Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:71672 misc.legal:22602 alt.censorship:1039
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!media-lab!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!unmvax!uokmax!slfields
From: slfields@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Scott L Fields)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,misc.legal,alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Do *NOT* reveal or mention "hacking" information (was Re: paper clip trick)
Message-ID: <1990Nov14.195928.23480@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu>
Date: 14 Nov 90 19:59:28 GMT
References: <14087@arisia.Xerox.COM> <56332@brunix.UUCP> <1990Nov14.183455.1825@eng.umd.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Lines: 19

In article <1990Nov14.183455.1825@eng.umd.edu> russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:
>In article <56332@brunix.UUCP> man@cs.brown.edu (Mark H. Nodine) writes:
>>So as I say, it has nothing to do with the legality of possessing or spreading
>>the information, although even there one might make a case  Free speech is a right
>>under the constitution, but if I use my right of "free speech" to form a 
>>conspiracy to overthrow the government
>  ^^^^^ requires an overt act against the government.  Just talk won't cut it.
>
>, or to slander somebody, then I have still
>>done something illegal.  But mostly I am making a plea to protect what freedom we
>>currently have on the network.
This subject is one that really bothers me from a legal standpoint. How many
people out there are familiar with "conspiracy to commit a felony"? Granted,
this means I can't talk about planning to kill the president but I think this
can be vastly abused as well. Many recent federal actions make some computer
actions a federal offense. In that case, simply talking about these subjects
in the wrong manner can be construed as "conspiracy to commit a felony". My
personal opinion is that that is basically a form of censorship. I am no lawyer
but I don't like the idea of this.