From: Daniel Salber <daniel.salber@imag.fr>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 09:06:08 +0800
To: Arun Mehta <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Minitel "saved" by hackers?
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19960712212426.002e925c@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
Message-ID: <v03007610ae0c2aab29e3@[129.88.32.100]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 21:31 +0500 on 12/07/96, Arun Mehta wrote:

> Has FT ever denied permission (to hard-core sex servers or neo-Nazis, for
> example)? That, the tax they charge and the prohibition of encryption make
> it too centralized for my taste. And will ultimately kill it. The longer the
> French take to migrate to the Internet, the worse for them (IMHO).

The tax wasn't charged by FT but by the government (ok, FT is
government-owned but it makes a difference nevertheless). Yes there have
been a few cases of censorship by the government (not FT!). As fas as I
remember the reasons were like chat services that allowed online
prostitutes or drugs dealers.

Prohibition of encryption is definitely a problem here. Although it's not
officially prohibited, you have to request a permit to use strong crypto,
and you don't get one if you plan to use "too strong" crypto like RSA and
you're not a "serious" institution like a bank. Some recent changes in the
organization of the security agency in charge of delivering permits as well
as the current trends towards the deregulation of crypto export in the US
may bring some change... some day. (see http://www.cnam.fr/Network/Crypto/
-- in french -- for details of french encryption regulations)

> Why not link up videotex in every country with the Internet? Let people surf
> the Web using their TVs and remotes (and maybe a keyboard with an infra-red
> link). That's what I'm trying to tell our utter failure of a videotex
> service in India.

As far as I know, most videotex systems use 1200 bps and crude 8-color
graphics. That's ok to make use of many web sites, but the web seems to be
heading full speed towards higher and higher bandwidth and interactivity.

Daniel