Skip to main content
Podcast Episode: Building a Tactile Internet

EFFector - Volume 9, Issue 13 - ALERT: Wiretap Funding & Expanded Powers Sneak into Major Bill


EFFector - Volume 9, Issue 13 - ALERT: Wiretap Funding & Expanded Powers Sneak into Major Bill

     ________________          _______________        _______________
    /_______________/\        /_______________\      /\______________\
    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/        |||||||||||||||||     / ////////////////
     \\\\\________/\          |||||________\       / /////______\
      \\\\\\\\\\\\\/____      ||||||||||||||      / /////////////
       \\\\\___________/\     |||||              / ////
        \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/     |||||              \////

EFFector Online Volume 09 No. 13      Sept. 27, 1996
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation        ISSN 1062-9424


ALERT: Wiretap Funding & Expanded Powers Sneak into Major Bill
  What YOU Can Do NOW
ACLU, EF-Georgia, EFF, et al., Challenge GA "Net Police" Law
ASEAN Nations' Net Censorship Pact Criticized
ALERT: Push for Online Access to Congressional Documents
  FTC Calls for Privacy Legislation in Wake of P-Trak Controversy
  Bernstein Hearing Held - ITAR Constitutionality Challenged
  "Clipper III" On the Move
  TIA Tells FBI "No" on National Cell Phone Surveillance Network
  House Crypto Hearing Held
  AOL Spam Filter Injunction Lifted
  Update on
  EFF's Barlow v. CDA-pusher Taylor on Wired's "Brain Tennis"
  SF Internet Demo (Volunteers Needed)
  European Commission Calls for Internet "V-Chip" and Anti-Freedom Crypto
  Net Censorship in India - Update
  Net Censorship in China - Update
  Net Censorship in Sinapore - Update
  2nd System-Cracker Strike Against US Govt. Web Pages
Upcoming Events
Quote of the Day
What YOU Can Do

* See or, /pub/Alerts/ for more
information on current EFF activities and online activism alerts! *


Subject: ALERT: Wiretap Funding & Expanded Powers Sneak into Major Bill


 Digital Telphony Funding & Expanded Wiretap Powers Sneak into Major Bill


  Please redistribute this alert to relevant forums. Please do not
  distribute after Oct. 5.  This alert produced & distributed
  by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (, and
  the American Civil Liberties Union (

* Executive summary:

The Administration is sneaking funding for expansion of wiretapping powers
into a huge appropriations bill, that must be passed with or without these
dangerous provisions.  Urge legislators to remove these controversial 
sections before passage.

 1) Contact your own legislators. Lists at:
    Urge them to pressure Congressional leaders and appropriations 
    committee members to remove wiretap & wiretap funding provisions
    from the omnibus funding bill called the Continuing Resolution.

 2) Contact Congress leaders and CJS appropriations subcommittee members
    yourself, and ask them to remove these controversion provisions.

 3) Contact CJS appropriations subcommittee members, if you have time.
    (pointers to contact info below).

* Contents

     What YOU Can Do NOW

* Intro

The Clinton Administration has managed to insert provisions for money and 
a new slush fund for the CALEA ("Digital Telephony") wiretap-the-nation 
plan, plus new "roving wiretap" powers and wiretap expansion to include
minor politically-motivated crimes, into a major funding bill that 
Congress will definitely pass, with or without these provisions.

DEADLINE: Uncertain, but probably Mon., Sep. 30, at the latest. Friday, 
Sept. 27, is the day to act.  If you receive this Sat. or Sun., please send 
faxes to legislators, so they arrive before Mon.

* What YOU Can Do NOW


Contact your own legislators, and ask them to push Appropriations 
committees and Congressional leadership to strip the CALEA money & slush 
fund, roving wiretap, and wiretap expansion provisions from the 
appropriations legislation before Congress adjourns.

Lists of legislators are available at (see the files 
senate95.list and house95.list)


  * You are a constituent
  * You are watching the outcome of this legislation very closely.
  * You are an Internet user, and learned about this bill on the Net.
  * The provisions in question are dangerous, highly controversial, and 
    do not belong in a funding bill. Hearings must be held.
  * These four provisions need to be removed: establishment of CALEA slush 
    fund (formally, Telecommunications Carrier Compliantce Fund), monies for 
    CALEA implementation and slush fund, "roving" ("multipoint") 
    wiretaps, and wiretap expansions to include minor crimes.
  * Refer to the bill as the "Continuing Resolution".

Please be polite and reasoned, and keep it short. Get your concerns 
across rapidly. There is no time left for long deliberations, just yes 
or no on this measure.


Also call and/or fax Congressional leadership.  These senior legislators
have the power to include or exclude the roving wiretap, wiretap 
expansion, and CALEA money & slush fund provisions. See talking 
points in step 1.


 Party State   Name                        Voice         Fax

     R MS Lott, Trent                1-202-224-6253  1-202-224-2262
          (Majority Leader)
     R OK Nickles, Donald            1-202-224-5754  1-202-224-6008
          (Majority Whip)
     D SD Daschle, Thomas A.         1-202-224-2321  1-202-224-2047
          (Minority Leader)
     D KY Ford, Wendell H.           1-202-224-4343  1-202-224-0046
          (Minority Whip)
     R OR Hatfield, Mark O.          1-202-224-3753  1-202-224-0276
          (Chair, Appropriations Committee)
     D WV Byrd, Robert C.            1-202-224-3954  1-202-224-4025
          (Ranking Member, Approp. Cmte.)
     R NH Gregg, Judd                1-202-224-3324  1-202-224-4952
          (Chair, Commerce, Justice & State Approp. Subcommittee)
     D SC Hollings, Ernest F.        1-202-224-6121  1-202-224-4293
          (Ranking Member, CJS Approp. Subcmte.)
     R UT Hatch, Orrin G.            1-202-224-5251  1-202-224-6331
          (Chair, Judiciary Cmte.)     
     D DE Biden Jr., Joseph R.       1-202-224-5042  1-202-224-0139
          (Ranking Member, Judiciary Cmte.)
     D VT Leahy, Patrick J.          1-202-224-4242  1-202-224-3595
          (a senior member of Sen. Jud. Cmte., co-sponsor of CALEA)


 Dist. State Name (Party)                Voice         Fax

     6 GA Gingrich, Newt (R)         1-202-225-4501  1-202-225-4656
          (Speaker of the House)
    26 TX Armey, Richard K. (R)      1-202-225-7772  1-202-225-7614
          (Majority Leader)
    22 TX DeLay, Thomas (R)          1-202-225-5951  1-202-225-5241
          (Majority Whip)
     3 MO Gephardt, Richard A. (D)   1-202-225-2671  1-202-225-7452
          (Minority Leader)
    10 MI Bonior, David E. (D)       1-202-225-2106  1-202-226-1169
          (Minority Whip)
     1 LA Livingston, Robert (R)     1-202-225-3015  1-202-225-0739
          (Chair, Appropriations Committee)
     7 WI Obey, David R. (D)         1-202-225-3365  1-202-225-0561
          (Ranking Member, Approp. Cmte.)
     5 KY Rogers, Harold (R)         1-202-225-4601  1-202-225-0940
          (Chair, Commerce, Justice & State Approp. Subcommittee)
     1 WV Mollohan, Alan B. (D)      1-202-225-4172  1-202-225-7564
          (Ranking Member, CJS Approp. Subcmte.)
     6 IL Hyde, Henry J. (R)         1-202-225-4561  1-202-226-1240
          (Chair, Judiciary Cmte.)
    14 MI Conyers Jr., John (D)      1-202-225-5126  1-202-225-0072
          (Ranking Member, Judiciary Cmte.)
     9 NY Schumer, Charles E. (D)    1-202-225-6616  1-202-225-4183
          (a senior member of the Jud. Cmte.)
    47 CA Cox, Christopher (R)       1-202-225-5611  1-202-225-9177
          (Chair, Republican Policy Cmte.)


Call & fax the members of the Senate and House Commerce, Justice & State
Appropriations Subcommitees (of the S. & H. Appropriations Committees)
and ask them to REMOVE all CALEA funding and other wiretap-related
provisions from the appropriations bill. These provisions do not
belong in a last minute funding bill. They are highly controversial,
undermine American civil liberties, and must be subject to full hearings
and public input, in committees suited to these issues. 

See step 1, above, for talking points.  

Lists of the Subcommittee members & their contact info are available at:

We realize this is a lot of calls, faxes or at least emails.  If you 
don't have time or resources for this level of activism, please be sure 
that in step 2 you contacted the full Appropriation Committees' and 
the CJS Subcommittees' chairmen and ranking members, as well as Lott, 
Gingrich, and Armey.  That's just 10 people including your own 
legislators.  Probably less time than it takes to make and eat lunch
or watch a sitcom.

* Background

Having funding for the controversial Communications Assistance to Law 
Enforcement Act (CALEA, previously called the Digital Telephony Bill) 
rejected in prior 1996 legislation, the Dept. of Justice has snuck two
CALEA funding provisions - and more - into an omnibus spending bill. The 
latest version of the amendment goes far beyond asking for the 
half-billion dollars Congress promised in 1995, and would create a slush 
fund, drawing on the budgets of "any agency" with "law enforcement, national 
security or intelligence responsibilities", including everyone from 
agencies like NSA with enormous, classified (virtually bottomless) budgets 
not subject to public accountability, to the Department of the Treasury 
itself, as well as CIA, DEA, FBI and others. This fund would be fueled by 
"left-over" money better re-directed to reducing the deficit.
Additionally, the amendment would seed the fund and pay for some initial 
CALEA network re-engineering with $40mil in direct monies. 

Worse yet, the amendment provides for roving wiretaps, which the drafters
of CALEA specfically and clearly rejected. This "mulitipoint wiretap"
provision would allow police to tap any phone used by a suspect, even
temporarily, including the phones of neighbors, or public payphones, 
regardless of who else might use them, without having to seek additional 
court authorization.  Additionally, the new language redefines, in 
political rather than criminal law terms, the crimes that would support 
a wiretap order. As with the poor definitions in several recent terrorism 
bills, this change creates a severe risk of wiretap-centered investigations
of citizens for their political opinions rather than for real crimes.

Timing: It is uncertain when these bills will pass, but Congress must 
pass an appropriations resolution before adjourning. At least one house 
of Congress may pass the bill, with or without wiretapping provisions, 
today, and both houses may pass it by Monday.  Differences between the 
versions will be resolved rapidly in joint conference committee, either 
this weekend or early next week, and the final version passed in a 
flurry. The CALEA and related provisions have to be stripped *NOW*.

Note for non-US citizens: If you, too, wish to take some action on this 
alert, if may be of value to do two things: Contact US Congressional 
leaders and express concern that the Administration's "wiretap everyone" 
CALEA agenda sets a horrible example for the rest of the world.  And, 
contact your own country's diplomatic corps, and ask them to pressure 
the Clinton Administration to back down on this issue and give it the public 
airing it requires. Please also be aware that the Clinton Administration 
is pushing the ITU to adopt international standards that would introduce
CALEA-style wiretapping around the world.  Your own parliamentarians 
need to hear your opposition to the introduction of CALEA "clones" in 
your country.



Subject: ACLU, EF-Georgia, EFF, et al., Challenge GA "Net Police" Law

Joint News Release:


Groups Challenge Georgia Law 
Restricting Free Speech in Cyberspace

September 24, 1996


          Teresa Nelson, ACLU of Georgia,  404-523-6201
          Shari Steele, Electronic Frontier Foundation 301-375-8856
          Robert Costner, EFGA, 770-512-8746
          Mitchell Kaye, 770-998-2399
          Emily Whitfield, Nat'l ACLU, 212-944-9800 

ATLANTA--The American Civil Liberties Union, Electronic Frontiers
Georgia, EFF, Georgia State Representative Mitchell Kaye and others today
filed  a lawsuit seeking a preliminary injunction against a Georgia
statute restricting free speech in cyberspace.

At a news conference here, the groups said that the law is
unconstitutionally vague and overbroad because it bars online users from
using pseudonyms or communicating anonymously over the Internet.  The
Act also unconstitutionally restricts the use of links on the World Wide
Web, which allow users to connect to other sites.

"Fundamental civil liberties are as important in cyberspace as they are
in traditional contexts," said Ann Beeson, an ACLU national staff
attorney specializing in cyber-rights.  "The right to speak and publish
using a virtual 'nom de plume' has its roots in a long tradition dating
back to the very founding of democracy in this country."

The lawsuit is the first such challenge to state cybercensorship laws,
the ACLU said.  The ACLU said it has been monitoring state regulation of
the Internet and that currently,  over 20 states have considered such

"This is the first challenge that we know of to a state statute that has
tried to regulate national -- indeed, international -- communications,"
said attorney Beeson.  "The nature of the Internet makes state
regulation extremely problematical, because it forces everyone in the
country to comply with  one state's law.  If fifty states pass fifty
contradictory laws, Internet users will be virtually paralyzed for fear
of violating one or more of those laws."

The complaint includes the assertion that the Commerce Clause of the
United States Constitution bars state regulation of the Internet because
it is an interstate communications medium.

The suit was filed in U.S. Northern District Court of Georgia Federal
Court, challenging the state law on behalf of 14 plaintiffs (note: see
attached for a list of plaintiffs).  The lawsuit names Governor Zell
Miller and state Attorney General Michael Bowers as defendants.

The Act was passed by the Georgia General Assembly and became effective
on July 1 of this year.    The law provides criminal sanctions of up to
12 months in jail and/or up to a $1,000 fine for  violations.

Two of the plaintiffs, Electronic Frontiers Georgia and Georgia State
Representative  Mitchell Kaye (R-Marietta), lobbied against the law
before its passage, and solicited help from the ACLU and others to mount
a legal challenge after it was enacted.

Electronic Frontiers Georgia (EFGA), a  Georgia-based cyber-liberties
organization, said that the group had supported a letter written by the
co-counsel in the case to state Attorney General Michael Bowers asking
him to clarify the law so that any debate about its meaning could be
settled without litigation.

"It's clear that no one would want to pass a law that says what this law
says, that simply linking from website to website or using a pseudonym
is illegal in Georgia and therefore throughout the Internet," said
Robert Costner of EFGA.

Rep. Kaye said he became involved in the battle against the law when
members of the House attacked him for maintaining a private website that
they said might be mistaken for the "official" website of the Georgia
House of Representatives.  The website is maintained by the Conservative
Policy Caucus and contains prominent disclaimers that it is not an
official government site.

"House leaders felt threatened that their voting records were being
published along with political commentary that was not always
flattering," said Rep. Kaye, a member of the Conservative Policy Caucus.
 "Sunshine is the best government disinfectant, and freedom of speech is
a not a partisan issue."

Teresa Nelson, executive director of the ACLU of Georgia, said that ACLU
was acting as a plaintiff as well as a litigant in the case in order to
protect visitors to its website who may wish to access or discuss
sensitive information anonymously or using a pseudonym.

"These concerns were addressed in the letter to Attorney General Michael
Bowers, requesting a very narrow interpretation of the law. 
Unfortunately, he chose to ignore our request and we have been forced to
litigate to protect confidentiality on the Internet."

The national ACLU, serving as co-counsel in the Georgia case, is also a
litigant in ACLU v. Reno, its challenge to Internet censorship
provisions of the federal Communications Decency Act.

In June of this year, a federal three-judge panel in Philadelphia
granted an injunction against the CDA, saying that, "as the most
participatory form of mass speech yet developed, the Internet deserves
the highest protection from governmental intrusion."    The government
has appealed that ruling and the case is now on it way to the U.S.
Supreme Court.

The Complaint

According to the complaint, the law makes it a crime to use a name that
"falsely identifies" a speaker on the Internet, without distinguishing
whether the person communicating had any intent to deceive or defraud or
simply wanted to keep his or her identity unknown.

"In some cases, anonymity is a necessary security measure," said ACLU
attorney Beeson.  "The personal safety of human rights dissidents,
domestic abuse victims, and whistle-blowers would be compromised if they
could not communicate anonymously."

Use of pseudonyms or anonymous identities also eliminates the potential
for discrimination and harassment according to gender or ethnicity,
Beeson said, and allows users to access controversial, embarrassing, or
sensitive information without revealing their identity.  She added that
in some cases an online "handle" or  pseudonym is assigned automatically
by a commercial online service such as Prodigy or Compuserve.

The complaint also states that the law may prohibit web links by making
it a crime to publish information "using"  trade names, logos or other
symbols, again without regard to the nature of the use, and without any
definition of what constitutes "use" on a computer network.

According to Robert Costner of Electronic Frontiers Georgia, many
websites include links using trade names or logos as a means of
providing information.

The EFGA site, he noted, provides a link to the BellSouth web page to
assist other Internet users in contacting BellSouth about a recent rate
increase request for ISDN telephone service.   Given the new
technological context of the Internet and unique "linking" feature of
web pages, Costner explained, even this type of grass roots news
advisory over the Internet could now be illegal in Georgia.

The Plaintiffs

The 14 plaintiffs and organizations named in the suit all expressed
concern that the law would prohibit them -- at risk of jail or fines --
from using pseudonyms to protect their privacy, communicate sensitive
information and defend themselves against harassment if their identities
were known on the Net.

For instance, the Atlanta Veterans Alliance, a Georgia-based
organization for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered veterans, said
the law would risk disclosure of the identity of AVA members who remain
in active military service.  Such disclosure would likely end their
military careers.

Another plaintiff, Josh Riley, an Atlanta-based realtor, operates two
Internet websites that contain many links to other websites of interest,
often using corporate logos and trademarks without specific permission. 
His award-winning web page,, contains information
on the Negro Baseball Leagues, including links to a site on an HBO movie
"Soul of the Game."

Mr. Riley said he believes it would be impossible as a practical matter
to obtain permission for every link in his site, even though he is
confident that all of the companies and organizations would give
permission if they were asked.

Certain plaintiffs also expressed concern that loss of anonymity would
put them and others at risk.  Plaintiff Community ConneXion, an Internet
Service Provider, specializes in providing the highest level of privacy
to online users.  The group recently developed a service known as the
Anonymizer, which enables any Internet user to browse and retrieve
documents anonymously.

Sameer Parekh, President of Community ConneXion, said that organizations
and individuals around the world use their services to protect them from
oppressive governments, invasive marketing databases and harassment
online. He said the Georgia law may force the group to choose between
shutting down its services or risking prosecution.

Lawyers representing the 14 plaintiffs are: J. Scott McClain (as
volunteer attorney) of the Atlanta firm of  Bondurant, Mixson and
Elmore; Ann Beeson and Christopher Hansen of the national American Civil
Liberties Union; and Gerald Weber, staff attorney with the ACLU of

Note to Editors: For more information on ACLU of Georgia et al. v.
Miller et al., visit these online sites: EFGA -
(EFGA will be providing RealAudio of the news conference.) ACLU - and via America Online at keyword: ACLU.

To stay informed on this and other issues, send email to with the message body of:
'subscribe efg-announce' (without the 'quotes'.)

RealAudio cybercast of the Sept. 24 EFGA/ACLU press conference in Atlanta 
about the case is available at 


Subject: ASEAN Nations' Net Censorship Pact Criticized

On Sept. 4, 1996, the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) member 
countries (Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, 
Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam) stated an agreement to collaborate on 
devising restrictions on Internet communication. A number of human 
rights, free expression and electronic privacy organizations wrote the 
following letter to the ASEAN secretariat in Jakarta, Indonesia to 
convey their concerns about this development. Similar letters sent by 
the same organizations were also sent to the ASEAN members.


September 13, 1996

We, the undersigned organizations, are writing to express our deep
concern about the decision announced on September 4 by ASEAN member
nations to collectively regulate communication on the Internet. The
agreement was announced in Singapore, at the close of a meeting of
officials from ASEAN member nations that was organized by the Singapore
Broadcasting Authority.

We would like to respectfully remind the ASEAN nations that
content-based restrictions on online communication violate
internationally guaranteed rights of free expression. As stated in
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression: this right
 includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek,
 receive and impart information and ideas through any media and
 regardless of frontiers.

The agreement did not include the adoption of a common regulatory
framework by ASEAN member nations. However, we are concerned that a
number of delegates to the meeting reportedly expressed support for
Singapore's recently established Internet Code of Practice. Human Rights
Watch/Asia has written to the Singaporean government to oppose these new
regulations, which impose sweeping controls on content, including
political discussion. The regulations have already resulted in arbitrary
censorship of at least one newsgroup message. They will surely induce a
chill on on-line speech in Singapore, and, as evidenced by the ASEAN
decision, they will affect online speech throughout the region.

It has been reported that one of the reasons for the ASEAN agreement was
a concern for preserving cultural values. While we recognize the
importance of representation for all cultures on the Internet, we oppose
censorship as a means of ensuring respect for cultural norms. We believe
that the most effective means of responding to offensive content is by
disseminating more content. Censoring offensive material will not remove
it from the Internet; it will simply cause it to be reproduced on
additional Internet sites.

We believe that the lack of agreement on a common regulatory strategy by
ASEAN member nations demonstrates the futility of attempts by nations or
groups of nations to introduce online content regulation schemes. Within
the ASEAN group itself, the cultural values of Vietnam, for example,
differ significantly from cultural values of the Philippines. It is
unlikely that the diverse group of ASEAN nations will reach an agreement
on the specifics of what should be censored, and how that censorship
should be accomplished. Moreover, because the Internet is a global
medium, moves to restrict online content will initiate battles for
competing cultural values on an international scale.

In closing, we would like to add that the attempt to restrict Internet
communication will detract from the many benefits that electronic
communication is bringing to the region. We hope that the ASEAN nations
will reconsider their unfortunate decision and instead focus on the new
opportunities that the Internet can provide to the citizens of the

Human Rights Watch/Asia 
CITADEL-Electronic Frontier France ( 
Les Chroniques de Cyberie, Canada ( 
Electronic Privacy Information Center, USA ( 
American Civil Liberties Union, USA ( 
cyberPOLIS, USA ( 
Electronic Frontier Foundation, USA (
 ALCEI-Electronic Frontiers Italy ( 
Association des Utilisateurs d'Internet (AUI), France ( 
Fronteras Electronicas Espana (FrEE)--Electronic Frontiers Spain
EFF-Austin (
Digital Citizens Foundation Netherlands--DBNL (


Full text of all HRW letters to ASEAN (including introductory remarks, 
and customized versions of the statement for each country) available at:


Subject: ALERT: Push for Online Access to Congressional Documents

[This is a Congressional Accountability Project (CAP) alert, endorsed by EFF.
EFF, CAP and Taxpayer Assets Project among others have been working on 
the issue of online public access to the REAL Congressional Documents for 
several years now. A current proposal could allow access to many of these 
vital records, but is being gutted.  Aside from the legislation, which
could establish access to these records in statute, Rep. Bill Thomas as 
chairman of the House Oversight Committee has the political power to 
open these documents to the online public aside from any legislation.
Please urge Rep. Thomas to do so, if the legislative avenue closes.
Please also contact the House Ways and Means Committee, the major 
roadblock to obtaining online public access to House documents, and urge 
them to reconsider their opposition to this pro-democracy change.
A list of members of this committee can be found at:
and a list of House members phone and fax numbers resides at:

We may not win it all this year, but there's always next time, and 
working to convince the skeptical on the Ways & Means Cmte. may pay off 
in the long run.]

     Sources indicate that the House Oversight Committee may soon
act on a measure to improve online access to Congressional
documents.  Legislative details are currently murky -- and
apparently subject to behind-closed-door negotiations between
House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) and key members of the House
Oversight Committee.  Citizen pressure on two key House Oversight
Committee members -- Reps. Bill Thomas (R-CA) and Vic Fazio (D-CA) 
-- is badly needed at this time.

     Currently, many important Congressional documents are not
available via the Internet, including committee prints of bills,
Congressional hearing records, texts of legislative amendments,
and Congressional Research Service reports.  This information
lock-out places ordinary citizens at a great disadvantage in most
Washington legislative battles, because most citizens do not have
real-time access to the core documents of our democracy -- or the
same access enjoyed by Washington special interest lobbyists.

     Congress is expected to declare final adjournment in early 

     The next three days are very important.  Please call or fax
the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Bill Thomas,
and the Ranking Minority Member, Rep. Vic Fazio, urging them to
provide online access to the following Congressional documents:

  *    Committee prints and discussion drafts of bills and
       Chairman's Marks
  *    Verbatim transcripts (both corrected and uncorrected)
       from House Hearings
  *    Prepared testimonies to House committees
  *    Voting records of Representatives
  *    Texts of legislative amendments
  *    Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports and Issue
  *    Committee reports
  *    Transcripts (both corrected and uncorrected) of House
       committee mark-ups
  *    Federal Election Commission (FEC) reports
  *    Lobbyist Disclosure reports
  *    House Financial Disclosure reports
  *    Statements of Disbursements of the House

     Following is contact information for Reps. Thomas and Fazio:

Rep. Bill Thomas:
Phone: (202) 225-2915
Fax: (202) 225-2908

Rep. Vic Fazio:
Phone: (202) 225-5716
Fax: (202) 225-5141

     For background on the issue of online access to Congressional
documents, see:


Subject: NewsNybbles

* FTC Calls for Privacy Legislation in Wake of P-Trak Controversy
Earlier this year the Lexis-Nexis online legal data service released a 
database, marketed at police agencies and lawyers, containing a huge 
number of American's names, current and previous addresses, phone numbers 
(many unlisted, according to some who've looked themselves up in the 
database), maiden names, and Social Security Numbers (SSNs), largely 
gathered from credit industry sources.  Lexis-Nexis removed SSNs from 
visibiilty in the database, known as P-Trak, only a few days after the 
service was announced, but the public outcry about P-Trak only got louder.

In response to an inquiry on the topic from Sen. Richard Bryan (D-NV),
the US Federal Trade Commission recommended on Sept. 20 that Congress 
pass new legislation to amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to 
prohibit the disclosure of information in consumer reports such as 
credit records, including "any identifying information other than the 
consumer's name, generational designation, current address and telephone 

While consumer advocacy organizations, including the Center for Democracy 
and Technology, and Taxpayer Assets Project, consider such an amendment 
at least a good first step to improving US privacy problems, the current 
legislative efforts to amend the FCRA have been dominated by credit and 
other industry lobbying, which has bent the bills decidely toward the 
anti-privacy side.  It remains to be seen if the new, sudden upsurge in 
privacy consciousness on the part of consumers will be enough to right 
the ship.  

US readers: Contacting your own legislators about your concerns is to say 
the least a good idea.  Tell them you want the FCRA to be amended to 
*improve* American privacy, not throw out the window what little of it 
is left. If this issue is not resolved in the current legislative session 
it is sure to be back in 1997, so be prepared to make your voice heard 
again, soon.  See the "What YOU Can Do" section of this newsletter for 
information on how to identify and contact your legislators. 

Text of FTC recommendations and other related documents available from 
the CDT web site at

[Sources: misc. offline news reports, CDT & TAP statements, Fight-Censorship 
Digest, RISKS, et al.]

* Bernstein Hearing Held - ITAR Constitutionality Challenged

Sept. 20, the San Francisco federal district court of Judge Marilyn Hall 
Patel heard oral arguments from Bernstein team lead counsel Cindy Cohn of 
McGlashan & Sarrail, and US Govt. attorney Anthony Coppolino. The 
Bernstein case, filed by mathematician Daniel J. Bernstein with backing 
from EFF and pro bono legal representation from McGlashan & Sarrail, 
seeks to have the ITAR and AECA restrictions on export of encryption 
ruled unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds.  The recent hearing
centered on motions for summary judgement made by both sides. Bernstein's 
motion claims that this law and regulation are unconstitutional on their 
face (the logical extension of the court's earlier ruling that source 
code is protected expression for First Amendment purposes). 

C|Net summary of the hearing:,4,3708,00.html

Transcripts will be provided under 
when available.

* "Clipper III" On the Move

President Clinton is reviewing the latest version of the Administration's
key "escrow" scheme - in which all user's encryption keys would be held 
by third parties for the convenience of police and intelligence agencies -
for approval. The new proposal, dubbed "Clipper III" by its opponents would
raise exportable key length a token amount, while still restricting the 
export of encryption products with any significant privacy protection 
features, and adding the Dept. of Justice to the list of governing bodies 
able to reject export requests. It is expected that the proposal will be 
made public at the Organization fo Economic Cooperation & Development 
(OECD) conference in Paris, Sept. 26-27 (with restricting public access to 
encryption being a hot item on the OECD agenda).

A coalition of online civil liberties organizations, including EFF, EPIC, 
ACLU, Privacy International, and many US local and non-US "Electronic 
Frontiers" organizations, submitted a resolution to the OECD, as a kind 
of pre-emptive strike, urging OECD to base its crypto polices on "the 
fundamental right of citizens to engage in private communication", to 
resist policies that try to set up surveillance networkings, and to pay 
attention to public concerns about privacy and invasion thereof.

Full text of this resolution available at:

The results of a journalist's (anonymized) interviews with OECD delegates
is available at:

[Source: HotWired, Fight-Censorship Digest, C|Net, etc.]

* TIA Tells FBI "No" on National Cell Phone Surveillance Network

Last week, the Telecommunications Industry Association, a telephony
standards body, rejected FBI demands to essentially turn the national
celluar phone network into a surveillance and tracking system of
unprecendented reach. The plan even included enabling police to track the
location of someone carrying a cell phone that was simply turned on but not
making a call!

EFF joins the Center for Democracy & Technology in condeming the
proposed system as flatly illegal.  The controversial "Communications
Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, orginally known as the Digital
Telphony Bill) authorized $500mil. to alter digital telphone technology
to preserve a status quo (namely, law enforcement ability to conduct
court-authorized wiretaps).  The rejected FBI proposal went far beyond
the authority granted by this statute.

TIA's rejection of the demands is certainly a victory for privacy, but
the FBI doesn't stay down for long. Please see the action alert leading 
this issue of EFFector.

* House Crypto Hearing Held

The US House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on crypto export and key 
"escrow", Sept. 25, 1996. Intial word is that little new material was 
broached, with the Adminstration retreating to its tired arguments that 
it must have key "escrow" (lately renamed "key recovery") and export 
control to maintain law enforcement and intelligence abilities in the 
digital age.  As usual, the Executive Branch astoundingly claims that 
"there is no real foreign availability" of encryption. However, the 
Administration has finally lets slip that its "voluntary" key recovery 
scheme may not be so voluntary after all.  The Administration was also 
criticized for attempting to amend the Omnibus Export Administration Act
in privacy-unfriendly ways.

CDT, who had staffers physically present at the hearing, will issue a 
more detailed summary Sept. 26 (or 27 at the latest), at:

[source: CDT, Fight-Censorship Digest]

* AOL Spam Filter Injunction Lifted

America Online, recently slapped with an injunction preventing it from 
filtering out mass email advertising directed at AOL customers has 
obtained a successful appeal to the injunction, but has yet to determine 
whether, and how, it will re-implement the e-blockade.

* Update on

Johan "Julf" Helsingius, operator of the pseudonymous 
remailer in Finland, has successfully obtained a temporary injunction 
against a preliminary court ruling that his service had to reveal the 
real user ID of pseudonymous user - a person the Church of Scientology 
wishes to file crimain charges against for intellectual property 
rights infringement.  The temporary injunction may last throughout
Helsingius' appeal of the initial ruling.

Helsingius plans to challenge the court's ruling that email has no 
privacy protection under Finnish law (despite strong privacy 
law in other media), and is negotiating with EFF to set up a legal 
defense fund for this effort.  None to soon: The government of Singapore,
after the Church of Scientology anti-privacy ruling, wants Finnish police 
to seize another Penet user ID - someone accused of making comments 
critical of a Singaporean government official (illegal in that ASEAN nation).

Press release about the injuction available at:

For more information, see:

* EFF's Barlow v. CDA-pusher Taylor on Wired's "Brain Tennis"

Beginning Monday, September 23, EFF co-founder John Perry Barlow will begin 
debating CDA supporter Bruce Taylor on Wired Online's
Brain Tennis forum, over government's supposed right to censor the Net, 
and whether such efforts would work anyway. The debate will last a week and a
half and will likely be followed by a live audio debate on the site.

Check out the debate at Brain Tennis:

* SF Internet Demo (Volunteers Needed)

Calling all Netizens and Web Surfers!

             * Please repost where appropriate *

Volunteers are needed to staff a storefront Internet demonstration.  This is
an opportunity to show off your Internet surfing skills, share your favorite
Web sites and help introduce San Francisco to cyberspace.

Coordinated by NetAction, and co-sponsored by:
Berkeley Mac Users Group (BMUG)
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
Impact Online
Institute for Global Communication (IGC)
Media Alliance
Pacific Bell
Upside Magazine
Volunteers are needed to staff the demonstration.  Volunteers must be willing
to work a minimum of two hours and must be familiar with Mac or PC computers
and Netscape web browser software.
The demonstration will be set up in a storefront display kiosk at Opera Plaza,
next to Max's Opera Cafe on Van Ness Avenue.  Donated Mac and PC computers
will be set up and volunteers will be available to show visitors how the
Internet works and what sorts of information and resources are available on
the World Wide Web.		

Monday, September 30 through Saturday, Oct. 5, 1996, from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Opera Plaza, 601 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco  
(Between Golden Gate and Turk in the Civic Center)

To show people who are not yet familiar with the Internet how the technology
works and what sort of information and resources are available on the World
Wide Web.  The demonstration will use computers and software that consumers
would be likely to purchase, and regular telephone service.

Volunteers should contact Audrie Krause at NetAction. 
Phone:          (415) 775-8674

Press release about the SF Internet demo available at:

* European Commission Calls for Internet "V-Chip" and Anti-Freedom Crypto

In an ironic twist on the uses of encryption, EC Commissioner Marcelino 
Oreja has suggested that Internet access be cryptographically limited so 
that only those who pay for access to a particular site can reach it, and 
for the government-forced implementation of an online analogue of the 
V-Chip, to screen out "pornographic" content. The Oreja proposal stems from
call for a clamp-down on online pornography stemming from a recent Beligian
child pornography & murder tragedy (which as usual had little or nothing 
to do with the Internet). The announcement comes just in time for a 
European Union meetings in Dublin and Galway, Ireland, at which figuring 
out how to censor the Internet is expected to be a "central theme" 
according to a Reuter's report.

Oreja admits that implementation of such a proposal would take time, but 
is calling for global-level agreements to censor the Internet.  Our 
European readers may wish to make their views on this known to the EC.
To Oreja's credit, he also acknowledged that an online industry code of 
ethics might be an alternative solution.

A question is begged, however: Do censorship-minded regulators and 
parliamentarians around the world really think that no one notices when 
they grandstand in reponse to a specific horrific event, such as offline 
child abuse in a particular jurisdiction, and generalize this into a call 
for global censorship of all sexually explict material? Apparently they
really do think this way. We've seen this shell-game time and again, but the 
ruse is transparent. The online public knows, and net-savvy journalists are
spreading the word offline as well. 

Reuter newswire has covered the simultaneously ridiculous and troubling 
Net censorship proposal, at:

* Net Censorship in India - Update

Netday reports that India's national commercial Internet access provider, 
VSNL, plans to block access to sites containing "undesirable" 
information, or that advertise services that are illegal in India, such 
as Internet voice telephony (a particular thorn in VSNL's side, since it 
claims to lose revenue from voice-on-the-Net applications. Does "conflict 
of interest" ring a bell with VSNL?  Apparently not.

Netday report on this and other interesting topics:

* Net Censorship in China - Update

The Chinese government rather unbelievably and melodramatically claims to 
be "shocked" that a Chinese student used a BBS for political speech 
(namely protesting Japanese actions regarding some disputed East Asian 
islands). Why China would be particularly concerned with someone 
criticizing Japan is unclear, but what is very clear is that Beijing has 
ordered at least one university network (at Qinghua U.) to be monitored, 
and for "offensive" messages coming from users there to be deleted - 
including anything outside "eduation and research" purposes.  Over a week 
before, the Beijing U. BBS was shut down completely.

Now that national-level Internet filters are in place in the People's 
Republic, limits on the number of new Internet accounts have been lifted.
A Chinese telecom official, Zhang Weihua, claims that the material their 
filters block is "material restricted all over the world", but other 
evidence begs to differ, and suggests instead that the government is 
preventing online access to material published by Taiwan, human rights 
organizations, dissident exiles, and major Western news corporations, as 
well as sexually-explict material.

See Netday for more information, at:

[Source: Netday, Reuter.]

* Net Censorship in Sinapore - Update

As of Sept. 25, a Singaporean court has fined a man, Lai Chee Chuen, the 
equivalent of about US$44,000 for downloading online pornography (61 counts) 
and for having a sexually explict magazine (1 count, for owning an issue 
of Penthouse).  Lai's arrest followed a tip from Interpol, investigating 
online exchange of pornography on the global Internet. This is the first 
we've heard of this investigation, which is also targeting sites in 
South Africa, Hong Kong, Canada, Germany & the UK, according to a 
Singaporean newspaper, the Straits Times.  Interestingly, the fine for 
getting porn off the Net was two times the fine for having sexy pictures 
printed on dead trees.

[Source UPI & Reuter newswires.]

* 2nd System-Cracker Strike Against US Govt. Web Pages

Following the replacement of the Dept. of Justice front web page with a 
new version claiming to be the homepage of the "Deptartment of Injustice" 
last month, crackers last week replaced the Central Intelligence 
Ageny welcome page with a "Central Stupidity Agency" satire, filled with 
references to Swedish hackers and computer crime prosecutions. In both 
cases the fake web pages were removed, though remains 
down, while the real DoJ page was put back online quickly.

One hopes that such events will increase governmental awareness of the 
value and importance of Internet security, including encryption, though 
holding one's breath is ill-advised...


Upcoming Events

This schedule lists EFF events, and those we feel might be of interest to
our members.  EFF events (those sponsored by us or featuring an EFF speaker)
are marked with a "*" instead of a "-" after the date.  Simlarly, government
events (such as deadlines for comments on reports or testimony submission,
or conferences at which government representatives are speaking) are marked
with "!" in place of the "-" ("!?" means a govt. speaker may appear, but
we don't know for certain yet.)  And likewise, "+" in place of "-"
indicates a non-USA event.  If it's a foreign EFF event with govt. people,
it'll be "*!+" instead of "-".  You get the idea.

The latest version of the full EFF calendar is available from:

ftp:, /pub/EFF/calendar.eff
gopher:, 1/EFF, calendar.eff

See also our new Now-Up-to-Date HTML calendar at:


Sep. 27 * American Bar Association Forum on Communications Law; EFF Staff 
	- Counsel Shari Steele will speak on issues of trademark online, 
	  including the recent Georgia law which has greatly chilled free 
	  speech online; New York City.
	  American Bar Association
	  740 15th St., NW
	  Washington, DC 20061-0001
	  Phone: (202) 331-2200

Oct. 3 -  EXL: Executive Lecture Series - "Marketing in Cyberspace"
	  Walter A. Hass School of Business, UC-Berkeley, C330 Cheit Hall, 
	  11:15 AM - 12:30 PM; Speaker: Ed Callan, Senior Product Manager of 
	  Consumer Markets, Pacific Bell Internet

Oct. 8-
     11 - EDUCOM '96; Philadelphia, PA
          Contact: +1 202 872 4200 (voice)

Oct. 10 * EXL: Executive Lecture Series - "Cyberlaw Issues"
	  Walter A. Hass School of Business, UC-Berkeley, C330 Cheit Hall, 
	  11:15 AM - 12:30 PM; Speaker: Lori Fena, Executive Director, 
	  Electronic Frontier Foundation

Oct. 11 * American Bar Association Forum on Communications Law; EFF Staff 
	- Counsel Shari Steele will speak on issues of trademark online, 
	  including the recent Georgia law which has greatly chilled free 
	  speech online; San Francisco
	  American Bar Association
	  740 15th St., NW
	  Washington, DC 20061-0001
	  Phone: (202) 331-2200

Oct. 12-
     13 - Supreme Law Seminars - Freedom Law and Internet Technology: 
	  The Full Faith and Credit Clause; Holiday Inn Palo Verde in 
	  Tucson, Arizona; focus of the seminar  will be  the  constitutional  
	  law  of  freedom,  and available Internet  technologies for 
	  teaching and  learning this law, and making freedom a reality.
	  Richard McDonald of Canoga  Park, California will be the featured 
	  guest speaker; Advanced tickets  are available by sending  $100 in 
	  cash or blank U.S. Postal Money order to  Paul Andrew Mitchell, 
	  Supreme Law Seminars,  c/o 2509  North Campbell,  Apartment 1776, 
	  Tucson, Arizona. For more info, Email to:
	  Paul Andrew Mitchell 

Oct. 16-
     17 - Internet Expo; Hynes Convention Center, Boston, MA; 
	  featuring the Web World and EMail World Expositions;
	  sponsored by DCI

Oct. 16-
     19 - Web Net-96: World Conference of The Web Society, organized by 
	  the Association of Computing in Education; San Francisco, CA. 
 	  Contact: +1 804 973 3987
	  Fax: +1 804 978 7449	

Oct. 19-
     20 - Computer Professionals for Social Reponsibility (CPSR) -  
	  Two-day conference at Georgetwon University (Washington, D.C., 
	  USA) will investigate the role of computers in political 
	  activism, election processes, and rights of access to information. 
	  Invited keynote speaker is Ralph Nader. More info contact CPSR:
       	  tel: 415-322-3778, 703-739-9320

Oct. 19-
     24 - ASIS 1996 Annual Meeting - Global Complexity: Information, Chaos 
	  and Control; meeting will consider the complexity of the working 
	  world of information professionals as well as theoretical 
	  perspectives involving the nature and use of information; 
	  Baltimore, Maryland, USA; more information, registration...
	  see under Conferences

Oct. 23 + International Bar Association's Media Law Seminar - Berlin;
	  Seminar discussion of Internet freedom of expression issues; 
	  part of IBA annual conference drawing 4,000+ lawyers from all 
	  acround the globe.

Oct. 29-
     30 ! "The First 100 Feet: Options for Internet and Broadband 
	- Access," sponsored by the Freedom Forum, the Harvard Information 
	  Infrastructure Project, the National Economic Council, and the U.S.
	  Dept. of Energy; The Freedom Forum Building, Arlington, Va.; 
	  submission deadline: June 20
	  Contact: Tim Leshan, Coordinator, Information Infrastructure 
	  Project, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 79 JFK
	  St., Cambridge, MA 02138
	  Phone: +1 617 496 1389
	  Fax: +1 617 495 5776

Oct. 29 - EXL: Executive Lecture Series - "Knowledge Management for the 
	  Enterprise: Delivering Business Value from an Intranet"
	  Walter A. Hass School of Business, UC-Berkeley,
	  C330 Cheit Hall, 11:15 AM - 12:30 PM; Speaker: Dr. Lougie Anderson, 
	  Director of Engineering, Internet Technologies Group, Sequent 
	  Computer Systems, Inc.

Oct. 29 - ETS: Emerging Technology Showcase - "Targeted Information Delivery"
	  Walter A. Hass School of Business, UC-Berkeley, C330 Cheit Hall,  
	  2 PM - 3:30 PM; Speaker: Kevin Brown, Director of Marketing, Inktomi

Oct. 29 - EXL: Executive Lecture Series - "The Internet and Non Profit 
	  Organizations"; Speaker: Audrie Krause, Founder, NetAction
	  Walter A. Hass School of Business, UC-Berkeley, C330 Cheit Hall,  
	  6 PM - 7:30 PM

Nov. 5  - ETS: Emerging Technology Seminar - "Electronic Commerce at APL -- 
	  Industry Challenges"; Speaker: Diane Silver, Vice President for 
	  Information Strategy American President Lines; Walter A. Hass School 
	  of Business, UC-Berkeley >C230 Cheit Hall, 2 PM - 3:30 PM

Nov. 6-
     8 + ETHICOMP96: Ethical Issues of Information Technology; Universidad
         Pontificia de Salamanca - Madrid, Spain; seeks to provide practical
         guidance on socially and ethically sensitive applications of IT --
         the social benefits and drawbacks of using IT; will include the
         presentation of case studies which raise or illustrate significant
         ethical problems of IT usage (1) in the workplace, (2) in education,
         (3) at home and (4) in leisure.  Nov. 6-8, 1996

         For further general information contact:
         Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility
         School of Computing Sciences
         De Montfort University
         The Gateway
         LE1 9BH UK
         Telephone: +44 116 257 7475
         Fax +44 116 254 1891

Nov. 13-
     15 - Fourth Biennial Participatory Design Conference, sponsored by 
	  Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility; Cambridge, MA.
	  Submission deadline: May 3.

Nov. 15-
     22 + Communication and the Empowerment of Civil Society in Africa, 
	  10th Biennial Conference; Cape Town, South Africa.
	  Tel. 25~2-216135 /227043

Nov. 18-
     22 - COMDEX Fall'96 Conference; over 2000 exhibitors and a host of 
	  speakers address today's most important business and technology 
	  issues; Las Vegas, NV USA

Dec. 1  - Computer Security Day (started by Washington DC chapter of the
          Assoc. for Computing Machinery, to "draw attention to computer
          security during the holdiay season when it might otherwise become

Dec. 5-
     8  + Tel*Ed/Multimedia '96, "a conference where communication 
	  technology is used to create learning experiences for the 
	  participants...where participants show, not tell, how 
	  telecommunication can bridge distances"; Tampa, FL and 
	  Monterrey, Mexico.	   


Jan. 23-
     25 - "The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual 
	  Property", sponsored by The Information Infrastructure Project;
	  Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Deadline for abstracts: Oct. 
	  15, 1996.
	  Contact: Tim Leshan, +1 617 496 1389
	  Fax: +1 617 495 5776

Jan. 28-
     31 - RSA Cryptography Conference - Computerworld called last year's 
	  event the sine qua non event of the crypto community; at various 
	  facilities atop Nob Hill in San Francisco, the luminaries of 
	  cryptography will gather; Right now, preparations for this 
	  conference are underway. There are many exciting ways for 
	  corporations and individuals to participate. Read on for 
	  information about presenting, exhibiting, or just attending

Feb. 10-
     11 - Internet Society Symposium on Network and Distributed System 
	  Security; for those interested in the practical aspects of network 
	  and distributed system security, focusing on actual system design 
	  and implementation, rather than theory. Dates, final call for
          papers, advance program, and registration information will be
	  available at the URL:


Subject: Quote of the Day

 "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to
gain ground."
  - Thomas Jefferson

Find yourself wondering if your privacy and freedom of speech are safe 
when bills to censor the Internet are swimming about in a sea of of 
surveillance legislation and anti-terrorism hysteria?  Worried that in 
the rush to make us secure from ourselves that our government 
representatives may deprive us of our essential civil liberties? 
Concerned that legislative efforts nominally to "protect children" will 
actually censor all communications down to only content suitable for 
the playground?  Alarmed by commercial and religious organizations abusing
the judicial and legislative processes to stifle satire, dissent and 

Join EFF! (or send any message to

Even if you don't live in the U.S., the anti-Internet hysteria will soon 
be visiting a legislative body near you.  If it hasn't already.


Subject: What YOU Can Do

* Digital Telephony/Comms. Assistance to Law Enforcement Act

The FBI has been seeking both funding for the DT/CALEA wiretapping 
provisions, and preparing to require that staggering numbers of citizens be 
simultaneously wiretappable, trackable by zeroing in on their cell 
phones, or subject to "terrorist" investigation for minor crimes or for 
donating to organizations the US Administration opposes.

To oppose the funding, write to your own Senators and Representatives 
urging them to vote against any appropriations or slush funds for 
wiretapping, and against any expansion of wiretapping powers, capacity, 
or authority.

In the wake of the Olympics bomb, the US government, both legislative and 
executive branches, are hot to pass new wiretapping laws, and fund the 
DT/CALEA wiretapping provisions.  SPEAK OUT NOW. There is not a moment to 
lose! See lead article in this issue for more information.

See for background 

* New Crypto-Privacy Legislation

Urge your Represenatitives to support the Pro-CODE crypto export bill.

For years US export controls on encryption have hampered the development
of secure communications online. This technology is vital for online 
commerce, for national security, and for YOUR electronic privacy.

The new Pro-CODE legislation will go a long way to rectifying the situation.

Join in the Golden Key Campaign - see

See also:
for more info.

* The Communications Decency Act & Other Censorship Legislation

The Communications Decency Act and similar legislation pose serious 
threats to freedom of expression online, and to the livelihoods of system 
operators.  The legislation also undermines several crucial privacy 

Business/industry persons concerned should alert their corporate govt.
affairs office and/or legal counsel.  Everyone should write to their own
Representatives and Senators, letting them know that such abuses of 
public trust will not be tolerated, that legislators who vote against
your free speech rights will be voted against by you in the next elections.

Join in the Blue Ribbon Campaign - see

Support the EFF Cyberspace Legal Defense Fund:

If you do not have full internet access (e.g. WWW), send your request
for information to

censorious legislation is turning up at the US state and non-US 
national levels.  Don't let it sneak by you - or by the online activism 
community. Without locals on the look out, it's very difficult for the 
Net civil liberties community to keep track of what's happening locally 
as well as globally.

* Find Out Who Your Congresspersons Are

Writing letters to, faxing, and phoning your representatives in Congress
is one very important strategy of activism, and an essential way of
making sure YOUR voice is heard on vital issues.

EFF has lists of the Senate and House with contact information, as well
as lists of Congressional committees. These lists are available at:, /pub/Activism/Congress_cmtes/, 1/EFF/Issues/Activism/Congress_cmtes

The full Senate and House lists are senate.list and hr.list, respectively.
Those not in the U.S. should seek out similar information about their
own legislative bodies.  EFF will be happy to archive any such
information provided to us, so pass it on!

If you are having difficulty determining who your US legislators are,
try contacting your local League of Women Voters, who maintain a great 
deal of legislator information, or consult the free ZIPPER service
that matches Zip Codes to Congressional districts with about 85%
accuracy at:

Computer Currents Interactive has provided Congress contact info, sorted 
by who voted for and against the Communcations Decency Act:

* Join EFF!

You *know* privacy, freedom of speech and ability to make your voice heard
in government are important. You have probably participated in our online
campaigns and forums.  Have you become a member of EFF yet?  The best way to
protect your online rights is to be fully informed and to make your
opinions heard.  EFF members are informed and are making a difference.  Join
EFF today!

For EFF membership info, send queries to, or send any
message to for basic EFF info, and a membership form.



EFFector Online is published by:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation
1550 Bryant St., Suite 725
San Francisco CA 94103 USA
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)
Membership & donations:
Legal services:
General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries:

Editor: Stanton McCandlish, Online Activist, Webmaster (

This newsletter is printed on 100% recycled electrons.

Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged.  Signed
articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF.  To reproduce
signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express
permission. Press releases and EFF announcements may be reproduced individ-
ually at will.

To subscribe to EFFector via email, send message body of "subscribe
effector-online" (without the "quotes") to, which will add
you to a subscription list for EFFector.

Back issues are available at:, /pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/, 1/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector

To get the latest issue, send any message to (or, and it will be mailed to you automagically.  You can also get
the file "current" from the EFFector directory at the above sites at any 
time for a copy of the current issue.  HTML editions available at: 
at EFFweb.  HTML editions of the current issue sometimes take a day or 
longer to prepare after issue of the ASCII text version.


End of EFFector Online v09 #13 Digest


Back to top

JavaScript license information