Making Sure Orwell Was Wrong
Footnote 6.1:
Encryption is the scrambling of messages into codes.
Footnote 6.2:
Simson Garfinkel, _Wired_, March 1995, page 44.
Footnote 6.3:
To simplify a bit, cryptography is the study, or the technique, of
making secret messages.
Footnote 6.4:
Peter Huber, _Orwell’s Revenge: The 1984 Palimpsest_ (New York: The
Free Press, 1994).
Footnote 6.5:
Sandy Sandford, “The intelligent island?” _Wired_, September/October
1993.
Footnote 6.6:
Rosalind Resnick, “Cyberbiz” column of July 3, 1995, published in the
_Miami Herald_, on the Knight-Ridder wire and her Web site,
http://www.netcreations.com. One of the best sites on the whole Net.
Drop by!
Footnote 6.7:
Exon has announced plans not to run again—his term ends in 1997. But
who knows what can happen in the meantime?
Footnote 6.8:
My favorite observation on the passion for censorship comes from Phil
Kirby, a former editorial writer for the _Los Angeles Times_, by way
of Nat Hentoff, in the book _Free Speech for Me, But Not for Thee_.
“Censorship,” Kirby said, “is the strongest drive in human nature; sex
is a weak second.” Thanks to Rob Chatelle of the National Writers
Union for bringing this gem to my attention.
Footnote 6.9:
The example of messages violating local standards comes from a
syndicated column by Lawrence Magid that appeared in the _Washington
Post_ on March 13, 1995.
Footnote 6.10:
Buckley and George Will are the most famous conservative journalists
in the United States. Among other accomplishments, Buckley is founder
of the _National Review_. His comments appeared in an “On the Right”
column released through the United Press Syndicate on February 24,
1995.
Footnote 6.11:
Perhaps the idea will have been changed by now to allow more freedom
to librarians and the public.
Footnote 6.12:
David Buerger, “Our lives are quickly becoming an open book,”
_Communications Week_, May 9, 1994, page 52.
Footnote 6.13:
Simson Garfinkel, _PGP: Pretty Good Privacy_ (Sebastopol, California:
O’Reilly & Associates, 1995), page 88.
Footnote 6.14:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.15:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.16:
William M. Bulkeley, “Cipher probe: Popularity overseas of encryption
code has the U.S. worried; Grand jury ponders if creator ‘exported the
program through the Internet’; ‘Genie is out of the bottle,’” The
_Wall Street Journal_, April 28, 1994, page A1.
Footnote 6.17:
“Tidbits on the PGP/Zimmermann case—Protecting Americans’ privacy,” an
item that Jim Warren released in the March 6, 1995, issue of his
online newsletter, _Government Access_.
Footnote 6.18:
Steven Levy, “Crypto rebel,” _Wired_, February 1993.
Footnote 6.19:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.20:
Garfinkel, _PGP_, page 112.
Footnote 6.21:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.22:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.23:
As of this writing, it looked as if Warren wouldn’t testify—perhaps
because his remarks would have been so helpful to Zimmermann’s side.
Footnote 6.24:
To its credit, the White House at least called attention to the First
Amendment nightmares of the Exon “decency” bill. Given how bad the
bill was, however, that was a little like denouncing slavery.
Footnote 6.25:
If the case is still on, contact Hugh Miller at hmiller@luc.edu for
information on making donations.
Footnote 6.26:
“Another chop at the Clipper chip,” _Business Week_, February 13,
1995.
Footnote 6.27:
“I oppose the Clipper Chip and all forms of key escrow because it’s
impossible to use bad legislation as a substitute for bad
engineering,” Bob Steele told me. Yes, he’s the same CIA alum as in
chapter 4, the one with whom I agreed in a friendly way to disagree.
Hi, Bob—you’re right on about Clipper!
Footnote 6.28:
Peter Lewis, “Attention shoppers: Internet is open,” the _New York
Times_, August 12, 1994, page D1.
Footnote 6.29:
Bulkeley.
Footnote 6.30:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.31:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.32:
Privacy International is an international human rights organization
founded in 1987 to oppose privacy invasions worldwide. It led the
campaign to fight a national card proposal in Australia that ended up
causing Parliament to dissolve in 1987.
Footnote 6.33:
_Ottawa Citizen_, January 31, 1994, as reproduced by David Banisar in
his “Bug Off!” paper for Privacy International.
Footnote 6.34:
Bulkeley.
Footnote 6.35:
Elizabeth Corcoran, “Bit by bit, an online collection of the Library
of Congress to digitize artifacts,” the _Washington Post_, October 10,
1994, page A1.
Footnote 6.36:
Junda Woo, “Big copyright curbs sought by industry,” the _Wall Street
Journal_, December 27, 1994, page B5.
Footnote 6.37:
Teresa Riordan, “Profile: Even in a ‘Big Tent,’ Little Insults, Little
Compromises,” the _New York Times_, May 29, 1994. The _Times_ is the
source of information on Lehman’s heroes. To answer the obvious
question—yes, I asked Lehman for comment on a number of topics ranging
from campaign donations to his use (or possibly nonuse) of the
Internet. No reply came. I also asked him about his controversial
$10,000 gift to a local politician, the one described in this chapter
and in chapter note 41.
Footnote 6.38:
Saundra Torry, “Many of Clinton’s chosen earned big bucks in private
practice,” the _Washington Post_, October 18, 1993, page F7.
Footnote 6.39:
Found at http://www.uspto.gov/combio.html.
Footnote 6.40:
Riordan.
Footnote 6.41:
Pamela McClintock, “D.C. council candidate returns questioned $10,000
loan,” the _Washington Times_, February 19, 1991, page B4. In a
“Notebook on Politics” column on February 21, Rene Sanchez of the
_Washington Post_ described the loan as “apparently in violation of
D.C. campaign finance law, which sets a $400 ceiling on individual
campaign donations.”
Footnote 6.42:
Riordan is the source of the “first” information.
Footnote 6.43:
Riordan.
Footnote 6.44:
Pamela Samuelson, “Legally speaking: The NII intellectual
property report,” _Communications of the ACM_, December 1994. On
the Web at http://gnn.interpath.net/gnn/meta/imedia/features/
copyright/samuelson.html.
Footnote 6.45:
_The Manchurian Candidate_ was the film in which the Communists
captured a GI, brainwashed him, and groomed their man to be president
of the United States.
Footnote 6.46:
Marcia Berss, “West will always be three,” _Forbes_, November 21,
1994, page 47.
Footnote 6.47:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.48:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.49:
Ibid.
Footnote 6.50:
Sharon Schmickle and Tom Hamburger, “West Publishing and the courts:
U.S. justices took trips from West Publishing,” _Minneapolis_ _Star
Tribune_, March 5, 1995. In of July, 1995, at least, the lead article
showed up on the Web at http://www.startribune.com/westpub/west.htm.
The home page for the _Star Tribune_ is http://www.startribune.com/.]
Footnote 6.51:
I can only speculate since, like Lehman, Opperman refused to answer my
written queries about donations and other matters.
Footnote 6.52:
Bill Salisbury, “Minnesota ‘bit players’ enjoy the show; Democratic
colleagues happy with their role at convention,” the _St. Paul Pioneer
Press_, July 14, 1994, Page 1A.
Footnote 6.53:
West’s 6,000-word letter of February 22, 1995, was available on the
World Wide Web at the following address in July 1995:
http://www.startribune.com/westpub/perspectives/response.htm.
Footnote 6.54:
Jack B. Coffman and Thomas J. Collins, “Bankrolling the legislature
part 6: Who has the clout,” the _St. Paul Pioneer Press_, April 17,
1992, Page 1A.
Footnote 6.55:
Margaret Engle, “Virtual money trail: The Center for Responsive
Politics on the Internet,” _Capital Eye_, June 15, 1995, Page 2.
Footnote 6.56:
Martin Schram, _Speaking Freely: Former Members of Congress Talk about
Money and Politics_ (Washington, D.C: Center for Responsive Politics,
1995), page 85.