- From: James P. Salsman <bovik@best.com>
- Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 17:30:33 -0700 (PDT)
- To: ietf@ietf.org
- Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org, ietf-openproxy@imc.org
Recently I read that internet service providers have been increasingly losing status as common carriers, because, for example, there have been a lot of continuing attempts at legislation requiring content-based filtering. In fact, someone has apparently written a worm (or "implemented an active network," in the words of the apologists) which scans the hard drives of its hosts, and sends mail of "suspicious" activity to authorities, along with everyone in the host's local address book. Perhaps the OPES group will be able to scan network traffic on those ISPs who choose to give up their common carrier status (and its immunization against suits steming from, for example, the Electronic Comminucations Privacy Act), so that whenever anyone sends an email which is objectionable to the FCC, they can immediatly alert the local police department, or the host's office of intellectual property control. The alternative, common carrier status, which is preserved by other, older, legislation in contexts involving IP telephony, at least in the United States, requires preservation of the end-to-end model. Benjamin Franklin knew this, as did Jefferson. John Stewart Mill wrote about it, too, more than 100 years before the first e-mail. Cheers, James P.S. Since I mentioned IP telephony, I am sure Lloyd would be disappointed if I failed to point out that here in the U.S., the use of asynchronous voice messaging (such as the excellent work being done by the IETF's Voice Profile for Internet Mail Working Group) is protected by both the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and older telephony common-carrier requirements in U.S. law. Moreover, it is firmly rooted in end-to-end requirements.
Received on Saturday, 16 June 2001 20:36:18 UTC