From: bigdaddy@ccnet.com (Le Dieu D'Informations Insensibles...)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 20:54:51 PDT
To: Jon Lasser <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu>
Subject: Re: Anti-Electronic Racketeering Act of 1995 (fwd)
Message-ID: <199507140351.UAA23945@ccnet.ccnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>On Thu, 13 Jul 1995, Ray Arachelian wrote:

>How about "not respecting international copyright law, and not having 
>extradition treaties with the US" ... set up a data haven, we now know 
>why we need it soon... charge by the Kbyte, automate the billing, and relax.
        How about one of the Middle Eastern countries? Saudi Arabia would have
been good until recently, but they've just signed the Berne Convention on
copyrights...so there's one down. On the plus side, the authorities haven't
banned crypto yet. Why? One only wonders.
        Kuwait has ready-made Internet access, but is, if I'm not mistaken,
also a signatory to the international copyright convention. Both Kuwait and
the KSA are also very friendly with the U.S., though I cannot name any
specific case of extradition between the two countries. Given the choice
between a Saudi court and a U.S. one, however, I'd pick the U.S. :-)
        Why not Yemen, Oman, or Lebanon? We'd have to start an ISP by
ourselves, but the countries are small enough...or just recovering from civil
war...such that nothing would be noticed(fingers crossed). Oman has CISnet
access...maybe something could be built on that. For Yemen or Lebanon, we'd
have to get a satellite hookup(which presents its own problems).
        Besides, Oman has simply _beautiful_ scenery. :-)        
>Anybody seriously interested? 
        In theory. To actually set up a data haven takes more resources than I
have. IMHO, however, one of the smaller Middle Eastern countries would be
good, as they generally don't(unless I'm mistaken) have reciprocal copyright
treaties with the U.S., are not generally signatories of the Berne Convention
(except KSA and the UAE and maybe Kuwait), and do not look likely to outlaw
crypto. 

Thoughts?

David Molnar

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMAVbweFDHpuTkgoVAQHt8Af/VkW5FIqpd46ydnchTpSfKZUS+c4Aviu6
ZQA2UYY5GbCQhyKNJ6Tk2OKJI82vfOpo+n+uSZfvAWnLlxrzQ1mDJxJ9wWaaAa4u
WIG4XWbGCFetRYAVYF+h/I6zG7+zCE8N3bn2kAcAz7SoDgqGP1CXiXsXmEiqBJNS
O8U8nM1ZFZ4KZBwShf5SsprKgKP98TCmWJc7L5li9Pco7HyLzBdsHUz2pJgCd4Eh
rp/8jfzu2so/tF5EHkjGIcPUnp0rEfZ5gKc/gimDloHfyzVxA3ITraXe8xOZF3iX
sICCpBb+qoDLzvt5lM+Vpm7+pUa/fF+OJB0+eX4gNw/a082gH6LeOg==
=rmDi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

lo...look to the sig, for there will be no sign