Blackmailedslave οIsearcht Szh rsearche Blackmailedslave Blackmailedslave ε
ρsearchί Cunt α
searchυ Blackmailedslave νa Blackmailedslave ν Szh ρ1335678298281_Rιsearchό Cunt μ Szh σ Cunt .Κ Szh πsearchιεςφ Blackmailedslave ρέ Blackmailedslave Porn π Szh ς Szh αsearchο Szh ε Porn κsearchύ Szh ι Cunt ηsearchσ Cunt ζ Cunt τηηπsearchρsearch tupe8pν Cunt ν Szh μ Cunt ς Porn ε Cunt ικ Cunt ι
ωyoujzz.commmί Porn ςsearch ε
ν Szh ι.searchΑ923kxw.con/τ
η Cunt δ Porn ε Blackmailedslave νsearchς Blackmailedslave φsearchσ Szh τsearchυ Cunt ntsearchresearch
Cunt ά Porn εsearch 
ά Szh ο Blackmailedslave α Porn ίsearchηsearchδhhttp%2527ευθsearchτήsearchε Porn ν α Szh ώεsearchαsearch Blackmailedslave λ Blackmailedslave ά Cunt χsearch
Porn λ Cunt .searchΌπ Blackmailedslave ς Szh εί Porn ν Blackmailedslave ι ηsearchσυ Szh ή Szh η Blackmailedslave η Szh ια Cunt το Blackmailedslave ψsearchφι Blackmailedslave κ
Szh ρήμα
Blackmailedslave δέες Szh γsearchα %D0%D4%BD%BB%CD%BC%C6%ACνωsearchυ Blackmailedslave ίsearch κ Blackmailedslave ι searchο Blackmailedslave ν
ρχι Porn ό Szh εsearchιsearchο Cunt ν Szh νι Szh κό
καθεστός που αυτή επιτρέπει είναι δύσκολο να
μεταφερθούν στον κόσμο του εμπορίου. Η συνέπεια
των ανιχνεύσιμων συναλλαγών, ας μην αναφέρουμε
την ανιχνεύσιμη επικοινωνία είναι ότι το Internet ή
τα σχετικά δίκτυα μπορούν να γίνουν θεμέλιο του
αντιθέτου της αναρχίας. Η ζωή σ΄έναν διαφανή
ωκεανό δεδομένων, μια ζωή στην οποία η καταγραφή
των κινήσεων του καθενός, των προτιμήσεων, των
αγορών, του ιατρικού ιστορικού, των αναγνωστικών
συνηθειών και των επαφών με τις αρχές
διατίθενται σε μερικούς, ίσως ακόμη και σε όλους.
Ίσως ο πληροφοριακός ωκεανός δεν είναι, μετά από
όλα αυτά, η σωστή μεταφορά. Ίσως η επικεφαλίδα θα
έπρεπα να ήταν information fishbowl ( όχι information ocean).
ΠΑΡΑΠΟΜΠΕΣ
Translated and hosted with the permission of the author. You may
reproduce this work for non-commercial academic use.
© Copyright 1996 A. Michael
Froomkin. All Rights Reserved. Associate Professor, University of Miami School of Law.
B.A. 1982, Yale College; M.Phil. 1984, Cambridge University; J.D. 1987, Yale Law School.
Internet: froomkin@law.miami.edu. I received significant advice, comments , suggestions,
and in several cases careful readings of earlier drafts, from Phil Agre, Caroline Bradley,
Mary Coombs, Hal Finney, Oscar H. Gandy, Jr., Lucky Green, Patrick Gudridge, Richard
Field, Trotter Hardy, Lili Levi, Mark Lemley, Tim May, Marcel van der Peijl, David Post,
Peggy Radin, Steve Schnably, Bill Stewart, Peter Swire, Stephen F. Williams, and Eugene
Volokh. I also benefited from the ideas posted by members of the cyberia-l, cypherpunks,
and e-cash mailing lists. SueAnn Campbell and Nora de la Garza provided library support.
Rosalia Lliraldi provided secretarial assistance. Portions of this paper, particularly in
Part II, are a revised version of an electronically published paper, A. Michael Froomkin, Anonymity
and its Enmities, 1 J. Online L. Article 4 (1995), available online
jol/froomkin.html.
I particularly wish to thank Dean Peter Shane and Pam
Samuelson for inviting me to participate in the panel entitled "The Regulation of
Computing and Information Technology" at the Conference for the Second Century of the
University of Pittsburgh School of Law at which an earlier draft of this paper was
presented. Unless otherwise stated, this article attempts to reflect legal and technical
developments up to January 1, 1996.
1. Actually,
"the Internet" is not one thing, but a set of tools. I. Trotter Hardy,
Government Control and Regulations of Networks, paper presented at Symposium on The
Emerging Law of Computer Networks, Austin, TX, May 19, 1995 (on file with author). The
Internet provides the best example because it exists today. The analysis will, I hope,
scale up to any successor network although there is good reason to believe that it does
not scale down to discussions that occur entirely within a forum owned and operated by a
single Internet Service Provider such as America OnLine or Compuserve, at least absent
common carrier status. Cf. Pacific Gas And Elec. Co. v. Public Utils. Comm'n of Calif.,
475 U.S. 1 (1986); PruneYard Shopping Ctr. v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980).Back to text at note 1.
2. See 1995 Pa.
S.B. 655, 179th Gen. Assem., 1995-96 Reg. Sess. (enacted June 13, 1995) (amending 18 Pa.
Const. Stat. § 910(a)(1)). Proposed federal legislation sought to prohibit all anonymous
electronic messages intended to "annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person . . .
who receives the communication." S. 314, 104th Cong., 1st Sess. § 2(a)(1)(B) (1995).
A similar proposal was introduced in Connecticut, see Larry Lessig, The Path of Cyberlaw,
104 Yale L.J. 1743, 1750 n.20 (1995). Back to text at note 2.
3. I use
"privacy" in this article to mean "the control of information about
oneself." See, e.g., Alan Westin, Privacy and Freedom 7 (1970). By using
"privacy" in this sense I do not mean to suggest that there is necessarily a
"privacy right" to control information about oneself. That is, for the purposes
of this article, a question of policy that needs debate. For arguments that if there is a
"right" to privacy it means something other than the right to control
information about oneself, see, e.g., Judith Jarvis Thompson, The Right To Privacy, 4
Phil. & Pub. Aff. 295 (1975).
William A. Parent, Privacy: A Brief Survey
of the Conceptual Landscape, 11 Santa Clara Comp. & High Tech. L.J. 21 (1995), gives a
useful survey of the various ways in which the term privacy can be deployed, including:
"the right to be let alone," Samuel D. Warren & Louis B. Brandeis, The Right
to Privacy, 4 Harv. L. Rev. 193, 205 (1890), "control of personal information about
oneself," Charles Fried, Privacy, 77 Yale L.J. 475, 483 (1968), "limitation of
access to oneself," Ruth Gavison, Privacy and the Limits of the Law, 89 Yale L.J.
421, 428 (1980), "having control of [one's] entire realm of intimate decisions,"
Julie C. Inness, Privacy, Intimacy, and Isolation 7 (1992), and Dean Prosser's four
privacy torts, William L. Prosser, Privacy, 48 Cal. L. Rev. 383 (1960).
Back to text at note 3.
4. Privacy Act of
1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a (1977). Back to text at note 4.
5. 15 U.S.C. §
1681 (1995). Several other nations have data protection laws. See infra text accompanying
note 354. Back to text at note 5.
6. See A. Michael
Froomkin, The Metaphor is the Key: Cryptography, the Clipper Chip, and the Constitution,
143 U. Pa. L. Rev. 709 (1995). Back to text at note 6.
7. See Joel R.
Reidenberg, Setting Standards for Fair Information Practice in the U.S. Private Sector, 80
Iowa L. Rev. 497, 500-01 (1995) ("In democratic society, information standards
reflect specific conceptions of governance. . . . For private interactions and the
relationship between citizens, both law and practice set the balance between dignity and
free flows of information."). Back to text at note 7.
8. Martin Gottlieb,
Pattern Emerges in Bomber's Tract, N.Y. Times, Aug. 2, 1995, at A1.
Back to text at note 8.
9. Note, The
Constitutional Right to Anonymity: Free Speech, Disclosure and the Devil, 70 Yale L.J.
1084, 1109 (1961) (collecting cases) [hereinafter Anonymous Note].
Back to text at note 9.
10. Id. at 1111. Back to text at note 10.
11. Id. at
1112-13. Back to text at note 11.
12. Viereck v.
United States, 318 U.S. 236, 251 (1943) (Black, J., dissenting). Back
to text at note 12.
13. Richard A.
Posner, The Right of Privacy, 12 Ga. L. Rev. 393, 394 (1978). Back to
text at note 13.
14. Richard A.
Posner, Privacy, Secrecy, and Reputation, 28 Buff. L. Rev. 1 (1979); Posner, supra note
13. Back to text at note 14.