[9400] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
International Enforcement
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John [Francis] Stracke)
Tue Jan 4 11:10:22 1994
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 1994 10:29:08 +0500
From: francis@avalle.insoft.com (John [Francis] Stracke)
To: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: Bruce Gingery's message of Mon, 3 Jan 1994 15:03:31 -0700 (MST) <Pine.3.05.9401031528.H1693-a100000@antelope.wcc.edu>
>On Mon, 3 Jan 1994 francis@avalle.insoft.com wrote:
>> >> How about the people who run the border sites that import the post
>> >
>> >John,
>> > What about the papers that are placed in a box and Posted (via snail
>>
>> Snailmail is different; there are specific treaties to cover it.
>
> Yet it's PEOPLE we're talking about. As blindly precedent driven as
>various legal systems seem to be, hopefully the "treaty" status could be
>ignored in a court case
A judge can't just ignore the law. Anyway, it's the *lack* of a
protective treaty that could endanger the site managers.
> and merely the lack of culpability of the "carriers"
>(individuals who carry) could be attributed as precedent.
What do you mean by "lack of culpability"? (Maybe: what carriers are
you talking about?)
I reiterate: in the hardcopy case, someone gets info out of Canada and
to the Buffalo paper, which prints it; the paper can't be prosecuted,
but the people who carry it across the border can have it confiscated.
Analogously, in the electronic case, the info gets to someone in the
US, who posts it; the poster is safe, but the people who export it to
Canada may be in trouble.
/===========================================================================\
|John (Francis) Stracke | My opinions are my own.| No matter how |
|InSoft, Inc. |========================/ subtle the |
|Mechanicsburg, PA | wizard, a knife between the shoulderblades |
|francis@insoft.com | will seriously cramp his style. |
\===========================================================================/
