From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 94 16:28:31 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Remailer Musings
Message-ID: <9404192326.AA20064@internal.apple.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>>On the other hand, part of the rules of being a common carrier are that
>>one is *required* to cooperate with appropriate authorities to prevent
>>this sort of abuse and to catch said abusers if/when it happens.  I
>>suspect that Mr. Templeton's lawyer could make a case that by setting
>>up a remailer where one cannot "trace calls," one is violating the
>>requirements of being a common carrier, and thus is responsible for
>>content.
>
>I wonder how this would jive with the factoid someone on this list (don't
>have the original handy) found a while back about the court ruling in favor
>of the right to operate under an alias in (constitutionally?) protected, at
>least in terms of publishing, etc.? I remember the case happening in L.A.,
>I think. Anyway, what are the odds a case could be made that my 'anonymous
>identity' "fooperson" is a legal pseudonym? Stretching it some, but a
>possibility, and one case where similarities with publishing can work in
>favor of privacy.

I believe it was stated (correctly, according to my understanding) that one
may use any pseudonym, as long as the intention in using it is not to
commit a crime.

Copyright infringement _is_, like it or not, a crime.

There is not, to the best of my knowledge, any such thing as "a legal
pseudonym".

--
Lefty (lefty@apple.com)
C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.