Computer underground Digest Sun Apr 12, 1998 Volume 10 : Issue 22
ISSN 1004-042X
Editor: Jim Thomas (cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu)
News Editor: Gordon Meyer (gmeyer@sun.soci.niu.edu)
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
Ian Dickinson
Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith
Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest
CONTENTS, #10.22 (Sun, Apr 12, 1998)
File 1--Digital wiretapping in the Netherlands
File 2--Fwd: Canada Hacker Arrested in NASA Case
File 3--US Govt wants to "tag" color printers
File 4--E-mail 'Spammer' Settles Lawsuit For $2 Million
File 5--Shareware and Persuasion (fwd)
File 6--"Web Security: A Step-by-Step Reference Guide", L.D. Stein
File 7--Information Trumps Reality (From NETFUTURE #68)
File 8--APRIL 16 -- FANTASTIC CPSR/Chicago program (fwd)
File 9--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 Apr, 1998)
CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION ApPEARS IN
THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Maurice Wessling" <maurice@XS4ALL.NL>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 10:51:18 +0000
Subject: File 1--Digital wiretapping in the Netherlands
PRESS RELEASE
XS4ALL Internet
Monday, April 6th 1998
Dutch parliament about to approve tapping paragraph after
pressure from Internal Security Agency.
A letter from the Internal Security Agency (BVD) to the leaders
of the four largest parties in parliament has played a key role
in ensuring that in all likelyhood, a majority of dutch
parliament will vote to include a controversial paragraph in the
new telecommunications law. In an attempt to secure government
access to telecommunication between citizens, the new
telecommunications law includes a paragraph that, among other
things, forces ISPs to make their networks tappable, at their
own expense.
In the letter, the BVD stresses the need for expansion of its
tapping capabilities. The dutch labour party (PvdA), the largest
party in The Netherlands, withdrew its objections against the law
upon receiving the letter.
Internet Service Providers, legal experts, business community
representatives, and the dutch government privacy watchdog
organization have expressed concern over the extention of tapping
capabilities for police and intelligence organizations. The new
law places a large financial burden on providers. Furthermore,
the necessity to expand the tapping capabilities was not
documented or argumented for.
XS4ALL, one of the countries largest ISPs has appealed to
parliament on several occasions to postpone the tapping paragraph
(chapter 13 of the new law) until the minister properly documents
the need for such radical changes. Of the large parties, only
D'66 will vote for postponing the tapping paragraph
Maurice Wessling <maurice@xs4all.nl>
Public Affairs
XS4ALL Internet
Amsterdam, Netherlands
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 22:59:58 EDT
From: Cu digest <Cudigest@aol.com>
Subject: File 2--Fwd: Canada Hacker Arrested in NASA Case
Canada Hacker Arrested in NASA Case
.c The Associated Press
SUDBURY, Ontario (AP) - A 22-year-old man faces dozens of charges
in a case involving the cracking of the computer security codes at
top aerospace facilities in the United States.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which conducted a 14-month
investigation, say a hacker broke into the computer systems at the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Center, the National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Association and Hughes STC, an
aerospace firm.
(The article notes that in one case, $50,000 damage was
caused to files and that access was also gained into several
private and university computer systems in Canada and the U.S.)
<snip>
Jason Mewhiney, 22, of Val Caron, is charged with mischief by
willfully obstructing, interrupting and interfering with the
lawful use of data. He is to appear in court May 13.
------------------------------
Date: 06 Apr 1998 15:29:44 -0400
From: Mark Atwood <mra@POBOX.COM>
Subject: File 3--US Govt wants to "tag" color printers
A recent news article has made me a bit nervous.
In Yahoo News in a Reuters article dated Tuesday March 31 2:25 PM EST
and titled "Lawmakers Press for Anti-Counterfeit Measures"..
The anticounterfeiting officers of the US Fed Govt, along with
Rep. Michael Castle, (R-DE), are "concerned" with the increasing use
of scanners and color printers to do "small batch" counterfeiting, and
want to change the laws a bit. I guess the existing laws are targetedd
at the "olddays" of making counterfeit plates, and running off a few
million dollars, not some small time operation of making a few
thousand in $50 bills. Castle said "previous sentencing guidelines
based on total amounts of counterfeit notes seized should not apply".
I can understand and support that.
BUT, the article goes on to say:
"In addition, Castle said, practical and realistic measures to tag
scanners and printers must be considered, in order to identify the
source of the counterfeit notes."
In other words, he wants every color printer to embed some sort of
signature into its output, so that the "authorities" can determine
where it came from.
I remember, back in high school civics, one of the bits of patriotic
propaganda that was dispenced to us, was that the USSR required all
photocopiers to embed a machine id and page number into its output, so
that the "authorites" could control their use as publishing tools.
Now the USA wants to do the same thing.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 01:56:21 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@TELECOM-DIGEST.ORG
Subject: File 4--E-mail 'Spammer' Settles Lawsuit For $2 Million
((MODERATORS' NOTE: For those not familiar with Pat Townson's
TELECOM DIGEST, it's an exceptional resource. From the header
of TcD:
"TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but
not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is
circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various
telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and
networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also
gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to
qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell
us how you qualify:
* ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * ======" ))
==================
Source: TELECOM Digest Tue, 31 Mar 98 - Volume 18 : Issue 48
Date--Mon, 30 Mar 1998 08:42:44 -0500
From--The Old Bear <oldbear@arctos.com>
LOS ANGELES (AP) - March 29, 1998 - A company that once sent as
many as 25 million unsolicited e-mail ads a day has agreed to pay
$2 million to settle a lawsuit aimed at ending the so-called
"spamming."
Under a consent decree filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court,
Cyber Promotions Inc. also must stop sending unsolicited bulk
e-mailings to customers of Earthlink Network Inc., {The New York
Times} reported Sunday, citing documents that Earthlink released
Friday.
"The most important benefit of this judgment is the message we've
sent to spammers that illegally tap our resources and clog up the
Internet with this trash -- we won't stand for it," said Charles
Garry Betty, chief executive of the Pasadena-based Earthlink,
which provides Internet service to more than 450,000 people.
Cyber Promotions, based in Dresher, Pennsylvania, was considered
the largest purveyor of unsolicited e-mail ads. A similar
injunction against the company was issued last year in a lawsuit
filed by America Online, the world's largest online service.
Cyber Promotions has been inactive for several months since its
own Internet provider refused to continue providing a connection,
the Times said.
Critics complain that the junk e-mails slow down receipt of genuine
messages and invade the privacy of e-mail users. Programmers
continually are upgrading computer programs designed to block
the unwanted messages.
California is one of about a dozen states considering laws to limit
unsolicited commercial e-mail. Last week, Washington became the
first state to enact such legislation. Congress also is looking
into the matter.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 98 18:56:06 -0700
From: Gordon Meyer <gordon@g2meyer.com>
Subject: File 5--Shareware and Persuasion (fwd)
Shareware and Persuasion
Scott J. Kleper
Stanford University
PO Box 3167
Stanford, CA 94309 USA
+1 650 497 1972
klep@cs.stanford.edu
ABSTRACT
Shareware programs generally achieve less than a 1% rate of registration.
Authors have tried to augment their software with various techniques
employing a variety of theories of persuasion, for encouraging users to
register. This paper attempts to formalize how persuasion is applied to
shareware, determine which methods work best, and analyze why. Based on
previous studies, it has been shown that crippling a program results in
the best returns. I attribute these results to the use of positive
reinforcement in crippleware.
Keywords
shareware, persuasion, Captology.
INTRODUCTION
As a business model, shareware is a very unique venture. A successful
author must not only product good software, but must also convince the
user that the software they have obtained for free is worth paying for.
While most people are morally responsible and do not intend to steal,
they often need an extra push to send in a shareware payment.
Quantification of shareware registration habits relative to the
techniques of persuasion employed may reveal the effectiveness of the
various theories of persuasion as they relate to software.
REGISTRATION VEHICLES
The three main vehicles for shareware registration-nagscreens,
crippleware, and time bombs, apply different techniques of persuasion.
Nagscreens
A software nagscreen is typically a dialog box that appears for a set
amount of time periodically (generally when the application is launched).
The purpose is to remind the user that they have not paid for this
product and will be forced to wait for the screen to disappear each time
they run the program until they pay for it. This relatively simple
technique shows several elements of persuasion. Many nagscreens invoke a
subtle feeling of guilt within the user, who may have thought that
payment was not important. For example, one of my programs declares, "I'm
currently a student at Stanford and I can't continue to release cool
software unless the Mac community continues to support me." The screen
also makes a threat that it will return while providing an incentive (its
removal) for the user to pay for the program. This is a form of negative
reinforcement. By sending in the registration check, the user is able to
remove the unwanted nagscreen.
Nagscreens, when implemented properly, can serve as reminders to users.
Rick Holzgrafe, Macintosh shareware author, writes that nagscreens "work
because so many people really are honest but forgetful."[2]
Unfortunately, it is difficult to predict how a user will react to a
nagscreen.
Nagscreens often invoke reactions that make persuasion more difficult.
Users who intend to pay for the product if they like it are annoyed by
what they see as a threat. Even worse, users who have sent in their money
but have not received feedback from the author yet can become frustrated
that this program has no knowledge of their recent purchase. Nagscreens
tend to work best with products that users may not even consider paying
for (like games) or when the screen provides additional information like
the number of hours the program has been in use. A very clever
implementation I once saw told the user the number of hours the program
had been used as well as the amount of money per hour they would be
paying if they registered. Realizing that a program would only cost
twelve cents for every minute it had been used appeals to the user's
practical side.
Crippleware
Crippleware is the term given to shareware which has limited
functionality but which can be unlocked to provide additional features.
Crippleware takes incentive much further than nagscreens. The user is
presented with a program that works but told that if she likes it and
pays for it, she will get an even better program. By not paying, the user
is locked out of certain features. After paying, the user obtains new
features that make the program more useful.
The main problem with crippleware is that since users aren't able to test
the entire program, they often don't even consider registering. As
Holzgrafe notes, "If you sell crippleware, be prepared for some
battles."[1] One of my most successful products, "HTML Markup," is
crippleware. The shareware version is fully-working and contains many
features. The registered version, however, adds a few extra goodies which
I view as a bonus for people who pay. Some users don't see it this way
however. I once received email from an angry user who had downloaded the
program and glanced at the documentation. As soon as he saw that he did
not have the full version, he sent me a message telling me that he would
never pay because shareware is not supposed to be crippled. After I
explained that he had a fully-working version and that the registered
version was a superset of it, he apologized and eventually paid for the
software.
Time Bombs
Many shareware authors come up with a period of time that they consider
reasonable for testing. While most shareware authors give a specific
trial period somewhere in their documentation, some authors keep track of
the usage so that the program will cease to function after the given
amount of time. Such "time bomb" techniques offer little in the way of
persuasion except to present the user with a do-or-die choice. If the
user wants to continue with the program, she must pay.
While time bombs can ensure that nearly all users of a program actually
pay for it, they significantly decrease the number of users who actually
try the program. Many users feel as though they are being accused of
theft before they even run the program once. Knowing that they will have
to pay for the product eventually, many users convince themselves not to
get used to the product. As Peter Lewis, one of the most successful
shareware authors, puts it, "time bombing the program forces the user to
make a choice of paying now or never, and they will often choose never
when they would have chosen later if you'd left that as an option."[2]
OPINIONS
Opinions among shareware authors vary greatly regarding which methods are
the best. The Association of Shareware Professionals specifically forbids
its members from releasing crippled shareware or shareware with
nagscreens that interfere with the operation of the program.[3] The ASP
will only certify software that complies with these guidelines because
they believe that it gives shareware a more professional image. Yet by
denying the fact that people need to be persuaded to register, the ASP
probably reduces its members' payments and its own membership rates.
Many authors who get a taste of how few users of their programs really
pay for it are tempted to use time bomb strategies because it is the most
effective for preventing illegal use of their software. Others use
nagscreens because they are easy to implement and usually do not limit
the program in any way. Crippleware is often viewed as a compromise
because they limit a program slightly and prevent illegal use of the
fully-working version.
A STUDY IN SHAREWARE REGISTRATION
Shareware author Colin Messitt performed an informal experiment to
quantify shareware payment habits. By releasing the same product in two
versions-one crippled and one using nagscreens, Messitt was able to keep
track of how many registrations he received for each version. The clear
winner was the version that employed crippleware techniques, which
outsold the other version five-to-one. In this experiment, it appears as
though positive reinforcement with incentive won out over negative
reinforcement with incentive.[4]
I believe that these findings are a result of one unique feature of
crippleware-when the user pays for crippleware, they are actually buying
something (extra features). With time-bomb shareware, a paying user is
put in the position of a thief caught with a television set in his hands.
Nagscreens may be ineffective simply because they annoy users. If a user
does not have the time to put up with software that nags them, she will
not have time to get used to it and see the need to buy it.
ANALYSIS
In his article entitled "Hookware," Kee Nethery summarizes the best way
to get users to pay. "Bug them just enough to get them to pay but not so
much that they stop using your software." There is obviously a tradeoff
between making users happy and making them pay.
My own shareware experiences agree with Messitt's findings. HTML Markup,
which is slightly crippled, continues to have strong sales. My latest
program, NetBots, has far more downloads and generates far more feedback.
The sales are good, but a smaller percentage of the users who download
NetBots register it than HTML Markup. I believe this is partially because
NetBots just gives a gentle reminder that it is shareware.
People are often amazed when I tell them that shareware can make money.
Considering that someone could use any of my programs quite happily and
legally without paying for them, it is striking that so many people
actually do pay. While some people just feel that it is the right thing
to do, I think that there is definitely an element of persuasion
involved. The success of shareware shows that while many people are
honest, a little push using the right techniques can bring that honesty
out.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to offer my thanks to BJ Fogg for introducing me to
Captology and to Phil King for relating Captology to shareware.
REFERENCES
Holzgrafe, Rick. "Successful Shareware."
<http://www2.Semicolon.com/Rick/ShareSuccess/Shareware1.html>
Lewis, Peter. "Writing Shareware for a Living."
<http://www.stairways.com/programming/sharewareauthor.html>
Association of Shareware Professionals. <http://www.asp-shareware.org>
Messitt, Colin. "Why Do People Register?"
<http://www.shareware.org/gazer7/why.htm>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 07:57:47 -0800
From: "Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor" <rslade@sprint.ca>
Subject: File 6--"Web Security: A Step-by-Step Reference Guide", Lincoln D. Stein
BKWEBSEC.RVW 980201
"Web Security: A Step-by-Step Reference Guide", Lincoln D. Stein,
1998, 0-201-62489-9, U$29.95
%A Lincoln D. Stein stein@genome.wi.mit.edu
%C P.O. Box 520, 26 Prince Andrew Place, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 2T8
%D 1998
%G 0-201-62489-9
%I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
%O U$29.95 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 bkexpress@aw.com
%P 448 p.
%T "Web Security: A Step-by-Step Reference Guide"
As it happened, this book came off the stack on a night when I wanted
nothing more than to wander off to bed. Despite my sleep deprivation
I managed not only to finish the book, but even to enjoy it. Any
technical book with security in the title that can hold interest like
that has to have something going for it.
The book covers all aspects of Web security, as laid out in chapter
one: the client or browser concern for privacy and safety of active
content, the Web server concern for availability of service and
prevention of intrusion, and the concern that both share for
confidentiality and fraud. Chapter two provides a brief but accurate
overview of cryptography as the backbone of secure systems operating
over unsecured channels. (There is only one oddity that I noted, when
512 bit RSA public key encryption was compared in strength with 40 bit
RC2 and RC4 systems.) More of the basics like Secure Sockets Layer
(SSL) and Secure Electronic Transactions (SET) are described in
chapter three, along with various forms of digital cash.
Part two looks at client-side security, with further discussions of
the use of SSL in chapter four. Chapter five details active content,
with particular attention to ActiveX and Java. "Web Privacy," in
chapter six, is an excellent and practical guide to the realities and
myths about information that can be gleaned from your browsing
activities. Included are practical tips about keeping your system
from finking on you. (Windows users should note that the files
referred to are not always in the paths specified, due to the variety
of ways that Windows programs can be installed.)
The bulk of the book, as might be expected, deals with server-side
security, this being the slightly more complex side of the issue.
Chapter seven provides an overview of the various vulnerabilities and
loopholes to watch and plug. UNIX and Windows NT servers are dealt
with in chapters eight and nine respectively. These chapters don't
assume much familiarity with the system security functions of the
systems, but do stick primarily to the server specific topics. Access
control is a major part of any security setup, and is covered in
chapter ten. Encryption and certificates are revisited in chapter
eleven, concentrating on use in access control. CGI (Common Gateway
Interface) scripting has been a major source of Web security risks,
and chapter twelve points out safe, and unsafe, practices in
programming scripts. Chapter thirteen discusses remote authoring and
administration. Firewalls are often seen as the be-all and end-all of
Internet security, and Stein covers the reality in chapter fourteen.
Each chapter contains references to both online and printed sources of
information, and these resources are all of high quality and useful.
As noted, the book is not only readable, but even enjoyable. The
writing is clear and accurate, giving the reader both concepts and
practical tasks in minimum time with maximum comprehension. Although
the bulk of the book is for Webmasters, the casual user can not only
read it but get a great deal of value from it. Any ISP that does not
have it on their customer support bookshelf should held criminally
negligent.
copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKWEBSEC.RVW 980201
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:41:54 -0500
From: Stephen Talbott <stevet@MERLIN.ALBANY.NET>
Subject: File 7--Information Trumps Reality (From NETFUTURE #68)
Source: NETFUTURE: Technology and Human Responsibility
Issue #68 Copyright 1998 Bridge Communications March 31, 1998
Editor: Stephen L. Talbott (stevet@oreilly.com)
On the Web: http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/stevet/netfuture/
You may redistribute this newsletter for noncommercial purposes.
Information Trumps Reality
--------------------------
You may have seen the story awhile back, but I'll bet you passed over its
significance. Look again; what you're seeing in this little scenario is
the perfect symbol of the Information Age:
A young woman hobbles painfully onto the college basketball court and
positions herself by her team's basket. The whistle sounds, a teammate
throws her the ball, and -- while the opposing players stand and watch
-- she puts the ball through the hoop. Then the young woman hobbles
back off the court and the other team shoots a basket, similarly
unopposed. With the score now 2-2, the real game begins. But the
young woman, whose college career-ending injury had left her one point
shy of the scoring record, now has her record. Everyone feels
wonderful (with the possible exception of the previous record holder).
There you see the mystical power of information. The fact in the database
takes precedence over the brilliant, real-life career supposedly being
honored. Of course, the career was actually being dishonored. The
supporters of the pre-game exercise said, in effect, "The young lady's
career lacked its own intrinsic meaning and value. None of us will
sufficiently appreciate her without the additional two points in the
database, however artificial and disconnected from her achievement they
may be."
The idea of it all is brutally clear: manipulate a human life so as to
produce a bit of stored information, which then becomes the basis for
appreciating the life. Information today less and less *derives* from
real life; more and more it *defines* real life.
The Net, of course, is the primary Kingdom of Information. Many of its
current policy debates can be seen as expressions of the following
problem: when our "presence" on the Net dissolves (as it tends to do)
into decontextualized bits of information, what distortions affect the
various recontextualizations that occur? That is, how do our lives get
redefined?
The data harvester with a product to sell redefines us one way, the bank's
loan department assessing our credit data redefines us another way, the
politician analyzing survey data with an eye on the upcoming reelection
redefines us yet another way, the security cracker looking for an opening,
the lonely person looking for a conversation, the haranguer looking for a
soap box ... each finds it all too natural to cultivate a reduced image of
the human being on the other end of the channel.
The same danger certainly occurs off the Net as well. But there is no
denying that the more thorough and easy the decontextualization -- and the
Net is a veritable engine of decontextualization -- the more difficult it
is to remain faithful to the real-life depth of persons and communities in
our various reconstructions. Information, fragmented though it be, takes
on a life of its own.
That is unfortunate, because information is not so much the beginning of
understanding as the end of it. Information is the last, abstracted
residue of what once was living knowledge. In the case of basketball, it
is the reduction to mute number of moves to the hoop that only a poet,
physiologist, mechanical engineer, sports analyst, and artist, combining
their insights, could capture with any justice.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 07:55:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: Netiva Caftori <N-Caftori@neiu.edu>
Subject: File 8--APRIL 16 -- FANTASTIC CPSR/Chicago program (fwd)
Date--Wed, 18 Mar 98 18:53:14 CST
From--donald goldhamer <dhgo@midway.uchicago.edu>
Subject--APRIL 16 -- FANTASTIC CPSR/Chicago program
THURSDAY, APRIL 16
INTERNET GOVERNANCE
TWO FANTASTIC SPEAKERS and a HOT DISCUSSION
CPSR/Chicago's April program will explore the topic of Internet Governance,
which is the major issue for this year chosen by CPSR's National board.
FIRST: "One Planet, One Net campaign of CPSR is testing Chicago" -- a report
presented by Midwest Regional representative Netiva Caftori.
Please come to hear and discuss the principles of socially responsible
Internet Governance. (see details below)
SECOND: "The Internet and Self-governance for the Generic Top Level Domain
Name System" presented by David W. Maher, chair of the Policy
Oversight Committee (successor to the International Ad Hoc Committee)
that is restructuring the rules for Internet domain names. (see
details below)
THIRD: We'll discuss the issues, including gTLD restructuring, in the context
of the principles of Internet Governance.
TIME: 6:00pm to 7:00pm -- eat and chat (bring your dinner or ask us to order)
7:00pm to 9:00pm -- program (we can go even a bit later if necessary)
WHERE: 25 E. Pearson Building
Loyola University Chicago
Room 1467, 14th floor.
For more details, contact: Don Goldhamer (cpsr-chicago@cpsr.org, 773-702-7166)
or Netiva Caftori (n-caftori@neiu.edu, 773-794-2739)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE ONE PLANET, ONE NET CAMPAIGN OF CPSR
CPSR's Board has launched a year-long focus on Internet governance. As a
result of an intensive strategic planning process, CPSR is undertaking a broad
examination of the issues in standards development, content development and
control, and access to the Internet.
CPSR will continue our policy advocacy on issues such as proposed changes to
the Domain Name System (DNS). We will continue to monitor and defend privacy
issues. CPSR was involved in direct government advocacy and testimony in the
recent encryption legislation and in the struggle over online ratings systems.
We participated at all levels in the Communications Decency Act legislative
process and as a co- plaintiff in Reno v. ACLU.
CPSR is focusing our main program initiative for the next year to strengthen
citizen input in the Internet governance dialogue now dominated by the
government and business sectors.
As a first step, the Board developed and issued "One Planet, One Net:
Principles for the Internet Era." This is an internet-draft document in the
IETF publication process. Please skim through those principles if you have
the time. They are to be linked from our web page at http://www.cpsr.org
Discussion of the draft will be about basic Internet issues -- who owns it?
what values will prevail? who will have access? who will decide how it is
governed? Participation in the discussion is through the CPSR listserv at
onenet-discuss@cpsr.org. We strongly urge CPSR members and others interested
in Internet governance issues to join in the discussion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE INTERNET AND SELF-GOVERNANCE FOR THE GENERIC TOP LEVEL DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM
The commercial exploitation of the Internet has created great controversy
about the assignment of domain names and related trademark use and
infringement issues. This will be a presentation by the chair of the Policy
Oversight Committee (successor to the International Ad Hoc Committee) that is
restructuring the rules for Internet domain names. The presentation will focus
on the task of building a system that accommodates divergent interests and
provides a rational basis for worldwide Internet activity.
The presentation will also cover intellectual property issues on the
Internet. The growth of the Internet has led to increasing numbers of
conflicts between trademark owners and users of domain names. The present
system is chaotic, with national courts rendering decisions on many disputes
in accordance with national law, without regard to the global nature of the
Internet. In addition, there is a private U.S. dominated system for resolving
disputes in .com, .net and .org. The Policy Oversight Committee, in
cooperation with the World Intellectual Property Organization, has developed
an administrative system that is designed to apply neutral principles in an
efficent and cost-effective manner without interfering with the jurisdiction
of national courts.
David Maher is the Chair of the Policy Oversight Committee and was appointed
to the Committee by the Internet Society. He is a patent lawyer in private
practice in Chicago, Illinois, and is a senior partner in the law firm,
Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal. A more detailed biography is available from
CPSR/Chicago.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 1998 22:51:01 CST
From: CuD Moderators <cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu>
Subject: File 9--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 Apr, 1998)
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
available at no cost electronically.
CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest
Or, to subscribe, send post with this in the "Subject:: line:
SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST
Send the message to: cu-digest-request@weber.ucsd.edu
DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS.
The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6436), fax (815-753-6302)
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
60115, USA.
To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CU-DIGEST
Send it to CU-DIGEST-REQUEST@WEBER.UCSD.EDU
(NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line)
Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"
On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet);
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.
In ITALY: ZERO! BBS: +39-11-6507540
UNITED STATES: ftp.etext.org (206.252.8.100) in /pub/CuD/CuD
Web-accessible from: http://www.etext.org/CuD/CuD/
ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/
aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/CuD/CuD/ (Finland)
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the
Cu Digest WWW site at:
URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long
as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and
they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are
preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts
unless absolutely necessary.
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
violate copyright protections.
------------------------------
End of Computer Underground Digest #10.22
************************************