From: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 07:34:19 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Are there laws against remailing messages?
Message-ID: <adc7448f200210047837@[205.199.118.202]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


[I've changed the thread title.]

At 2:17 PM 5/21/96, Jim Choate wrote:

>In pondering the last few days of discussion it occurs to me that a test
>might be possible. In short:
>
>Is it legal for a business to anonymously remail physical mail?
...
>I would also like to point out (the obvious I admit) that the founding
>fathers apparently embarced anonymous distribution via their 'publius'
>handle. It seems to me that a federal prosecutor would have a hard time
>claiming there was no precedence for such actions. Such a claim to my way
>of thinking would be fundamental in any attempted prosecution for anonymous
>remailing. Also, as far as I can find out, there was no persecution of the
>newspapers for printing this material anonymously, they apparently were not
>held to task for the content. This seems to indicate that English commen law
>of that day (and its descendants here today) embraced anonymous speech as
>well.


Several points:

* The Supreme Court formally decided many years ago that leaflets, fliers,
articles, handouts, etc., cannot be required to be identified. (Some state
had tried to require that leaflets be identifed with the name of the author
or distributing group. I don't have the case name handy, but it's pretty
famous and is cited in all the books on cyberspace law...I may even have a
mention of it by name in the Cyphernomicon.)

* This ruling, which is certainly fully consistent with the First
Amendment, should of course apply to electronic forms of leaflets, fliers,
articles, handouts, etc. Unless, of course, there is an upheld
interpretation that the Net is different from print media, which I think it
clearly is not.

* As to laws against receiving a letter and then resending it to somone
else...how could that be a crime? What I receive in my mail is my business.
What I do with what I receive in the mail is also my business. Demanding
that I process letters or notes to me in certain ways and not in other ways
would be interfering with my communications.

(Quibblers will likely cite FCC and election campaign laws as a
counterexample. Wrongly, I think. Another debate.)

* Now if I start doing this remailing on a large-scale basis, various
business regulations, tax laws, etc., obviously come into effect.
"Remailings Etc." will have to satisfy various regulators, tax collectors,
OSHA inspectors, etc...all the things that make it so hard to start a small
business in America. However, I can't think of any obvious laws which ban
receiving a package or letter, removing the outer addressing, removing the
payment, and then resending it.

(Not saying there aren't such regulations, though I think they are clearly
unconstitutional. The "regulate commerce" language which is frequently
cited as justification for meddling in business should not be able to turn
a business into a lawbreaker for doing what individuals can do.)


In summary, what I receive in my mail, physical or electronic, is for me to
do with as I wish. This includes sending it on to another site, commenting
on it (*), etc.

(* A finesse I thought of a few years ago is this: If remailing is ever
banned or if remailers are held liable, use _quotes_. That is, I say:

----

To: foo@bar.baz
From: Tim-Remailer@black.net
Subject: Ever seen anything like this?

Somebody sent me this:

<message>

----

Now, what's a law against remailers going to do? Hold me liable for passing
a message on and asking for comment?

(Yes, I think this is a pretty transparently cute ploy to circumvent laws
about remailings. But it shows, I think, the can of worms that gets opened
should such a law ever get passed and then upheld. It would place limits
not only on what one could "remail without comment," but on what one could
_include_ in one's own messages!)

--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."