From: stewarts@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 06:03:07 +0800
To: Charlie Comsec <remailer-politics@server1.efga.org
Subject: Re: [RePol]  Re: Pasting in From: you@yourmachine.com
In-Reply-To: <19971203142004.12956.qmail@nym.alias.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971203093552.00748ecc@popd.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 02:20 PM 12/03/1997 -0000, Charlie Comsec wrote:
>You start to tread on dangerous ground when you concern yourself with the
>content (body) of a post.  If, for example, you start to filter on content,
>then you're implicitly approving anything that you do allow to pass through.  
>That sets a precedent that's hard to contain and exercising editorial control 
>over the contents increases the remailer operator's legal liability for 
>material posted.

If some victim of forged hatemail to Usenet requests that your remailer 
block all email containing her name and address, is that legitimate?  
Or if somebody's forging death threats with her name at the bottom?
I think yes, assuming the forgee is not a sufficiently public figure like 
Hillary Clinton or Janet Reno that would lead to obvious disbelief.

(If Gary Burnore makes the same request, you've got a tradeoff between doing
the safe thing, and blocking, or doing what he deserves and also reposting
copies run through some jive filter. :-)

I agree that blocking postings based on content that isn't specifically
targeting someone who's requested in advance is probably not a good idea.
				Thanks! 
					Bill
Bill Stewart, stewarts@ix.netcom.com
Regular Key PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF  3C85 B884 0ABE 4639