response 30 of 316:

Jun 14 04:15 UTC 1999

Here's a new draft.  No big changes, many small ones:
===========================================================================
DECLARATION OF [WHOMEVER]

I, [Whomever], of Ann Arbor, Michigan, do declare:

I am [president] of Cyberspace Communications, a Michigan non-profit
corporation, whose primary function is to maintain a free, public-access
Internet service called "Grex." The name "Grex" (which means "group"
in Latin) is also registered as a d/b/a for Cyberspace Communications, Inc.
On behalf of Cyberspace Communications and our members and users, I submit
this declaration in support of plaintiffs' motion for injunctive relief
against enforcement of [such and such] (hereinafter, the "Act").

[I have such and such credentials.  Blah blah blah.  I've been involved with
computer conferencing since such and such, helped found this and that, and
even my dog is exceptionally bright.]

BACKGROUND

Cyberspace Communications is a recognized 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization,
which pursues charitable and educational missions on the Internet.  We provide
basic access to Internet services free of charge, and we provide a wide range
of on-line discussion forums allowing free exchange of information on any
topic.

The Grex system is accessible to the public via the Internet as
"cyberspace.org".  It is also accessible via a bank of dial-in modems
located in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  A simple registration process allows users
to create accounts for themselves.  This process is designed to be as
barrier-free as possible, encouraging the widest possible range of people
to use the system.  Users are not required to pay any fees, nor are they
required to give any information about themselves.  All accounts are
created immediately upon request.  This open access policy helps ensure
that the widest possible range of people can make use of our services
and bring their viewpoints to our discussion forums.

We typically see about 200 new accounts created daily, and currently have
about 29,000 active accounts.  Users come from all over the world, including
a substantial number from India, but the majority of those most active in
our public forums are Michigan residents.  Many are minors.  Because we do
not require our users to supply such information, we do not have complete
information about the ages or locations of our users.

Grex hosts electronic conferences on more than 100 topics, all of which are
open to all users except for one administrative conference.  These conferences
lie at the heart of our educational mission.  Typical conferences include
music, the arts, writing, consumer information, housing, finance, small
business, philosophy, living with disabilities, men's and women's issues,
parenting, pets, computer hardware and software, nature, and role-playing
games.  There are also non-topical "creative" conferences and a general
discussion area.  All Cyberspace Communications policies are discussed and
developed in a public conference called "coop".  Any posting to these
conferences typically remains publicly readable for months or years.  Postings
are censored only in rare cases (for example, if someone posts a dozen copies
of the same message we might hide all but one).  All conferences can be read
over the web even by people who do not have Grex accounts - they are easily
readable by anyone in the world who has access to the Internet.  The
conferences currently contain about 42 million words of text, roughly five
times as much text as a typical 20 volume encyclopedia.  Roughly 200 new
messages are posted to the conferences every day.

Grex also hosts a live-chat area, called "party."  Messages posted here are
seen instantly by other participants.  Discussions there are typically more
dynamic and less serious.  It is especially popular with our younger users.
On average over 5000 messages a day are posted in the chat area.

All Grex users can freely send and receive private E-mail.  They can also
access the world wide web via a non-graphical browser, and about 1000 users
have use Grex to post their own text-only web pages.  (Images are not allowed
because our Internet connection is too slow and overburdened to support them.)
Users can also open private conversation channels to other users currently
using Grex.  There are also a number of ways that users can transfer files
of any type to and from Grex, possibly exchanging files with other users.
We allow full access to software development tools on our system for those
interested in learning programming.

Cyberspace Communications is funded almost entirely by voluntary donations
from our users.  Our current assets consist of $4,500 in the bank and various
old computer equipment.  We have about 100 members who donate $60 a year or
$6 a month and receive a minor increase in Internet access as a perk.  Our
total revenue in 1998 was about $8,200, giving us about 30 cents per user
per year to spend.  About $7,500 of this was spent simply to keep the system
running - rent, electricity, phones, Internet connectivity, and such - leaving
us about $700 to spend on upgrades to our service.  All of the work done to
maintain and administer Grex is done by unpaid volunteers - we can not afford
any paid employees.  Except for an unstaffed machine room, we maintain no
offices.  Although our funding is extremely limited, we value that fact that
drawing our income primarily from our users means we are primarily
responsible to our users.  There are no paid advertisements on Grex.

For many of our users, Grex is simply a place to get free E-mail or web
access.  Serving such people is an important part of our mission, but for
some 500 people of all ages, Grex is much more than that.  It is a dynamic
community where they meet and make friends, exchange ideas, and learn new
things.  Essentially all of our funding comes from donations from this group.
Grex is only able to survive because of the dedication of the users who
participate in our open forums, and believe in the value of our mission.

CYBERSPACE COMMUNICATIONS AND ITS USERS FEAR PROSECUTION UNDER THE ACT

We are concerned that Cyberspace Communications and its users may be at
risk of prosecution under the Act.

Our computer is located in Michigan, and many of our users are Michigan
residents.

We know that some of the users of our system are minors.  About 75% of our
users volunteer information about their age when they register on Grex.  Of
these, about 20% say they are under 18.  However, except for a few people
personally known to our staff, we have no way of knowing if these declared
ages are accurate.  It should also be noted that more than half of our users
ask that the information they give be kept private from other users, so
our users are even more likely than our staff to have difficulty recognizing
minors.

Cyberspace Communications itself authors very little material, and none of
it could be construed to be "sexually explicit."  (It is primarily publicity
information, help pages, and technical documentation for our system.)
However, there are materials posted on Grex by our users which we believe
might be construed as being "sexually explicit matter" under the terms of
the Act.  These materials are accessible by all users.  Since our forums
are primarily text-based, most of this is verbal material rather than
images.  However, users are allowed to import files to their personal
areas on Grex, and some use this facility to place publicly readable images
on the system.

Two examples of conference items from Grex which might be impacted by the
Act are attached.  Exhibit one is discussion of pornography from the women's
conference on Grex.  Though most of the discussion is not very "sexually
explicit" at various points examples are used that might be considered in
violation of the Act.  Though a discussion like this would probably not be
banned under the act, users would likely feel much less free to speak on the
subject.  Exhibit two is a graphic description of a rape from the poetry
conference on Grex.  It was apparently entered for artistic and cathartic
reasons.  The responses show concern, sympathy and support.  Many other
possible examples could be found.

Although it is not, in general, clear to us exactly what material would or
would not be considered sexually explicit, we know for a fact that textual
material of any conceivable description could be posted on Grex at any time,
by any person.  Even if all questionable material were removed from Grex, any
person wishing to cause problems for us could post new material at any time.

It is unclear to us to what extent, if any, the Act's exemption for
computer network service providers would protect Cyberspace Communications,
or what would constitute a good faith effort to inform ourselves of ages
of our users or the nature of the material being exchanged among them.
Clearly what kinds of monitoring would be expected from us must be
different for different types of communications - for example, the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act prevents us from monitoring E-mail.
What are our different responsibilities with all the different media we
offer?  Since we allow users to install custom software on their accounts
on our system, are we responsible for monitoring new communications
systems created by our users?

Our uncertainty about our liability under this law is aggravated by the
fact that, as a matter of policy, we allow anonymous users on our system.
Would we be directly responsible for everything an anonymous user of our
system transmits to a minor, including private E-mail?  This seems contrary
to the precedent set by the United States Postal Service, which allows
mail to be sent anonymously, but at the same time it doesn't seem sensible
that someone could evade the Act's prohibition on sending sexually explicit
material to minors by simply using anonymous E-mail.

AGE VERIFICATION IS NOT FEASIBLE

To comply with the Act, Cyberspace Communications would have to find a way
ensure that no forum which might contain sexually explicit material can be
accessed by a minor.  Unless all postings of sexually explicit material
were completely eliminated from Grex, this would require verifying the ages
of our users.

We have not, as an organization, extensively studied any verification
technique.  Those based on credit or debit cards would be inappropriate for
a free system.  Given that we average over 200 new users every day, it is
difficult to imagine any verification technique that would not require
a full time person and/or a substantial expense, neither of which is within
reach of our limited resources.

AGE VERIFICATION WOULD UNDERMINE OUR MISSION

Even if a method were found by which verification could be done reliably
within the limitations of our resources, doing so would substantially
undermine our ability to pursue our mission of providing forums for
free speech and of providing free access to Internet services.

Our current policy of not requiring new users to give us any information
is designed to make joining the system as easy and un-intimidating as
possible.  Many people are nervous about getting on the Internet or getting
involved in a public forum.  Almost any method of proving their age would
require users to reveal some significant amount of personal information.
Being confronted by such questions would scare off some of the users who
could most benefit from our service.

Such a verification procedure would also limit the ability of users
to speak anonymously in our forums.  We believe that having the option of
speaking anonymously is an important part of free speech, and having to
identify yourself to the people operating the system would for many people,
including people ranging from elected officials to battered women, limit what
they were willing to say in public forums like ours.

Segregating minors from other users of our system would also undermine
Grex's ability to help young people develop maturity and communications
skills.  On-line forums are one of the few places where young people
can interact with adults on an equal basis.  Their ages are not obvious
to other users, so they are judged by the content and quality of what they
have to say.  For young people, it can be wonderful to discover a world
where they can be respected and treated as equals by adults simply by
sharing their thoughts and behaving maturely themselves.  While it is true
that there are some risks when young people are mistaken for adults on-line,
it would be a gross oversight to ignore the fact that it can also be an
extremely positive experience for them.  For young people to be confined
to a "kid's room" on Grex would turn Grex into much less of a unique
educational experience for them.

RESTRICTING CONTENT IS NOT FEASIBLE

Unless all minors were completely banned from Grex, compliance with the
Act would force Cyberspace Communications to monitor all forums accessible
to minors, identify "sexually explicit" material, and eliminate it from
those forums.

Doing this would require substantial labor, especially for the live chat
channels which are continuously active 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and
which would presumably require continuous monitoring.  It would be difficult
to finding volunteers who would be willing to make that level of effort and
who could be trusted to make the difficult legal distinctions between material
which is and is not acceptable under the Act.  We would not have the resources
to pay anyone to do such a job.

RESTRICTING CONTENT WOULD UNDERMINE OUR MISSION

Even if a method were found by which verification could be done within the
limits of our resources, doing so would substantially undermine our ability
to pursue our mission of providing forums for free speech.

First, because of the difficulty of reliably determining which users are
minors, it is certain that any censorship of sexually explicit material
would have to interfere with the ability of adults to discuss such topics
on our system, even though such speech is not directly prohibited by the
Act.

Second, because of the difficulty of determining exactly what content is
"sexually explicit" it is to be expected that any censorship by Cyberspace
Communications, or self-censorship by our users, would be done more broadly
than might be strictly necessary under the Act.  Again this would result
in a broader inhibition of on-line free speech than a literal reading of
the Act suggests.

This chilling effect could impact many useful discussions which touch on
sexual topics, and have significant social value.

Certainly there is material posted on Grex which is meant only to titillate
or shock.  But in our conferences no posting stands alone for long.  One
user's pornographic posting is likely to be followed by another user's
objection to its portrayal of women.  When such material appears in a open
public forum, community standards are readily applied to it, not because the
material is suppressed, but because upstanding members of the community are
there to respond.  When young people are allowed to participate in such
forums, it is an excellent opportunity to them to learn to understand and
respect community's standards on sexuality and other issues.  If young
people encounter sexual material only in "outlaw" forums occupied only
by other people seeking titillation, this kind of perspective be gained.

CONCLUSION

As various laws of this type have been proposed over recent years, our users
have discussed strategies for how we could cope with such a law.  We have not
been able to find any viable plan.

We have a long history of being good, law-abiding citizens of the Internet.
Many of our volunteers would sever their relationships with Grex rather than
be associated with an organization that operated in clear defiance of the law.
The loss of many of our most upstanding people would irretrievably harm our
community, even if we were never actually prosecuted.

But at the same time, compliance with the law would appear to require that
we validate our users and/or censor our discussion forums.  For the reasons
stated above, we are reluctant to do these things because we believe they
would limit our ability to act as a forum for free speech in ways that go
far beyond just restricting minors from gaining access to sexual materials.
Many of our current volunteers and donors would be uninterested in supporting
such a restrictive forum.

But beyond that, doing these things in any meaningful manner, if it is
possible at all, would require resources substantially beyond what we now
have.  Over our eight-year history we have demonstrated that it is possible
to provide an excellent service to a very large set of people on a miniscule
budget.  This Act would make that impossible.  It would raise the financial
bar so that only organizations large and wealthy enough to pay full-time staff
people would be able to run public conferencing systems.  For us to raise that
much money we would probably need some combination of corporate sponsorship,
advertising revenue, and user fees.  Any of these options could significantly
undermine our ability to function as an open forum for free speech on the
Internet.

For all of our history, we have been proud to consider ourselves to be the
freest forum for speech that can be sustained under the law.  If this Act is
upheld, we believe that we would either have to shut down completely, or
become substantially more restrictive.  We do not believe that the benefits
of this Act can justify so great an encroachment on the constitutional right
to free speech for all Americans.