From: Mike Duvos <enoch@zipcon.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 14:33:02 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: CPAC, XtatiX, and the Censor-State
Message-ID: <19970728062731.13289.qmail@zipcon.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



The self-proclaimed "child protectors" are at it again.  This
time, an ex-police officer with far too much time on his hands
has declared war on all so-called "boylover" web sites on the
Internet.

This includes not only sites where legal issues surrounding
youthful sexuality are discussed, but virtually every site in
which the word "boy" appears, including photography web sites,
young celebrity sites, and any sites such sites link to.

We're not talking about porn here, but material which is
perfectly legal, the vast majority of which would attract little
attention aside from the fact that a bunch of Christian wankers
have unilaterally decided for all of us that they do not want it
on the Net.

They have sworn to harrass each and every ISP carrying material
on their "hit list," until the material is removed.  Tactics
include intimidating snail mail spams and phone calls by people
claiming to be associated with law enforcement, as well as late
night phone calls threatening bodily harm to ISP management and
their families.

The rantings of this individual and his similarly minded friends
can be found at...

         http://mavrick-bbs.com/cyranch/sewer2.htm
and      http://www.thecpac.com/net-safety.html

The latest organization to be attacked by Officer Friendly and
his contingent of jackbooted thugs is XtatiX.com, a small
provider which until recently had hosted a number of web
resources which CPAC didn't like.  The nature and content of
these web sites were clearly discussed with XtatiX before they
were chosen to host them, and assurances were given that no 
problem existed. 

XtatiX.com states explicitly on their home page, and I quote...

   "XtatiX supports the concept of an open Internet. Xtatix
    does not censor accounts or content in any form. We
    encourage our users to exercise sound and responsible
    judgement when creating their web pages."

   "We also understand that some internet sites may have
    content that some find objectionable. Software products
    exist which give the individual the ability to limit
    unwanted material. This software does not interfere with the
    rights of others to surf as they wish."

So one might think that anything legal and resonably tasteful
goes at XtatiX, right?  Well, that's the way it was until the
CPAC contingent hurled a few threats in their direction.

In response to the harrassment, XtatiX is now sending a letter to
web customers whose pages are, according to XtatiX, "too
controversial."

XtatiX says in part...

   "We regret to inform you that we can no longer host your
    website, due to many local and national pressures on us, to
    get rid" of sites of the nature of yours, and also a few
    more sites with other natures that could be considered
    controversial."

   "We sincerely apologize, because we _DO NOT_ like
    censorship, nor do we endorse its use. We have had to
    practice it of late, though, because of many law
    enforcement and other officials emailing us, and or calling
    us in regards to some of the sites we are now hosting."

   "Again, if it were based soley upon our choice, then we
    would not change our censorship policies, and would not have
    to do things such as these, which pain us very much. We
    would appreciate it very much if you would please copy the
    files you need to host your site off the server within 48
    hours, and delete the copies on the server."

   "This does not mean that we do not still want you on as an
    XtatiX customer, but we can no longer deal with as many
    hate mails, phone calls, and emails from law enforcement
    officials and users on other systems. Please bear with us."

Now XtatiX is certainly welcome to accept or turn away business
as they see fit, although it seems somewhat disingenuous of them
to loudly advertise their service as one that "does not censor
accounts or content in any form," while at the same time,
crawling all over themselves to get rid of customers they
consider "too controversial," based on harrassment orchestrated
by a single pressure group.

Now to some Cypherpunk issues this case illustrates...

"Information Wants To Be Free"

Our working model of information services has always been
comprised of three things.

First, a dynamic collection of information service providers with
complete discretion as to whom they choose to do business with.
Second, a Net which regards censorship as damage and routes
around it.  And third, market forces that ensure that any legal
information has a home where others may access it.  Providers
that censor lose customers, who give their money to providers who
don't.

The CPAC/XtatiX case study demonstrates another reality.

First, a dynamic collection of information service providers in a
mad race to see who can come in second to last when the awards
for "Enemy of the State" are handed out.  Second, a Net in which
almost nothing is multi-homed which cannot even regard damage as
damage and route around it.  And third, market forces which
ensure that censorship is frequent, silent, and never publicly
spoken of in policy statements.

Whether it's CPAC wanting to nuke all web sites containing the
word "boy," Sen. Swinestein wanting to nuke all web sites
containing the word "bomb," or Sen. Hatch wanting to nuke all web
sites containing the word "sex," the optimal strategy for service
providers has turned out to be to quietly remove any material
some squeeky wheel is uncomfortable with, keep proclaiming
themselves to be the strongest supporters of free speech in the
entire Net community, and stonewall when asked questions which
might suggest anything to the contrary.

This behavior of the Net mirrors the behavior of the other
so-called "free" market-driven media.  There are issues and
points of view you will never see discussed on the evening news,
or in Time and Newsweek.  There are books that disappear from
your local library and bookstores and are not replaced.

The Net is starting to look a lot more like just another
"self-regulated" media outlet, where the individual citizen has
access only through a company whose principals are well versed in
whose feathers must not be ruffled.

The CPAC/XtatiX dance is being repeated each and every day, with
providers like Tripod and Geocities, and with search engines
quietly removing Horsemen-related articles from their databases,
all while proudly displaying their Blue Ribbon Campaign icons for
Free Speech on the Net.

What's happening now is that a lot of sites are moving offshore,
but it probably won't be long before "The Attorney General's List
of Horseman-Related Offshore IPs" is dutifully prepared for
Congress each year, and Router-Blocked at our borders under
threat of criminal penalties.  "Information Laundering" will
undoubtedly become the Fifth Horseman shortly thereafter.

All of this represents a big shoe in the clockwork of
Crypto-Anarchy, and a problem needing a technological solution
post haste.  Suggestions and discussion are welcome.

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch@zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $
         {Free Cypherpunk Political Prisoner Jim Bell}