Hacker Chronicles 1/HACKER1.ISO/cud3/cud305f.txt

Text File | 1992-08-18 | 9KB | 183 lines

------------------------------

From: Visualize Whirled Peas <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Feds (In this case the FCC) hits Ham Packet BBS Ops.
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 91 08:55:45 PST

********************************************************************
***  CuD #3.05: File 6 of 8: The Feds hit Ham Packet BBS Ops.    ***
********************************************************************

-Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio
Subject: FCC Citation of Packet BBSs for Store-and-Forward Msg

                   FCC CENSORS/CENSURES PACKET RADIO
                            Tom Clark, W3IWI
                            January 30, 1991

Today a number of packet BBSs on the east coast received citations from the
FCC's Norfolk (actually Virginia Beach) Field Office which may well spell
the end to much of amateur packet radio. According to Jim, WA4ONG the
following packet BBSs (and perhaps others) are involved: N3LA, WA3TSW,
KA3CNT, KA3T, WA3ZNW, W3IWI, WA4ONG, WB0TAX and N4HOG [my copy of the
citation has not yet arrived in the mail -- the details in this message are
taken from a copy WA4ONG faxed to me].

The letter dated January 25th from Mr. J. J. Freeman, Engineer in Charge at
the Norfolk Office, to WA4ONG states:

"I have received a report that indicates you may have operated your amateur
 radio station, call sign WA4ONG, in violation of Section 97.113(a) of the
 Commission's Rules. It appears that you used the Ama-teur Radio Service to
 facilitate the business activity of THE COALITION TO STOP U.SD.
 INTERVENTION IN THE MIDDLE EAST."

"Specifically, on or about January 5, 1991 you received a packet radio
 message originated by amateur radio station WA3QNS. You then transmitted
 this packet radio message to another amateur radio station. The message
 was:

   { Here appears a copy of the message sent by [e-mail] originat-ed
     at 22:22z on Jan.5 with the BID #21035_N3LA, Subject: Call This Number
     ASAP. The message listed the business telephones and fax numbers for
     "The Coalition" as well as a 1-900-xxx-xxxx number to call to
     "register your voice" I won't repeat the bulletin here, because
     repeating the bulletin would make it illegal to send this message! }
(Continued in Part 2)
/EX

SB  URGENT@USA < W3IWI  $38141_W3IWI
FCC CITES BBSs FOR @USA MSG (Part 2/4)
R:910131/0445z [e-mail] [Balto/Wash MD/DC]

                FCC CENSORS/CENSURES PACKET RADIO cont'd

"This activity was a facilitation of the business affairs of the Coali-tion
 to Stop U.S. Intervention in the Middle East and therefor {sic} in
 violation of Section 97.113(a)."

The FCC citation then contains the boilerplate demanding a response within
10 days explaining circumstances and correct actions, and then closing with
a chilling "to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to
insure current and future rule compliance" and a state-ment that future
transgressions will bring fines and/or license revoca-tion.

That's the facts. I'll now discuss some of the implications and recommended
actions.

                            THE IMPLICATIONS

The implications of the action by the FCC's Norfolk Field Office are
absolutely appalling. What is implied is that each and every station in a
store-and-forward network is responsible for the actual message CONTENT
passing through each node. The BBSs were cited because their calls were in
the message header "audit trail". The  FCC's action states that each BBS
SYSOP is personally responsible for the "correctness" of all messages
merely passing through his system. Here, the W3IWI mail switch handles
about 10,000 messages per month automatically. There is NO WAY that I can
vouch for every bit that passes through!

If the FCC had instead gleaned its information from on-the-air monitor-ing,
then all the THENET/NETROM/ROSE/TCPIP/DIGIPEATER switches handling the
message would have been equally culpable! The implication of the FCC action
is that a node control operator must read all information and be prepared
to shut the system down at the first hint of an "inappropriate" message.
It's hard enough to watch the information passing on 1200 BPS links --
imagine the impossibility of "censoring" 56 kBPS or faster channels.
(Continued in Part 3)
/EX

SB  URGENT@USA < W3IWI  $38142_W3IWI
FCC CITES BBSs FOR @USA MSG (Part 3/4)
R:910131/0445z [e-mail] [Balto/Wash MD/DC]

                     THE IMPLICATIONS cont'd

In future networks where redundant channels exist, it is quite possible
that a given message will be fragmented and parts of it sent via several
parallel paths. The message may exist as a complete entity only at the ends
of a virtual path. It would be impossible to implement the censor-ship the
FCC seems to be demanding with such a network, so the "legali-ty" will
interfere with development of new technology.

Consider another recent development: amateur packet radio satellites.
PACSAT is licensed by the FCC with a US trustee and a cadre of US sy-sops.
PACSAT is, in essence, a flying BBS with the sysops on the ground.  In
order to screen out "offensive" messages, a ground-based SYSOP has to use a
radio channel to verify message CONTENT. But the FCC letter says that the
very act of reading an "offensive" message on the radio is illegal. If the
Norfolk FCC action is allowed to stand, the logical implication is that
PACSATs must be turned off!

A number of us have discussed such issues with responsible individuals at
the FCC in Washington ever since the first fledgling days of packet radio.
The signal that the FCC sent was that the sole responsibility for the
CONTENT of a message lays with the ORIGINATOR. The actions of the Norfolk
Office seem to indicate a new policy has been adopted which effectively
kills packet radio.

Or -- perhaps -- the Norfolk Engineer in Charge who issued the citations
was offended by the particular message and chose to take out his
frus-trations on all the "King's Messengers" who brought the message to
him?

                   W3IWI COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It is ironic that the WA3QNS message that brought down the wrath of the FCC
a number of the BBSs that "touched" his message brought a very vocal
response from the packet community informing him that

 (1) 1-900-xxx-xxxx are in fact commercial ventures designed to raise
     money and that a call to the number would cost the caller.

 (2) The subject message was probably in violation of 97.113(a) and
     probably illegal
(Continued in Part 4)
/EX

SB  URGENT@USA < W3IWI  $38143_W3IWI
FCC CITES BBSs FOR @USA MSG (Part 4/4)
R:910131/0445z [e-mail] [Balto/Wash MD/DC]

              W3IWI COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS cont'd

Personally, I have been silent (but very frustrated) that about the 10% of
bulletins addressed @USA (or @ALLUS, @ALLBBS, etc.) that are in poor taste.
I have grown tired if blather about censorship, First Amendment Rights and
the incredible volumes of hate mail. WA3QNS, by his statements and by the
responses to his statements from other folks, has been one of the causes of
this frustration. I have longed for the return to normalcy with messages on
technical topics and personal communications.  I have found it frustrating
to pay the electric power bill and pay for the W3IWI hardware for others to
engage in marginally offensive "Free Speech". I have wished that the
(ab)users of @USA would have exercised more discretion with
self-censorship.

But I have gritted what teeth I have left and avoided being a censor.  Now,
the FCC's CENSURE has left me with no alternative than to be a CENSOR.

Until the FCC tells me that I can do otherwise, I will only release @USA
messages that I personally screen and am willing to stake my license on.
The priority on my time is such that I don't expect to have time to screen
@USA bulletins. Any complaints about my decision will be sent to /dev/null.

For the vast majority of you who do not abuse the system, I'm sorry that
this situation has come up and that your ability to "fan out" informa-tion
will be hindered. Since there have been very few instances of "offensive"
personal messages, I'll take the risk of keeping all other packet mail
flowing here and I hope the other BBS SYSOPs do likewise.  But PLEASE
exercise self-policing. The BBS SYSOPs don't want to be held responsible
for YOUR words.

The ARRL has already been informed about the Norfolk citations. Because of
the potentially devastating impact on all packet radio if the Norfolk
situation is allowed to stand, I anticipate a lot of phone calls to be made
in the next few days!

73 de Tom, W3IWI

********************************************************************
                           >> END OF THIS FILE <<
***************************************************************************