Disclaimer Update

Ringo Kamens 2600denver at gmail.com
Sat May 20 18:40:45 UTC 2006


Perhaps you should look into the Secret Service v Jackson case and
FBI/SS/Swiss SS v Indymedia Case as well as FBI? v Rackspace.

On 5/20/06, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Civil cases can be discarded if the government gets the judge to
> agree that secrecy requirements are hampering the government's case.
> If they didn't have probable cause, they will say "Oh, its
> classified" and get the case dismissed. I am not a lawyer, but it
> looks like you are screwed out of the server either way. You should
> consult a lawyer to determine what your status is.  Or you could wait
> until the server gets taken.
> On May 20, 2006, at 7:53 AM, Mike Perry wrote:
>
> > So I was doing some research into the EFF vs. AT&T case because it's
> > happening right in my backyard and it's fascinating as all get-out,
> > and I came across 18 USC 2707 (of the ECPA):
> >
> > http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/
> > usc_sec_18_00002707----000-.html
> >
> > This seems to state that if a server or traffic is seized without
> > good faith and probable cause (and a warrant) that the owner of that
> > server has civil avenues of remedy against the government ($1000/email
> > account + legal costs).
> > Since several friends of mine have email accounts on the machine that
> > also runs my Tor node, it would seem this is applicable here. I
> > updated my disclaimer at
> >
> > http://tor-exit.fscked.org/
> >
> > to reflect this, as well as to better identify a Tor node for what it
> > is (as far as the law is conerned): an Internet router just like any
> > other, except that it does not maintain the source address of packets.
> >
> > Based on these grounds, it would seem that what happened in France
> > should be pretty impossible in the US, at least legally, since
> > probable cause should not exist.
> >
> > But as we know, the US government doesn't seem to be too fond of
> > following the law anymore. So there's always that element of risk.
> There is also the risk that they seize your server and get a FISA
> warrant three days later.
> >
> >
> > I suppose they probably will try to claim in EFF v AT&T that they DO
> > have probable cause to tap the Internet traffic of the entire
> > west coast... But of course that claim is classified, so none of us
> > (nor
> > even EFF) will get to see it. Genius and insanity oft go hand in hand.
> >
> > --
> > Mike Perry
> > Mad Computer Scientist
> > fscked.org evil labs
>
> Sincerely,
> Watson Ladd
> ---
> "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
> Temporary Safety deserve neither  Liberty nor Safety."
> -- Benjamin Franklin
>
>
>
>



More information about the tor-talk mailing list