Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!world!eff!mnemonic From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Steve Jackson Games Search Warrant Message-ID: <1990Nov16.215719.12860@eff.org> Date: 16 Nov 90 21:57:19 GMT References: <1990Nov14.151548.6650@eff.org> Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation Lines: 55 In article peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >This is getting tedious. Again, a phreaker makes a really flat joke and >the feds take it seriously. I think both sides of this conflict need to >get a clue. It might be legal to joke about hijackings in an airport, or >walk into a bank on a blistering cold day wearing a ski mask, but it's >awfully dumb. Similarly joking about a password cracking service on a BBS >you know to be monitored by the feds (who have never been known for their >sense of humor) is just asking for trouble. Normally, I'd agree with you, Peter, but in this instance I don't think the users of the Phoenix Project were doing the equivalent of joking about hijackings in an airport. First of all, the text of the messages makes it clear that there was actually no decrypting service (although the Secret Service edited the message to make it seem as if there was). And, if there had been one, would it be illegal per se? (That is, would it be illegal if the person were not doing the decrypting as part of a conspiracy to commit a crime? What statutes does running a decrypting service violate?) Second, "Erik Bloodaxe" was only one of the people searched; "The Mentor," whose only suspicious activity was explaining how Kermit works, and Steve Jackson Games, which had nothing to do with the Phoenix Project BBS, never made anything that could be interpreted as a joke at all, much less the equivalent of a "hijacking" joke at an airport. Finally, even if decryption of passwords is a crime, is it the equivalent of hijacking? One reason the government intentionally overreacts to talk of hijacking is that it is such a threat to the lives and safety of so many people. Is this true of password decryption? Should a computer user--even one who thinks his BBS is monitored--expect the feds to bust down his door because he joked about the prospect of running a decryption service? This is hardly the equivalent of being a bank robber or a hijacker, or of appearing to be either. In short, while I agree with you, Peter, that it's unwise to provoke law-enforcement agents, I disagree that what was posted on the Phoenix Project could reasonably be interpreted as provocation. This distinguishes those postings from wearing a ski mask in a bank or mentioning hijackings in an airport, which *are* reasonably interpretable as provocations. --Mike -- Mike Godwin, (617) 864-0665 |"If the doors of perception were cleansed mnemonic@well.sf.ca.us | every thing would appear to man as it is, Electronic Frontier | infinite." Foundation | --Blake