Re: "cracks" via tor

["Jonathan D. Proulx" <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 10:39:13AM -0500, Geoffrey Goodell wrote:

:You operate spoon, yes?  I would be more worried that you were serving
:as an exit node for Usenet traffic.  But of course, we must all choose
:our battles.

definately a matter of picking battles. Usenet has degenerated and no
doubt serves all kinds of illegal material, but within that chaff is
some discourse I personally deem valuable.

p2p holds the promise of samizdat type publishing that may need or
warrant strong protections, but I've yet to see this material.  I'm
willing to reconsider if someone has a good counter argument.

So that's my personal biases, and I'm aware that port utilization is
arbitrary and many services have port 80 options to circumvent
port filtering.

:Regarding DMCA, I recommend that you consider this template:
:
:http://afs.eecs.harvard.edu/research/tor/website/eff/tor-dmca-response.html
:
:(ignore the link to receive the document from tor.eff.org.)
:
:The DMCA safe harbor provisions should actually protect you in this
:case, or so EFF believes.

Thanks.

:For the record, in response to two DMCA notices, I presented this
:template to members of the Harvard General Counsel, and they were
:satisfied.  I suspect that the reaction of MIT lawyers will be similar.
:Remember that Tor is a system with substantial benefits both to research
:and to privacy.  If institutions such as MIT do not support this, then
:who will?

MIT has a good record of protecting privacy research here from these
sorts of assertions.  I would not want to make it seem otherwise.