Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!well!tenney
From: tenney@well.UUCP (Glenn S. Tenney)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: S.2575 Elec Comm Priv Act
Message-ID: <1672@well.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 24-Aug-86 04:36:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: well.1672
Posted: Sun Aug 24 04:36:19 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 24-Aug-86 19:47:32 EDT
References: <1632@well.UUCP> <1013@hoptoad.uucp> <1170@utastro.UUCP> <1661@well.UUCP> <15365@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: tenney@well.UUCP (Glenn S. Tenney)
Organization: Whole Earth Lectronic Link, Sausalito CA
Lines: 43
Keywords: Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986

One of the main problems is the intertwined dependencies within this
document.  It is not illegal to receive 'readily accessible to the
general public' signals, but then they say that lots of things are 
NOT readily accessible.  For example, any scrambled signal is not;
anything carried on a subcarrier or other signal subsidiary is not;
and anything carried on a communication system provided by a common
carrier is not.  Repeat, these are NOT READILY ACCESSIBLE to the 
general public and would therefore be illegal to receive unless
somehow you were authorized (how?).  Notice that since usenet is
carried via common carriers it is not readily accessible to the
general public.

Then notice that it says that a person or entity may divulge the contents
of any communications if ... with the lawful consent of the originator
or ANY ADDRESSEE or intended RECIPIENT.  Ok, is ihnp4 an addressee
of a piece of mail that goes through it?  Read an address and notice
that every node is an addressee (my opinion, though stretching it), just
not the final destination.  Then it's also ok to divulge communications
to any person employed or authorized, or WHOSE facilities are used to 
forward such communications.  Ok, now its clearly ok to divulge private
mail to every letter carrier (electronic that is), but what restrictions
do they have -- none that I saw.

To say that similar wording is the same for US Snail is ludicrous (sp?).
Electronic mail (and netnews) is VERY different.  Every forwarding node
is like a letter carrier, except that every message is a postcard to be
read by everyone (ok, with some system expertise).

When I have time (soon?) I'll try to better document my concerns, but
they boil down to: I can't receive what I want (even ignoring scrmbled
signals) even though the communications act of 1934 with many years of
history says I can, but can't divulge/use it; it doesn't really take
into account the real world of bbs'es and electronic mail.  Might not
any usenet node be considered an 'electronic communications -- remote
computing service'?  If so, you may be asked to provide to the Feds
disclosures of communications and back-up tapes of these communications
(often without notice to the 'subscriber').

-- Glenn Tenney 
UUCP: {hplabs,glacier,lll-crg,ihnp4!ptsfa}!well!tenney
ARPA: well!tenney@LLL-CRG.ARPA        Delphi and MCI Mail: TENNEY
As Alphonso Bodoya would say... (tnx boulton)
Disclaimers? DISCLAIMERS!? I don' gotta show you no stinking DISCLAIMERS!