[4737] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Is anonymous speech protected?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School )
Mon May 17 22:15:10 1999
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 21:58:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: Dave Del Torto <ddt@lsd.com>
Cc: Cryptography-C2 <cryptography@c2.net>,
SoftSpeech <sftspch@samsara.law.cwru.edu>
In-Reply-To: <v04205112b36652888097@[192.168.248.7]>
For an only slighted dated summary on mask laws see
http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/clipper1.htm#ToC54
For a discussion of anonymity laws see
http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/ocean.htm
And yes, it's a real case, decided as you heard, but I don't have the
citation handy.
On Mon, 17 May 1999, Dave Del Torto wrote:
> Forgive me for lacking further specifics just now, but an anonymous
> lawyer friend tells me that the May 11, 1999 edition of the "San
> Francisco Daily Journal" reported that a federal district judge
> declared a (n unspecified) city's ordinance --forbidding the wearing
> of masks, hoods or any device in public to conceal one's identity
> (except for religious, safety or medical reasons)-- as being
> *unconstitutional* (!).
>
> The city in question, according to this (so far) hearsay evidence,
> was trying to discourage a Ku Klux Klan rally. The KKK claimed itself
> a "religion" and that the hoods protect its members from retaliation
> (how deliciously ironic). The court agreed that the mask ban was an
> unconstitutional violation of the Klansmen's right to free speech and
> to anonymous association in public.
>
> Wow! First the Bernstein decision, and now this? Wait, someone pinch
> me... I think I'm dreaming about the country I hope I live in, and
> not the one I wake up to every day... Imagine: if both judgements
> hold, anonymous posting of crypto source code will be
> constitutionally protected (as it should be).
>
> First Question: does anyone know which City is involved and/or where
> the Judge's decision can be found? I'm afraid I don't have any more
> info than what I've mentioned here, no date, no case name, etc.
>
> Second Question: can anyone cite/remember any other federal court
> decision that protects one's right to remain anonymous (other than
> those protecting victims or people in federal witness protection
> programs, etc)?
>
> If true, this case may have fascinating implications for
> internet-based forms of anonymous association such as using ZKS'
> Freedom.Net service.
>
> dave
>
>
>
--
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
--> It's hot here. <--
