1994-08-12 - Computer services NOT in DTB was: Are Remailers Liable for What They Remail?

Header Data

From: “Pat Farrell” <pfarrell@netcom.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 80d80f2cf50dd6cd4f70885652ecca69e0fa8413fb4233bf0d9313cb1a7620ca
Message ID: <37693.pfarrell@netcom.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-08-12 14:31:36 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 12 Aug 94 07:31:36 PDT

Raw message

From: "Pat Farrell" <pfarrell@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 94 07:31:36 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Computer services NOT in DTB was: Are Remailers Liable for What They Remail?
Message-ID: <37693.pfarrell@netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

> Following up on myself...
> I was looking thru the text of an early markup of the bill today, and it
> includes information service providers. I'll go out to my car and get the
> page and cite.

I misread the wording of the bill. It carefully defines information service
providers, and then many pages later says that they are not covered
by the requirements of the bill.

At least this is the text of the hardcopy that I have, and in the
text files in the ftp.eff.org files. (The EFF files seem to be
exactly what I have, except for formatting, etc.)

Since it explicitly excludes information service firms, I expect that
remailer operators are safe from this one.

I appologise for any confusion I've caused. And I still think the bill
is a crock.

The bill has not been thru "markup" so the wordings, inclusions and
exclusions may change. Some bills even go thru markup after they
are voted on. This may be one of those, altho with the defeat of
crime bill, the politicians are pretty busy today.


Pat Farrell      Grad Student                 pfarrell@cs.gmu.edu
Department of Computer Science    George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Public key availble via finger          #include <standard.disclaimer>