From: troy@cbme.unsw.EDU.AU (Troy Rollo)
Subject: Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Latest FBI Wiretap Bill
Followup-To: alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.privacy,talk.politics.misc,soc.culture.usa,news.admin.policy,alt.irc
Organization: University of New South Wales
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 23:40:09 GMT

The following was posted to a lot of newsgroups, but missed alt.irc. It
concerns IRC too.

From article <1992Sep2.195247.15369@nntp.hut.fi>, by jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala):
> This is the Big Brother bill that's been circulating previously.  See
> the original article in comp.org.eff.talk for the bill itself.
> 
> In article <1992Sep2.181158.4511@eff.org>, rita@eff (Rita Marie Rouvalis) writes:
>>The following is the latest version of the FBI Digital Telephony 
>>Proposal, introduced in May 1992. This version removes the previous 
>>language that authorized the FCC to set standards and now places it 
>>solely in the hands of the Attorney General. Fines are $10,000/day for 
>>non compliance with services within the public switched network having 
>>18 months to comply and services outisde having three years.  The 
>>proposal now manadates that the capability for remote government 
>>wiretapping must be included into the system.
>>
>>This proposal clearly enhances the ability of the FBI to monitor 
>>communications.  It takes the unprecendented step of placing control 
>>over certification of telecommunications equipment in the hands of the 
>>Attorney General and requires that the equipment be constucted to allow 
>>government have the ability to monitor communications from a 
>>"government monitoring facility remote from the target facility."  All 
>>telecommunications users should be concerned by the privacy and 
>>security implications of creating systems that have holes for the 
>>government or any other knowledgable user to plug into.
>>
>>
>>102nd Congress
>>    2nd Session
>>
>>                              S. _____
>>                           [H.R. _____]
>>
>>                         IN THE SENATE
>>             [IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES]
> 
> [ Most of bill deleted ]
> 
> Note that the fine is "a civil penalty", which if I understand
> correctly is a tool to violate the U.S. Constitution clause about "due
> process" - ie. because it's not a criminal law, the usual "burden of
> proof" doesn't apply and the courts won't say it's a violation of due
> process (the same method as in the legalized robbery known as civil
> forfeiture laws and the proposed forced eviction laws).  You'll have
> to double-check this, though.
> 
> Here's the excerpt which all Usenet sites, FIDOnet sites, BBS system
> keepers etc. among other electronic communications service providers
> in USA would have to comply with or pay $10,000 / day and be put under
> a restraining order (unless excepted by The Attorney General, after
> consultation with the Department of Commerce, the Small Business
> Administration and Federal Communications Commission).
> 
> 
>       (a)  Providers of electronic communication services and private 
> branch exchange operators shall provide within the United States 
> capability and capacity for the government to intercept wire and 
> electronic communications when authorized by law:  
>      (1)  concurrent with the transmission of the communication to the 
> recipient of the communication;
>      (2)  in the signal form representing the content of the 
> communication between the subject of the intercept and any individual 
> with whom the subject is communicating, exclusive of any other signal 
> representing the content of the communication between any other 
> subscribers or users of the electronic communication services provider 
> or private branch exchange operator, and including information on the 
> individual calls (including origin, destination and other call set-up 
> information), and services, systems, and features used by the subject 
> of the interception;
>      (3)  notwithstanding the mobility of the subject of the intercept 
> or the use by the subject of the intercept of any features of the 
> telecommunication system, including, but not limited to, speed- dialing 
> or call forwarding features;
>      (4)  at a government monitoring facility remote from the target 
> facility and remote from the system of the electronic communication 
> services provider or private branch exchange operator;
>      (5)  without detection by the subject of the intercept or any 
> subscriber;  and
>      (6)  without degradation of any subscriber's telecommunications 
> service.
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> 
>      (e)  The Attorney General shall have exclusive authority to 
> enforce the provisions of subsections (a), (b) and (c) of this section.  
> The Attorney General may apply to the appropriate United States 
> District Court for an order restraining or enjoining any violation of 
> subsection (a), (b) or (c) of this section.  The District Court shall 
> have jurisdiction to restrain and enjoin violations of subsections (a) 
> of this section.
>      (f)  Any person who willfully violates any provision of subsection 
> (a) of this section shall be subject to a civil penalty of $10,000 per 
> day for each day in violation.  The Attorney General may file a civil 
> action in the appropriate United States District Court to collect, and 
> the United States District Courts shall have jurisdiction to impose, 
> such fines.
>      (g)  Definitions--As used in subsections (a) through (f) of this 
> section--
>      (1)  'provider of electronic communication service' or 'private 
> branch exchange operator' means any service or operator which provides 
> to users thereof the ability to send or receive wire or electronic 
> communication, as those terms are defined in subsections 2510(1) and 
> 2510(12) of Title 18, United States code, respectively, but does not 
> include the government of the United States or any agency thereof;
>      (2)  'communication' means any wire or electronic communication, 
> as defined in subsections 2510(1) and 2510(12), of Title 18, United 
> States Code;
>      (3)  'intercept' shall have the same meaning as set forth in 
> section 2510(4) of Title 18, United States Code;  and
>      (4)  'government' means the Government of the United States and 
> any agency or instrumentality thereof, any state or political 
> subdivision thereof, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, 
> territory or possession of the United States.      
> 
> 
> //Jyrki
--
__________________________________________________________________________
troy@cbme.unsw.EDU.AU	Overworked, overcommited and always multitasking.
Newsgroups: alt.irc