1994-03-01 - Re: Freehdom Isn`t Freeh

Header Data

From: Mats Bergstrom <matsb@sos.sll.se>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 907386e3aa5f6281e7ddaaf87fb824320ad70e90946fdebea3695417fc9077f4
Message ID: <Pine.3.85.9403011929.A14466-0100000@cor.sos.sll.se>
Reply To: <199403011606.AA22179@panix.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-03-01 18:57:06 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 1 Mar 94 10:57:06 PST

Raw message

From: Mats Bergstrom <matsb@sos.sll.se>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 94 10:57:06 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Freehdom Isn`t Freeh
In-Reply-To: <199403011606.AA22179@panix.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.85.9403011929.A14466-0100000@cor.sos.sll.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> New York Times, Monday, February 28, 1994
> Business Day
> A PUSH FOR SURVEILLANCE SOFTWARE
> By John Markoff

> A version of the legislation was first proposed in 1991 by the Bush
> Administration at the urging of the Justice Department.  But unlike that
> version, the new bill would limit the surveillance to public networks and
> not include company phone systems --- private branch exchanges, or PBXs
> --- or private corporate computer networks.

This is not fair! But couldn't a network provider hire all it's users for 
1 dollar a year and deduct the employees' communications expenses from 
their salaries (making the net salary negative) thus keeping the network 
corporate and private?

matsb







Thread