] Now, any Californian who shares files with more than 10
] people must add their e-mail address to the file. Those
] who break this law could be fined up to $2,500, spend a
] year in jail or both.

Anonymous speech on the Internet is now illegal in California. The MPAA is coming to your state next.

Wired News: California bans anonymous speech on the Internet

] Reuters is reporting that the House of Representatives
] has recently passed the bill that would approve of
] penalties for those using fraudulent WHOIS records.

If privacy is outlawed only outlaws with have privacy. And this horse is gunna be black. Fuckers.

Slashdot | Whois Record Falsification Closer To Illegality

] As an intermediary, the OSP finds itself in a position to
] collect and store detailed information about its users
] and their online activities that may be of great interest
] to third parties. The USA PATRIOT Act also provides the
] government with expanded powers to request this
] information. As a result, OSP owners must deal with
] requests from law enforcement and lawyers to hand over
] private user information and logs. Yet, compliance with
] these demands takes away from an OSP's goal of providing
] users with reliable, secure network services. In this
] paper, EFF offers some suggestions, both legal and
] technical, for best practices that balance the needs of
] OSPs and their users privacy and civil liberties.

I wish Google would agree to drop the last two octets from IPs in their logs.

EFF: Best Practices for Online Service Providers

Rattle wrote:
] Decius wrote:
] ] UPDATE: There are some very interesting posts flying
] ] around about this guy being an ebay scam artist:

Sorry I forgot to turn off my bold there. You might want to fix that in your post...

] The Patriot Act being used is very disturbing. We were told
] that would not be used in domestic criminal matters. That at
] the very least implies that they could have gotten his ISP
] finical records another way, and they were just doing their
] records harvesting in the easiest way available (which I don't
] like). I would like more details on this.

Well, they did nothing wrong. There are certain provisions in the Patriot act that have to do with terrorism. Others don't. The provision in question doesn't. Whats important is that politically the Patriot act was sold as an anti-terrorism tool, and yet we see it here being used in a context that has nothing at all to do with it's purported justification. Politically there is room to be angry about this. Technically its not illegal, but its the sort of thing you ask Senators about. Why did they allow this law to be used in this context?

RE: Stargate Information Archive - Federal Charges Filed Against SG-1 Archive

UPDATE: There are some very interesting posts flying around about this guy being an ebay scam artist:

http://www.boingboing.net/2004/07/26/stargate_fansite_ope.html

People he has screwed are all over the place talking about it in the context of this story. Kind of brings his credibility into question.

] However, instead of thanking Adam for his promotion of
] their product, officials at MGM and the MPAA have chosen
] to pressure the FBI into pursuing criminal charges. Adam
] was first tipped off about the investigation when the FBI
] raided his and his fiancee's apartment in May of 2002 and
] seized thousands of dollars worth of computer equipment.
] Adam later received a copy of the affidavit filed in
] support of the search warrant, and was shocked to
] discover that this document, prepared by the FBI,
] contained significant amounts of erroneous and misleading
] information. For example, two social security numbers
] were listed for Adam, one of which is not his. References
] were made to a cease and desist letter sent by the MPAA
] to an email address that did not exist. His online
] friendship with other Stargate fans across the globe was
] portrayed as an international conspiracy against the
] MPAA. And perhaps most disturbing of all, it was later
] revealed that the FBI invoked a provision of the USA
] Patriot Act to obtain financial records from his ISP. The
] FBI's abuse of its powers did not stop there. When they
] seized Adam's computer equipment, he was given written
] documentation stating that it would be returned within 60
] days. The equipment that they did return did not arrive
] until more than 8 months later, and only then after much
] prodding from his lawyer. Much of it was damaged beyond
] repair - one laptop had a shattered LCD screen, an empty
] tape backup drive was ripped apart for no apparent
] reason, his fiancee's iBook was badly damaged when it was
] pried apart with a screwdriver.

1. Welcome to the new world of criminal copyright prosecutions. This reminds me of operation Sun Devil. The FBI is usually far more professional then this. Apparently they've assigned a bunch of idiots to their copyright sqaud, which is reasonable at first glance in that its not very important, but ultimately a mistake because this issue is too controversial and too visible to be handled by thugs. These guys aren't going to stop behaving this way until a judge throws the book at them (as occured to the Chicago Secret Service agents who raided Steve Jackson Games). Therefore, I suggesting holding on to your seats. There will be a bunch more stories where this came from, and as the net is a hell of a lot louder then it was in 1991 you can expect the FBI to feel some very serious pressure over the issue as the horrors mount up.

... [ Read More (0.1k in body) ]

Stargate Information Archive - Federal Charges Filed Against SG-1 Archive

] Earlier today on Politech we saw a critique of People for
] Internet Responsibility's take on whois privacy.
] Following are some replies from Politech members.

Some discussion following from my open letter to PFIR...

Replies to critique of PFIR and Whois privacy [Politech]

] The Task Force recommendations include proposals ranging
] from a recommendation to notify those who may be included
] in the database of the possible uses of WHOIS data to one
] that recommends ICANN offer the Internet community
] "tiered access" to serve as a vague mechanism to balance
] privacy against the needs of public access. Too many of
] the recommendations seem to be framed by those who view
] Internet users with hostility, such as the recommendation
] to punish domain name users when a domain name is
] cancelled or suspended for "false contact data," by
] canceling all other registrations with identical contact
] data.

Unbelievable insantiy. WHOIS is a convenient place to publish contact information for a domain. That is what it ought to remain. There should be no requirement that information be accurate, and no tiered access system. If you want to find out who controls a computer on the internet, you traceroute the IP and subpoena the ISP. The COURT SYSTEM is your "tiered access control system."

Recent WHOIS Report Overlooking Fundamental Issue?

] Austin's crucial mistake would seem to be putting the
] explosives information on the same web site as his
] anarchist protest rhetoric. Publishing the information on
] a separate site would apparently have shielded him from
] prosecution.

A retrospective look at the Sherman Austin case.

What the FBI Doesn't Want You to See at RaisetheFist.com

] On my rec.humor.funny web site, I maintain the newsgroup
] archives, including this 13 year old joke entitled
] American Expressway.
]
] Today I got one of those bullying "cease and desist"
] letters from American Express's law firm, ordering me to
] take down the joke for trademark infringement. Here's the
] text of the cease and desist
]
] Do these guys know who they are trying to bully? I guess
] not, here's my response to them:
]
] You can "Screw More" with an American Express Lawyer.......

I absolutely cannot stand companies that send out baseless legal threats to unprepared citizens. I like Amex and to see them do it is disgraceful. I think that this activity ought to be illegal. In any event, this time they got exactly what they deserved. They served Brad Templeton. He's the Chairman of the EFF. I can just hear Nelson saying "HA-HA."

Brad Ideas: American Express threatens me over joke on web site

] Yesterday the FBI made public its new proposal for
] wiretapping powers that would powerfully extend such
] powers to broadband services such as DSL and cable-based
] access. The gist of the proposal is simple: the FBI wants
] to be able to to easily set up wiretapping on all kinds
] of Internet traffic, the key word here being easily. As
] this report notes, this could mean that to be compliant
] with the rules (should they pass), both ISPs and
] developers would need to build back-doors into their
] services and the technologies that run on top of them.

The compromise that allowed CALEA to pass is very clear. Telecommunications OK, Internet not OK. That fact that voice services are now carried on internet networks does not change the fundamental legislative compromise. Expanding the scope of this thing is well outside the FCC's jurisdiction. Only Congress has the power to do this.

Of course, in the wake of 9/11, I think that protecting the internet from being turned into a ubiquitous surveillance network will be almost impossible.

Ars Technica: Broadened FBI wiretapping powers would require net fixes