EFFector Online Volume org Publicati

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

           //////////////     //////////////     //////////////

         ///                ///                ///

       ///////            ///////            ///////

     ///                ///                ///

   //////////////     ///                ///

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

EFFector Online Volume 5 No. 1       2/5/1993       editors@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation   ISSN 1062-9424

                        -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-                         

                               In this issue:

Three perspectives of a two-day meeting in Atlanta between EFF and 

                        -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-

This past January 23rd and 24th, 11 members of the electronic 

community met in Atlanta with members of the staff and board of 

the Electronic Frontier Foundation.  The meeting lasted a day and a 

meeting attendees had formed a group to organize and formulate 

This issue of EFFector Online presents some first-hand views of what 

transpired in Atlanta.  Mitch Ratcliffe, one of the members of 

This!Group out of San Francisco's Bay area, David Smith, a board 

member of the EFF-Austin group, and Jerry Berman, EFF's Executive 

Director, all offer their thoughts about the meeting.  Other meeting 

attendees were:

	Dick Anderson, Delegate from EFF-Austin

	John Perry Barlow, EFF Executive Committee Chairman

	Judi Clark, Delegate from This!Group

	Esther Dyson, EFF Board Member

	Dave Farber, EFF Board Member

	Cliff Figallo, EFF Online Coordinator

	John Gilmore, EFF Board Member

	Mike Godwin, EFF Legal Services Counsel

	Mitch Kapor, EFF Board Chairman

	Jon Lebkowsky, Delegate from EFF-Austin

	Matt Midboe, Delegate from Huntsville, Alabama

	Simona Nass, Delegate from NTE (New York)

	Alexis Rosen, Delegate from NTE (New York)

	Shari Steele, EFF Staff Attorney

	Bob Stratton, Delegate from Washington, DC, area

	Glenn Tenney, Delegate from This!Group

	Ed Vielmetti, Delegate from Ann Arbor, Michigan 

     Information Activists Confer, Establish Understanding 

*******************************************************************

by Mitch Ratcliffe

Atlanta, where the world comes everyday for news and colorized 

movies, the capitol of Cyberspace, was the setting for a discussion 

between the Electronic Frontier Foundation and information activists 

on the weekend of January 23-24. After two days of discussions, the 

agenda in coming years, and how local groups can work together to 

EFF has endured a roller-coaster year, during which it wrestled with 

the growth of its influence in Washington and growing interest in 

local chapters. After the group's board of directors rejected investing 

organizational energy in local chapters and closed its Cambridge, 

Mass. office -- shifting all funding to a Washington office -- they 

faced the challenge of explaining their new role to the world. EFF's 

founders had already discovered the Internet community can be a 

fickle friend. As the group succeeded inside the Beltway, its Internet 

constituency has savaged them in e-mail and news groups. People 

EFF agenda served only its corporate sponsors. 

So, the purpose of the meeting in Atlanta was clearly two-fold. In 

addition to identifying the projects on which the attendees can work 

together, EFF needed to cultivate a chorus of voices in key virtual 

and actual forums that can articulate their new agenda. The 

Austin, Texas,-based EFF chapter that has been growing for the past 

year, as well as activists from New York, San Francisco, Ann Arbor, 

Mich., and Huntsville, Ala.

EFF and the representatives of the various groups met bearing with 

them considerable defensiveness after months of crossed signals and 

animosity. What transpired was not a conversion, but a discovery of 

the personalities behind the EFF machine. Mitch Kapor and John 

ascended to head the now Washington-based organization, exposed 

themselves to questioning for two days. What we found were very 

the world is about where they came from, what they have 

accomplished and how they operate in Washington. While we do not 

agree with everything they do, there is no denying that they are 

effective. Considerable educational and advocacy territories are also 

"There has been some ambiguity in people's minds with regard to 

changes we announced are fairly minimal. We've decided to focus a 

lot of our activities in Washington because there is a significant 

communication. Without a concerted effort to reach out to the Net -- 

and to everyday people who live and work on the fringes of 

Cyberspace, because they use computers, cable television and ATM 

cards -- the organization has allowed itself to become a victim of its 

own early expectations that enlightened visions of the future would 

allow them to transcend organizational and Beltway politics. Instead, 

the EFF received a fierce, full-body reality check. They've found that 

experience can be a high-sticking teacher on the black ice of life.

"We're a bunch of permanent, chronic mavericks," Kapor said. "But 

certain things became very clear when the board met to discuss our 

thing that's increasingly clear is that there is a sense in certain parts 

of the net that EFF has a perceived obligation to serve particular 

constituencies. We are not trying to be the provisional government of 

Cyberspace, and we also reject the idea that we have an obligation to 

He also said his own personal animosity for running the day-to-day 

operations of a large organization had contributed to the 

miscommunication between EFF and potential chapters. 

Discussion on the first day revolved around the recently announced 

changes at EFF. After EFF presented several perspectives on its 

Washington-based strategy, the activists from around the country 

explained how their groups were founded and had begun to grow.

"We're better defined and we're capable of changing based on what 

are not for the net community, we're for the idea of communities. 

One that we come from and feel close to is the net community, but 

that's not the only one." 

Jerry Berman explained that EFF will continue to advocate for 

freedom of expression and extension of civil liberties into 

Cyberspace.

"We are committed to the legal services and civil liberties service 

the American Civil Liberties Union. "With regard to those two 

functions, of representing people in trouble and civil liberties 

of the net community, there is a strong part of all of us who wants to 

That outreach will come through collaboration with local information 

advocates, Berman said.

The regional groups in attendance outlined their organizations: 

This!Group, the San Francisco-based group, said that it has pursued a 

loose structure, but tightly defined projects. Without a board or 

officers in place, This!Group has not grown particularly fast. It has, 

Awake at Night at the Dawn of the Information Age", and a CD-ROM 

containing video and audio clips from the Computers, Freedom and 

liberties cases and papers.

EFF-Austin, the "alpha" chapter that EFF sanctioned in 1991, has 

large audience of potential members. With approximately 70 

members, EFF-Austin has published "InfoDisks" of EFF-related 

NTE, the New York group that sprung up last fall, has 50 or so active 

members. They have established a board of directors and hold 

monthly meetings in Manhattan that are well attended. Net access is 

a focus for NTE, because several public access UNIX providers have 

ordinary folk and the law enforcement community.

Ann Arbor, the Washington DC area and Huntsville, where people 

Conversation about how the Net might be organized to fight 

ntrusions on privacy or freedom of expression revolved around how

EFF might act as a central clearinghouse for information. But more 

than that, it became apparent that a national action coordinator is 

needed. This person or organization must be a conduit not only 

between EFF and the regions, but also a mechanism for generating 

letters to Congress, agencies and so on (for example, imagine the 

mpact of 100,000 letters sent to the National Security Agency vis-a-

vis encryption export policy -- the Director of the NSA should have 

to wonder about how people got his address by now -- but no 

Attendees called repeatedly for a national coordinator staff member 

at EFF. They also demanded that EFF take its show on the road, 

country. However, this may have been missing the real point -- if the 

over the next year. The Net -- or better, people concerned about the 

extension of civil liberties into Cyberspace -- had better get to 

organizing a body that can provide these services. The message is 

that EFF is already busy. 

So came the suggestion on the second day that a federation of 

nformation activist organizations would be one possible solution to

the problem. Of course, more organization may be the last thing the 

Net and activists need. But the suggestion was made and approved 

American Library Association, ACLU and many others. The steering 

committee began work on a statement of principles and conjured the 

(CIA). A Birds of a Feather session to discuss the CIA will be 

nformation, send mail to cfp93@well.sf.ca.us).

What was accomplished? The reestablishment of communication 

among members of a broad coalition, but one that has not succeeded 

n including everyone concerned about electronic communications

and civil liberties. Contentiousness is the first law of the Net, and 

there is certain to be argument about the motivations of EFF in 

thousands of activists who are reaching users in the far corners of 

the Matrix. But for those who attended, it was a weekend of 

future collaboration and action. 

Mitch Ratcliffe

Editor at Large

MacWEEK

coyote@well.sf.ca.us

Mitch_Ratcliffe@macweek.ziff.com

+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+ 

February 7, 1993

ATLANTA SUMMIT CONFERENCE

David Smith

bladex@wixer.cactus.org

[This is not intended to be a definitive account, but rather my 

Summit Conference. --D.S.]

The format of the conference was (roughly) a day and a half of 

conversations while seated in a Georgia Tech campus building, 2-3 

more hours of conversation while seated in the lobby and bar of the 

ndividuals, I learned a lot more about EFF-Austin, and how we fit

nto the "national scheme."

Take, for example, the nature of each organization. The word "civil 

liberties" was dropped more times by lunch than I had heard in 

almost a year of my own involvement with EFF-Austin. While EFF-

National works primarily as a political activist, EFF-Austin works as a 

and common ground for the vast and diverse members of the Austin 

electronic community. 

While a wing of EFF-Austin may develop in the future that more 

closely resembles the traditional cyber-liberties organizations, a self-

A preconception I carried into Atlanta was thinking that the "Best 

Thing To Do" was the creation of a document, FAQ, outline, or 

across the country. After meeting and speaking with members from 

the other groups, however, I now believe a cookie sheet cut-out 

environment and local area.

Some examples.

San Francisco already hosts a strong Computer Professionals for 

Social Responsibility (CPSR) group as well as Bay Area MacIntosh 

User Group (BMUG). There is no need (or desire) for This!Group to 

affiliation of people picking and choosing tasks that interest them. 

Judi Clark and Mitch Ratcliffe are working a CD-Rom that will be a 

combination of historical archive of the Computers Freedom and 

an informational brochure or pamphlet. 

Another example of a group being a function of their area is Matt 

Midboe, the representative from Huntsville. He cannot receive UUCP 

access in his area, much less an Internet connection. (Note: He is 

"borrowing" one from one of the Departments at his University, with 

mplicit permission). Austin has at least a dozen sites to receive

USENET newsgroups and e-mail access, so this is not an issue of 

concern for EFF-Austin.

Finally, after listening to Simona Nass and Alexis Rosen discuss the 

organization-building experiences of NTE, I am glad that we had the 

EFF-NATIONAL RE-ORGANIZATION

Jerry Berman, executive director of EFF-National, spoke about the 

comp.org.eff.talk, and after speaking with other EFF-Austin Board 

members, my impression was that EFF had engaged in a full scale 

Berman's explanation, however, showed the re-organization as an 

attempt to realign the organization with their commitments to 

advance the cyber liberties agenda. Not only did it not work to have 

two offices, he said, but it was counter- productive, created mixed 

communications function of the Cambridge office, they were simply 

National that spoke admitted to the organization having a serious 

communication problem, aggravated in part by having two offices.

Berman also left me with a greater understanding of the role that EFF 

the First Amendment at heart : the CIA, FBI, the military, AT&T, NSA, 

this gridlock is through alliances with as many members as possible 

n order to provide for the passing of the civil liberties agenda.

Berman gave as an example the digital telephony bill, which the FBI 

EFF-National opposed this on constitutional grounds and enlisted the 

aid of several business and telecommunication industry interests. 

line and thought that the scheme would be too expensive to 

mplement. Perhaps they aligned with EFF-National not out of

concern about being a good democratic citizen, but out of the desire 

to protect profits. 

So what? says the EFF-National.

The alliance was so effective that not a single member of the Senate 

nor House of Representatives sponsored the bill, when it could have 

the need to be tough on crime etc. etc. The civil liberties agenda was 

National. 

That is the dance that Jerry Berman is hosting in Washington. 

Besides a sense of greater understanding and co-operation between 

thesegroups mailing list), some more concrete items are rising out of 

Atlanta.

The local groups banded together to present EFF-National with a joint 

made a list of resource-sharing tasks that would help us out, and 

asked EFF-National to assign or hire a person to perform these tasks. 

Berman said this would be discussed at the Board Meeting (which 

announcement or follow- up as been released as of this writing.

As a direct result of contacts made in Atlanta, Matt Midboe reports 

that he has located a company interested in providing access to the 

Huntsville area.

A special Steering Committee was formed to investigate the creation 

of a formal organizational structure that will serve as an alliance 

between the cyber-liberties groups. Jon Lebkowsky immediately 

volunteered as the representative for EFF-Austin, pending Board 

approval at the next Director's meeting.

We also agreed to continue using the thesegroups mailing list as a 

forum for communication. We discussed having another conference 

n a year from now, and immediately volunteered Austin as a host

members of different groups. 

* * *

End note :

Also, I want to personally thank EFF-National for sponsoring the 

conference and taking the time to listen to our concerns. I want to 

thank EFF-National for paying for our round trip airfare and dinner 

Saturday night, as well as Mike Godwin for picking up the tab at the 

bar, even if Atlanta doesn't stock Shiner Bock.

+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+- 

EFF-Austin contact information

E-mail : eff-austin@tic.com

Snailmail : PO Box 18597,  Austin, TX 78760

VoiceMail : 512-465-7871

Disclaimers : You are encouraged to re-distribute this.

the author and not the organization. (c) 1993

+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+=+-+= +-+=+

February 5, 1993

An Open Letter from Jerry Berman

Executive Director

Electronic Frontier Foundation

	On January 12, 1993, the Electronic Frontier Foundation 

announced that it was moving all of its operations to Washington, DC, 

and that I was EFF's Executive Director.  At the same time, EFF 

announced that it was not going to establish formal EFF chapters 

around the country.  On January 23 and 24, members of EFF's board 

and staff met in Atlanta with representatives of groups interested in 

cooperative efforts.  In this first issue of EFFector Online for 1993, we 

offer you both "grass roots" and EFF views on what this all means.  I 

am including my own first take on the changes at EFF.

	First and foremost, we are consolidating our operations in 

Washington, DC, in order to better carry out our mission of fostering 

openness, individual freedom and community on the electronic 

frontier.  We want to serve as more effective advocates of policies 

and causes that increase civil liberties and democratic values in new 

efforts.

	But why Washington?  The answer is plain:  While many of us 

are increasingly cynical about Washington, DC, and "inside the 

beltway" politics, we must also understand that the momentous 

s as true when it comes to the shaping and civilizing of cyberspace

as with anything else.

	While many who already communicate online think of the 

electronic frontier as inhabited by BBS systems, the WELL, USENET 

and other fledgling outposts of new digital communities, in fact the 

electronic frontier exists within communications wires that are 

nstitutions -- from the FBI to the Congress, from the FCC to the

telephone and cable companies -- are battling between and among 

themselves over the future control and governance of the electronic 

frontier.

	Recognizing the importance of being "inside the beltway," EFF 

opened the Washington office last January and ever since has 

outcome of these policy battles in ways that are consistent with and 

Seldom have our electronic public interest policy efforts, or those of 

others, been discussed in EFFector or other EFF outlets.  And when 

they have, they have often been badly garbled or misconstrued.    

We can only accept full responsibility for failing to explain the civil 

liberties implications of the "ISDN thing" or to fully communicate 

EFF's leadership role in thwarting the FBI's effort to "dumb down" 

new computer and communications technologies and networks to 

carry out government wiretapping.

	As none of these policy debates or issues are resolved, nor can 

they be resolved in ways that serve the public interest without 

broader citizen participation, we are restructuring our operations and 

our communications.

	Soon, both EFFector and our new public policy newsletter will 

		* our ISDN initiative and our involvement in the NREN are 

commerce and culture with one another as we transition to the 

broadband networks of the next century;

		* EFF will continue to coordinate a broad coalition of 

organizations -- from public interest groups like the ACLU and CPSR 

to companies interested in the future of communications like AT&T, 

Microsoft, Lotus and Sun Microsystems -- in opposition to the FBI's 

legislation to "certify" technologies and networks only when they 

meet broad, ill-defined wiretapping standards;

		* EFF wants to build grass roots support for lifting export 

and other controls on encryption to guarantee the right of privacy 

and security;

		* EFF  not only wants to litigate future "Steve Jackson 

Games"-type cases, but it wants to avoid the need to do so by 

establishing new Secret Service and FBI investigative guidelines that 

keep law enforcement officers from trampling on the First and 

Fourth Amendment rights of computer users;

		* we want other groups to use EFFector and other EFF 

		* EFF is interested in working toward a possible 

federation of electronic frontier outposts that we would join but not 

	To accomplish this mission, we will be located in Washington 

but will maintain our presence on the Net.  We are committed to 

listen, learn and work towards common goals but maintain our 

ndependence.  Members of the EFF board and staff will be out and

about, both online and off.

	EFF is a unique organization, operating at a critical moment.  

Major policy decisions affecting free speech and privacy will be made 

over the next several years.  Combining technical, legislative and 

legal expertise, EFF is committed to engaging in vigorous advocacy 

for our vision of the electronic future, which we hope you share.  We 

look forward to working with you to make this vision a reality.

Jerry Berman*

EFF Executive Director

(*Before joining EFF as Washington Office and now Executive Director, 

Jerry Berman was Chief Legislative Counsel for the American Civil 

Liberties Union and founder of the  ACLU Projects on Privacy and 

=============================================================

For information on EFF membership, email  or call 

(617)576-4506.

     EFFector Online is published by

     The Electronic Frontier Foundation

     666 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, DC 20003

     Phone: +1 202 544-9237 FAX: +1 202 547 5481

     Internet Address: eff@eff.org

     Coordination, production and shipping by Cliff Figallo, EFF 

     Online Communications Coordinator (fig@eff.org)

 Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged.

 Signed articles do not necessarily represent the view of the EFF.

 To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors

 for their express permission.

=============================================================