placing any bets on the eventual outcome of the Second Great
Net Panic, especially when protect-our-children rhetoric comes laced
with protect-our-country slogans. But I know the summer's starting and
some of the keys on my workstation are starting to stick. Yesterday I
spent a sweaty afternoon performing open-keyboard surgery to try and
get my home row working again.
So I'm not too optimistic...
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
BRUCE TAYLOR TRIES A "FINGER" GAMBIT
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
Bruce Taylor, the former Federal smut-buster and chief architect of
the CDA, is at it again. This time the Brucester is weighing in on the
New York CDA case with an expanded copy of the amicus brief he first
filed in the Philly lawsuit in which I'm a plaintiff.
When I spoke with him last Thursday, Taylor sketched out his latest
argument in favor of the CDA -- that it's constitutional because the
"finger" service can be modified to return info about whether
someone's an adult or a child. "I just learned about 'finger' a few
weeks ago," Taylor said.
His brief reads:
Though the testimony is disputed between the parties, there is
evidence in the record to show that there ways to comply with the
CDA that are presently available, other means that are possible and
trivial to institute, and there will undoubtedly be more and easier
ways to comply in the future. Potential mechanisms of compliance
include... agreement on an -L18 or digital or access provider user
or some other mechanism or combination of devices which allow
content providers to identify adult visitors to their sites, pages,
or GIFs and thereby exclude children (such as refinement of the
PRESENT METHOD OF FINGERING to identify the name of a visitor so
that the visitor's access provider or ISP releases the users age as
well as his or her identity -- a fact no less anonymous),
[Emphasis mine. --DBM]
Of course, Taylor's suggestion of putting an "A" or "C" (adult or
child) flag in the info returned by finger creates more problems than
it solves. Most online services don't provide information about users
via finger daemons. More to the point, such a proposal would let any
unscrupulous net.lurker troll for "C" flags -- not exactly the best
way to protect children!
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
DIGITAL FUTURE COALITION ACTION ALERT, PRESS CONFERENCE
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
In response to a planned House subcommittee markup of its ill-bred
copyright legislation this Wednesday, the Digital Future Coalition is
planning a press conference at 9:30 am this Tuesday, June 11, at the
National Press Club in Washington, DC.
Presenters at the press conference include the Consumer Federation of
America, the National Education Association, the American Committee
for Interoperable Systems (including Sun Microsystems and America
Online), and the Home Recording Rights Coalition. Other members of the
DFC include the American Library Association, the Electronic Frontier
Foundation, People for the American Way, and the Electronic Privacy
Information Center.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIGITAL FUTURE COALITION ACTION ALERT
From dfc@alawash.org
Imminent Congressional action on NII copyright bill threatens
consumers, students, and other Internet users
Your immediate contacts with key House Judiciary Subcommittee Members
critical!
The House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual
Property will meet in the next few days to vote on H.R. 2441, the NII
Copyright Protection Act. Call subcommittee members who represent you
or to your institution NOW and tell them that this badly imbalanced
bill shouldn't be voted on unless and until all of the following
problems are addressed. If passed in its current form, H.R. 2441
would:
* Make it a crime to manufacture the next generation of VCRs,
personal computers and other digital devices needed for
recreational and educational use by adding a sweeping and
overbroad new Section 1201 to the Copyright Act;
* Make simply browsing the Internet a violation of the law without
a license from copyright owners;
* Prevent teachers from using computers to their full potential in
"distance education" efforts that bring electronic classrooms to
kids, especially in rural communities and for the disabled;
* Subject computer system operators -- including online services
and networks at schools and libraries -- to potentially crippling
liability for the copyright violations of their users.
Please immediately fax a letter to -- AND CALL -- all members of the
House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property who
represent you or an institution with which you are affiliated. These
contacts must be made NO LATER THAN Tuesday, June 11 and preferably
sooner. Address contacts to the Congressperson, but direct your letter
or call to the appropriate staffer. [URL at the end. -DBM]
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
DEPUTY ATTY GENERAL SLAMS NET, CALLS FOR CENTRAL CONTROL
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
It's scaremongering at its finest. That's all I can think after I read
the text of a speech Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick gave
earlier this year at the Air Force Academy.
Gorelick starts with the time-honored horror gambit of terrorists,
child pornographers, organized crime groups, and hackers -- but then
moves on to rail against the social problems she's found on the Net.
"Email flames" and "faceless" chat rooms are threats to family values,
she claims.
Then she calls for a centralized government agency to deal with the
problem of the Internet. Clearly, she says, we need a "Manhattan
Project" to fight cybernastiness and net.terrorists:
We clearly need one focal point in the government to take the lead
in addressing this issue comprehensively -- to develop national
policy, coordinate the necessary other agencies, and with industry
on developing solutions. We need the equivalent of the "Manhattan
Project" to address the technological issues and to help us harden
our infrastructures against attack. It might be that we can just
designate an existing agency to take the lead. Or we may need a new
agency or some interagency body to perform the task...
Jeanne Devoto (jdevoto@well.com) writes:
[It's an] attempt to conflate the threat of computer intrusion with
the "threat" of open access to a mass medium. If such a conflation
is widely successful, we could see "We must pass this measure
to license Internet users/ban indecent language/impose FCC
regulation on ISPs - in order to combat the threat of computer
crime!"
Computers are the equivalent of nuclear weapons? Maybe treating software
as a munition makes sense after all.
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
AL GORE DECRIES "UNWARRANTED CENSORSHIP?"
+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+
Al Gore sure knows how to play to an audience -- even if it's a bunch
of computer geeks who don't like how the White House has embraced and
defended the Communications Decency Act. During his commencement
address at MIT on June 7, Gore said:
But let me also state my clear and unequivocal view that a fear of
chaos cannot justify unwarranted censorship of free speech, whether
that speech occurs in newspapers, on the broadcast airwaves -- or
over the Internet.
Our best reaction to the speech we loathe is to speak out, to reject,
to respond, even with emotion and fervor, but to censor -- no. That
has not been our way for 200 years, and it must not become our way
now.
Talk is cheap. It's now possible for Washington politicians to speak
out against the CDA -- but only because so many mainstream industry
and academic groups coalesced around the ALA/CIEC lawsuit.
When it counted, Gore did nothing to halt the morality crusaders who
pushed the "indecency" standard through Congress. In fact, he embraced
the bill, saying in an interview with the Wall Street Journal:
This is an early Christmas for consumers. It's a terrific bill...
Every concern the president expressed about the initial legislation
has been dealt with on a bipartisan basis.
He also issued a statement on December 20, 1996:
Today we had a victory for the American economy and the American
consumer with the bipartisan agreement to create a telecommunications
industry for the 21st Century in a way that will lower prices,
increase and improve services in telecommunications and preserve the
diversity of voices and viewpoints in television and radio that are
essential to our democracy.
Stay tuned for more reports.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A clarification to Dispatch #12: Cherry v. Reno has not yet been
formally consolidated with Shea v. Reno.
Mentioned in this CDA update:
Deputy Atty Gen Jamie Gorelick's speech slamming Net, calling for controls:
http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2733
Complete DFC copyright Action Alert, with legislator contact info:
http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2740
Declan McCullagh on "LolitaWatch" and -L18 -- July '96 Internet World:
http://www.internetworld.com/iw-online/July96/news.html
Declan McCullagh on CDA hearings -- June '96 Internet World:
http://www.internetworld.com/iw-online/June96/news.html
Bruce Taylor's amicus "finger" brief in NYC CDA lawsuit:
http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2736
NRC crypto report now online, thanks to John Young:
http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/nrcindex.htm
Brock Meeks on Sen. Sam Nunn's plans for domestic snooping:
http://www.hotwired.com/netizen/96/23/campaign_dispatch3a.html
Al Gore speaks at MIT about dangers of net.censorship:
http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=2737
Al Gore's 12/95 statement on Telecommunications Act of 1996:
http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=478
Al Gore calls Telecommunications Act "early Christmas" present:
http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=469
Al Gore speaks at Penn, greeted by anti-CDA protests:
http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=1170
Creative Incentive Coalition on copyright, pro-HR2441:
http://www.cic.org/
Digital Future Coalition on copyright, anti-HR2441:
http://www.ari.net/dfc/
Brock Meeks on online copyright:
http://www.hotwired.com/muckraker/96/20/index3a.html
U.S. Congressional Internet Caucus:
http://www.house.gov/white/internet_caucus/netcauc.html
Fight-Censorship list
Rimm ethics critique
Int'l Net-Censorship
Justice on Campus
This document and previous Fight-Censorship Dispatches are archived at:
To subscribe to future Fight-Censorship Dispatches and related
announcements, send "subscribe fight-censorship-announce" in the body
of a message addressed to:
majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu
Other relevant web sites:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
This transmission was brought to you by....
THE CDA DISASTER NETWORK
The CDA Disaster Network is a moderated distribution list providing
up-to-the-minute bulletins and background on efforts to overturn the
Communications Decency Act. To subscribe, send email to
with "subscribe cda-bulletin" in the message body.
WARNING: This is not a test! WARNING: This is not a drill!
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+