Computer underground Digest Wed June 23 1993 Volume 5 : Issue 46
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
Copy Editor: Etaoin Shrdlu, Seniur
CONTENTS, #5.46 (June 23 1993)
File 1--Re: File 6--Course on "Politics and Technology"
File 2--A public experiment in how private our lives really are
File 3--AB1624/Calif Legislature Computer Access -- Full Text
File 4--Summercon Synopsis & Playful Precis
File 5-- Defense Contractor Attacks Full Disclosure (Reprint) (#1)
File 6--The "Offending" Full Disclosure Story (#2)
File 7--The Harris Letter Threatening Litigation against FD (#3)
File 8--The Full Disclosure Atty's Response to Harris (#4)
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
available at no cost electronically from firstname.lastname@example.org. The
editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6430), fax (815-753-6302)
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
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 DL0 and DL12 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 the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210; and on: Rune Stone BBS (IIRG
WHQ) 203-832-8441 NUP:Conspiracy
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted
nodes and points welcome.
EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893;
In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493
ANONYMOUS FTP SITES:
UNITED STATES: ftp.eff.org (184.108.40.206) in /pub/cud
uglymouse.css.itd.umich.edu (220.127.116.11) in /pub/CuD/cud
halcyon.com( 18.104.22.168) in /pub/mirror/cud
AUSTRALIA: ftp.ee.mu.oz.au (22.214.171.124) in /pub/text/CuD.
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud. (Finland)
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud (United Kingdom)
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.
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 14:00:26 EDT
From: phyland@ESSENTIAL.ORG(Paul Hyland)
Subject: File 1--Re: File 6--Course on "Politics and Technology"
CPSR distributes for $10 (I think) a list of Course Syllabi on
Computers and Society, written by Terry Winograd and Batya Friedman.
Ordering information can be obtained in the file cpsr.books at the
info server cpsr.org (listserv/ftp/gopher/wais), or write to the
national office at email@example.com.
There are many other files there that chould be helpful to you in the
preparation of your class materials.
Paul Hyland firstname.lastname@example.org or essential.org
Moderator, CPSR List email@example.com
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 14:41:58 -0700
Subject: File 2--A public experiment in how private our lives really are
A reported has asked me for help in finding people who will help to
penetrate the privacy of four volunteers, for a major newspaper story.
Any takers? Contact the reporter:
Reporter for major metro paper is interested in help finding out
anything there is to find on four prominent people who have
volunteered to have their privacy breached.
Financial fundamentals. Lives of crime. Aches and pains. How rich
they are, where they vacation, who they socialize with. You name it,
we're interested in seeing if it's out there.
All for a good cause.
If you're willing to advise this computer-ignorant reporter, or dig
in and get the dope on these volunteers, please contact him at
Or call at +1 617 929 3342. Soon.
Feel free to forward this far and wide.
John Gilmore firstname.lastname@example.org -- email@example.com -- firstname.lastname@example.org
Creating freedom, rather than longer chains, bigger cages, better meals, . . .
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 03:54:09 GMT
From: kiddyr@GALLANT.APPLE.COM(Ray Kiddy)
Subject: File 3--AB1624/Calif Legislature Computer Access -- Full Text
Well, it has changed and it is definitely an improvement. so, without
further ado, the full text of AB1624.
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 17, 1993
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 18, 1993
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE--1993-94 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1624
Introduced by Assembly Member Bowen
(Principal coauthor: Senator Torres) (Coauthors: Assembly Members
Areias, Bornstein, Goldsmith, Isenberg, Johnson, Karnette, Katz
Mountjoy, Nolan, Polanco, Speier, and Vasconcellos)
(Coauthors: Senators Dills, Hayden, Killea, Morgan, and Rosenthal)
March 4, 1993
An act to add Section 10248 to the Government Code,
relating to the Legislature;
LEGISLATIVE COUNSELUS DIGEST
AB 1624, as amended, Bowen. Legislature: legislative
information: access by computer network.
Under existing law, all meetings of a house of the Legislature
or a committee thereof are required to be open and public, unless
specifically exempted, and any meeting that is required to be open
and public, including specified closed sessions, may be held only
after full and timely notice to the public as provided by the
Joint Rules of the Assembly and Senate.
This bill would make legislative findings and declarations that
the public should be informed to the fullest extent possible as to
the time, place, and agenda for each meeting.
This bill would require the Legislative Counsel, with the advice
of the Joint Rules Committee of the Senate and Assembly, to make
available to the public, by means of access by way of the largest
nonproprietary, nonprofit cooperative public computer network,
specified information concerning bills, the proceedings of the
houses and committees of the Legislature, statutory enactments,
and the California Constitution.
Vote: 2/3 majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. Section 10248 is added to the
2 Government Code, to read:
3 10248. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that
4 the public should be informed to the fullest extent
5 possible as to the time, place, and agenda for each
6 meeting of the houses and committees of the Legislature.
7 The Legislature further finds and declares that it is
8 desirable to make timely information regarding these
9 proceedings available to each member of the public,
10 irrespective of where he or she resides, for the least cost
12 (b) The Legislative Counsel shall, with the advice of
13 the Joint Rules Committee, make all of the following
14 information available to the public in electronic form:
15 (1) The most recent Assembly Daily File and most
16 recent Daily Senate File.
17 (2) The text of each bill introduced in each current
18 legislative session, including all amended forms of the
20 (3) The bill history of each bill introduced and
21 amended in each current legislative session.
22 (4) The bill status of each bill introduced and
1 amended in each current legislative session.
2 (5) All bill analyses prepared in connection with each
3 bill in each current legislative session.
4 (6) All vote information concerning each bill in each
5 current legislative session.
6 (7) Veto messages concerning each bill, when issued,
7 in each current legislative session.
8 (8) The California Codes.
9 (9) The California Constitution.
10 (10) All uncodified statutes enacted on or after
11 January 1, 1993.
35 (11) Documentation that is available to the public and
36 maintained in computerized form by the Legislative
37 Counsel which describes the computerized digital
38 formats of the files containing the information specified
39 in this subdivision.
40 (c) The Legislative Counsel shall automatically
1 transmit copies of files of the information specified in
2 subdivision (b) by way of the largest nonproprietary,
3 nonprofit cooperative public computer network upon
4 receiving any computerized request for the files. These
5 files shall be made available in this manner immediately
6 after they are transmitted to the Office of State Printing.
7 The files shall contain all of the text and formatting
8 information transmitted to the Office of State Printing. In
9 the event that a technical malfunction prevents these
10 files from being transmitted immediately after they are
11 transmitted to the Office of State Printing, the
12 Legislative Counsel shall report that fact to the Joint
13 Rules Committee within one business day.
14 (d) Any file that is available pursuant to subdivision
15 (c) shall remain available to the public upon request by
16 electronic digital data transmission until it is updated.
17 When a file is updated, a copy of the file without the
18 updated information shall remain available to the public
19 by electronic data digital transmission for at least 90 days
20 after the update.
21 (e) The Legislative Counsel may not control which or
22 how many files are available to a person who requests the
23 files nor monitor or keep any records about those persons
24 who request files, except for the purpose of assuring the
25 quality of computer operations. No fee or other charge
26 shall be imposed as a condition to public access to any files
27 that are made available to the public pursuant to this
29 (f) No action taken pursuant to this section shall be
30 deemed to alter or relinquish any copyright or other
31 proprietary interest or entitlement of the State of
32 California relating to any of the information made
33 available pursuant to this section.
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 15:17 CDT
Subject: File 4--Summercon Synopsis & Playful Precis
SummerCon 1993 in Review !!!
Hacking Tales and Exploits by the SotMESC
Additional Activities by the GCMS MechWarriors
The weather was right, too right. Something was foul in the
air. It was akin to that mythical 'Calm before the Storm' scenario
that is dreaded by so many. But, Scribbles and I boarded the
Techno-Laden SotMESC compact and took off down the Highway to our
ultimate goal . . . Hacker Heaven in Summertime Fun - SummerCon !!!
Instantly, weather was seen brewing in the Caribbean. Hints
of Hurricanes echoed through the towns we drifted through. To
alleviate any anxieties, massive quantities of Jolt! were obtained
in the infamous town of Hatties-Gulch, a small town taken over by
the virulent filth called College Students.
The trip continued, over hill and over dale. Dale was quite
considerate not to press charges. Colleges were passed in a blink
of the eye. Nothing was going to stop us. We were on a mission
from the Church. But, that's another story.
After locating that famous arch, a beeline was made at speeds
over 100 MPH through St. Louis until our destination came into
view: The St. Louis Executive International (800-325-4850). We
came to meet our nemesis and friends at the fest hosted by the
Missouri Programming Institute. Brakes were quickly applied
as the car appeared to be going off the off-ramp and into the ditch.
From the lobby it was obvious, there were unusual people here.
These were the kind of people that you fear your daughters would
never meet. The kind of people that kicked themselves into
caffeine frenzies and would become infatuated with virtual lands.
Yes, these were my kind of people.
Now, the adventure may start . . .
( More to come after I get out of the shower real quick )
-Frosty, ilKhan of the SotMESC
The continuing story of Hackers gone astray in the big city =:)
For those of you that were waiting, we apologize for the delay.
But, nobody can interrupt an original episode of ST:TNG and the
discovery of the latest 2600 'zine.
Oh, and in response to A-Gal on pg 30 of 2600, Scribbles says
she's the sexiest hacker on the nets. Hmmmmm, I'm inclined to agree
with that. I'm sure Control-C will agree too, especially after he
trailed her for half of SCon.
Now, we all know that Friday is the warm-up day on what we can
expect to see at SCon during the main saturday drag. It was no
surprise to find the main junction box rewired, pay-phones providing
free services, rooms rerouted and computers running rampant down the
hallways. But, the traditional trashing of Control-C's room this
early signaled that more would be needed to top the night. The maid
was definitely not pleased.
For a list of those that attended, maybe KL can provide us
with that information. There were too many faces for my fingers
to lap into. And, there were quite a few new faces. I believe
that Weevel was the youngest hacker at 16, and Emmanuel was the
oldest, although he didn't give his age.
Let's get to the meat of the matter. The conference had
a nice spacious central area with tables neatly lining alongside
the wall. Between the tables and the walls were many hacks packed
as tightly as they could get. Why didn't we think of moving the tables
closer together ???
KL took control and ran the conference smoothly. dFx panned
everyone on his digital camcorder. Several cameras were around
to provide us with gifs later. And the conference took off . . .
First up was Stewart from SRI ( Stanford Research Institute ).
He elaborated on SRI's being involved in research, engineering and
design. From studies done around the world with hackers and those
associated, malicious hacking can not be stopped. There is no
evidence, though, that the current hackers are interested in bringing
the networks down at all. Concern was given to new hackers that may
be emerging with financial gain and maliciousness occurring. The top
security hole with system was noted as being the infamous social
engineering technique. SRI did note that many places did not utilize
the security that they even had in place. It was also noted that laws
against malicious hackers, and probably any hacker, should be fair and
just. The most malicious hacks that are turning up have been spotted
in the following named countries: Holland, Scandinavia countries, very
possibly soon in the UK, Australia, Israel, the former USSR, and
Bulgaria ( noted for virii writers ).
A voice made mention of Operation Rahab, hackers in German
Next up was Count Zero from cDc/RDT to talk about packet radio.
His talk included information about the IESS and handed out a flyer on
America 2000 ( school under 1984 regimes ). Maybe someone will
provide us with a copy of this. A packet radio modem at 1200 can be
obtained easily for $50. TCP/IP packets are already being send over
the bandwidth along with other network protocols. The usefulness of
all this is that the information is broadcast and it is virgin
territory. The baud limitation is due only based upon the bandwidth
you are operating at and the number of collisions occurring. On a
band you can see every packet that is being transmitted if you wish.
All this is located on a 2 meter band. Currently the FCC forbids
encryptions on the airwaves, although this is noted as being virtually
impossible to enforce. It also takes 5 months to get an amateur
radio license, and your personal info is recorded in a book easily
obtained at libraries. The problem with going around the FCC is that
there exist vigilante HAMs that monitor the bands and have nothing
better to do than filter info and whine to the FCC. Bandwidths are
decreasing though. This is due to an increased interest overall by
communications in these areas. Unless you do something major the FCC
will not give you much interest. The book on preparing yourself for a
Tech Class can be obtained from Radio Shak for $9.
Next up was dFx. He was promoting the HCon and Tone-Loc t-shirts
that were for sale. Merchandising was getting pretty high. He also
gave out a few Mitsubishi 800 disks. He was also recognized as the
ONLY and LAST member of the Neon Knights, a club that had a wide range
of comedy names generated. The word was put out the HCon '93 will be
in December 17-19 with a hint that it could also wind up being in
Austin. Then the conversation turned to Lord Byron's bust, which we
should here more information on any day this week. The conversation
reiterated the government narc that was at the AA meeting that was
pressuring Byron. Byron was also noted as having rejected a plea
bargain the courts offered him. And lastly, it is going to happen
soon so get them while you can. The FTP site at eff.org will be
dropping its CuD directory due to a conflict of interest with EFFs
major contributors, mainly the RBOCs and other interest groups that
don't like us.
Erik Bloodaxe took the table next to talk about what was
happening with his involvement with Phrack and some interesting info
about Agent Steel. As for Phrack, the Email list is being with-held
by Tuc. The mailing list has been refused at Mindvox due to files
missing mysteriously at that site. And, no organization registered
for Phrack #42 since it was copyrighted with a nice and lengthy
preamble, except for one company from Midar. Currently Phrack #43 is
in limbo and is estimated at 1 Meg long. Going onto the info about
Agent Steel, basically he's a narc. Lord Havok from Canada is trying
to restart the LOD under some unknown logical rationale that since LOD
is defunct, anyone can reclaim the name. Lord HAvok, aka Cameron, has
been going around trying to get documentation to put together an LOD
technical journal #5. Supposedly there is a skin-head group in Canada
that is now tracking Cameron down.
Someone next came up and gave us an update on Codec. Two weeks
after the last SCon, Codec was pulled over while on the run from the
law for speeding and then arrested for burglary, resisting arrest, etc
. . . He is estimated to be out of jail in 1995 and still has time to
serve in a few other states. Mail can be sent to him at this address:
email@example.com. Maybe Crunch can give Codec some hints on how to
get by in prison?
From the CPSR, Eric Nielson took the table. He elaborated on
the CPSR and ran a Q&A period. Basically, the CPSR files many FOIA
requests and sues the government. Their focus is on the workplace
computing. Elaboration was given on the Clipper Chip and computer
ship security. The CPSR is staffed with lawyers and takes their
funding from dues and grants. They are not sponsored by any
From the far side of the table came the infamous Emmanuel
Goldstein from 2600. He stated how he had testified at congress and
gave them a live demonstration of bandwidth scanning and redboxing.
While he was there, the inquisition started against him on the issue
of 2600. Emmanuel then tried to explain the culture to our
representative that it is bad to classify all hackers as criminals.
Goldstein then went on to talk about the DC 2600 bust and how it has
resulted in 2600 meetings springing up all across the country. A
review of several films on software piracy at the office, disaster
recovery and viruses from Commonwealth Films was given. And, to
hilight everything, 2600 has purchased an AT&T van that they plan to
take to assorted conventions and
start a fleet of these up.
Pst, BTW, on pg 43 of 2600 the intersection should be a jump =:)
Last up was Errath Ackby, a Certified Netware Engineer. He
explained that the only upgrade in Novell 4.0 is the disk compression.
He also informed us that the supervisor and guest accounts generally
have default passwords. TO hack into this Net, you should use a PC
with full alt and functions keys. The supervisor p/w is on the
RConsole in a file called autoexec.mcf on version 3.11. Netcrack
will not work on a system with Intruder Lock-Out. Non-dedicated
netware must boot from a floppy. Best of all, you can dial out
by using cubix-quarts, which are PC with modems on the system.
Thus we have come to the end of the conference part of
SummerCon. Part III will go into detail about several of the
flyers that were floating about and the post-conference excitement
that nobody there would ever forget !!!
Below is a quick reprint of a paper that was recovered
from Control-C's trashed room.
I would like to set up a meeting
to discuss Kevin's progress in Social
Studies and English. Please let
me know when it would be
( Scribble , scribble )
Dear Mr + Mrs Gormby,
We would be happy
to meet with you at
9:30 on Thursday, April
1st in Room 104
Now, could this be Kevin Poulson ??? Naaa, no way.
Amazing what technical data trashing will uncover. I guess
I should throw this away now . . .
THE ADVENTURE CONTINUES !!!
-Frosty, ilKhan of the SotMESC
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1993 22:32:12 PDT
From: Alex Zelchenko
Subject: File 5--Defense Contractor Attacks Full Disclosure (Reprint) (#1)
((MODERATORS' NOTE: Glen Roberts, editor of Full Disclosure, a gadfly
hardcopy journal/newsletter, has been threatened with a lawsuit by
Harris Corp. over a review of one of its products. As the experiences
of 2600 Magazine illustrate, the threat of litigation by large
corporations seems to be a way of silencing speech of those writing on
CuD readers will recall that Roberts and his co-gadfly Bill Vajk
obtained and made available a number of sealed federal warrants and
affidavits during the so-called "Hacker Crackdown" of the 1990s,
including the Ripco BBS and Rich Andrews documents. Full Disclosure was
also one of the first print media to attack the crackdowns and
provided considerable information about the events to the computer
community. Vajk and Roberts aggressively use the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) to ferret out information. The generosity of
Roberts and Vajk in sharing their information with CuD, amongst
others, makes any threat to their enterprise a threat to our own
information flow for two reasons. First, if media such as 2600 or Full
Disclosure are silenced from legitimate pursuit and publication of
information because of the chilling effect of intimidation, then a
significant source of information is lost. Second, if large
corporations or government agencies can threaten publications of which
they disapprove into silence, it severely curtails the free flow of
information and makes other media more cautious lest they also be
Alex Zelchenko collected the basic documents related to this case. In
this file, we reprint a (forthcoming) Full Disclosure piece
summarizing the events. Second is the "offending" story that resulted
in the threat of litigation. Third is the letter from Harris attorneys
threatening the suit, and finally is the response of Full Disclosure
legal counsel to Harris.
DEFENSE CONTRACTOR ATTACKS NEWSPAPER EDITOR
(CHICAGO) -- Harris Corporation, through its Electronic Systems
Sector in Melbourne, Florida, has attacked Glen L. Roberts, Editor of
Full Disclosure, the nation's #1 surveillance journal, threatening
him with civil and criminal proceedings over his editorial review of
one of their products.
In 1991, Full Disclosure reported on the National Technical
Investigators Assoc conference held Washington, DC. Harris, an
exhibitor at the conference, was included in Full Disclosure's
A Harris product called "Triggerfish," which the company promoted at
the conference as a cellular phone interception system, was included
in Full Disclosure's report. Harris now claims that this editorial
review was an "apparently unauthorized advertisement," and that it
constitutes a deceptive trade practice, violates its trademarks and
may be a "felony."
Roberts stated, "clearly, I have a First Amendment right to discuss
the products or services of any company in my publication. The First
Amendment has no requirement that I get 'authorization' to talk about
what's being sold to the public, or law enforcement agencies."
Further, Roberts said that this issue is especially important to the
public and political discussions about privacy and surveillance
technology. Roberts thinks that Harris has failed to learn the lesson
of the "Pentagon Papers" case.
"We're seeing laws passed relating to issues of privacy, and in
particular cellular phone privacy, without informed public debate on
the issue, by either the public, or our Congress." Roberts considers
this action by Harris as an effort to prevent such public debate.
Roberts said, "Full Disclosure was started to encourage debate and
public knowledge of these topics."
FULL DISCLOSURE, BOX 903, LIBERTYVILLE, ILLINOIS 60048. PHONE:
(708) 395-6200. FAX: (708) 395-6022. TOLL FREE: (800) 235-1414
: For sub a message left on 800-235-1414 will do it
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1993 22:32:12 PDT
From: Alex Zelchenko
Subject: File 6--The "Offending" Full Disclosure Story (#2)
Here is the original story as it appeared in "Full Disclosure." It
will be followed by the text of a letter received by the publication.
The following pages highlight some companies and products that
exhibited at the 1991 National Technical Investigators Conference
(NATIA) show in Washington, DC.
NATIA is an organization of over 2300 law enforcement officers,
communications and security managers assigned to support technical
investigative activities in the major federal, state and local law
enforcement and intelligence agencies.
The NATIA membership is responsible for supplying all of the various
audio, video, photographic, specialized electronic and investigative
aids used in support of these sensitive bugging, wiretapping and
As with the 1990 show, there was a strong showing of covert video
systems. Cellular phone interception systems are now becoming
The following information has been complied from product literature
made available at the show. It should be remembered that NATIA has a
law enforcement membership and some of the products are only available
to such agencies. Additionally, some RF devices are not FCC approved
and therefore, only available to Federal law enforcement agencies.
Even though the sale of some devices may be limited to official law
enforcement agencies, the technology is relatively simple. For
example, the cellular phone monitoring equipment is sold only to the
law enforcement market. However, anyone wishes to exert a little elbow
grease can accomplish the same on their own. This should be taken as a
stern warning to those who have an expectation of privacy when using
their cellular phones. As the information shows, commercial units can
record the calls, as well as tracking by mobile phone number,
electronic serial number and also direction finding to physically
locate an individual using a cellular phone.
Harris Law Enforcement Products
TRIGGERFISH has a number of cellular phone based applications:
determining a suspects phone number, dialed number recorder, and
wiretapping. According to Harris, ``for the first time, law
enforcement is not at a disadvantage in tracking the high-tech
criminal.'' Additionally, the unit ``collects and integrates all
relevant data, including voice, directly from the ether.''
Box 91000, Melbourne, FL 32902. Phone: (800) 442-7747, Fax: (407) 768-4005
Reprinted from Full Disclosure, Box 903, Libertyville, Illinois 60048
Phone: (800) 235-1414
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1993 22:32:12 PDT
From: Alex Zelchenko
Subject: File 7--The Harris Letter Threatening Litigation against FD (#3)
May 26, 1993
Mr. Glen L. Roberts
Box 903 - FD24
Libertyville, Illinois 60048
Dear Mr. Roberts:
Your issue No. 24 of Full Disclosure has been brought to my attention
because of an apparently unauthorized advertisement on page 8 for a
Harris law enforcement product referred to as "Triggerfish." It is my
understanding that the publication of this advertisement was not
previously requested nor authorized by Harris. The unapproved use of
this advertisement constitutes a deceptive trade practice, which
would potentially subject you and your newspaper to civil liability.
Further, you have used our trademarks -- Harris and Triggerfish --
Lastly, you may have committed a felony under 18 USC 2512(1)(c)(i).
This criminal statute prohibits the placement in a newspaper or
magazine of an advertisement for an electronic product that is
primarily useful for the purpose of surreptitiously intercepting
electronic communications. Further, these actions on your part may
have also subjected Harris Corporation to such liability under this
You are hereby instructed to immediately desist from placing
advertisements or promotional material related to Harris electronic
law enforcement products in your newspaper. Any further actions of
this nature will be dealt with by filing a suit against you and your
Sincerely, /s/ John L. DeAngelis, Intellectual Property and Licensing
Harris Corporation Electronic Systems Section P.O. Box 37, Melbourne,
Florida 32902 Telephone 407-727-4000
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1993 22:32:12 PDT
From: Alex Zelchenko
Subject: File 8--The Full Disclosure Atty's Response to Harris (#4)
Drath & Dwyer
- Lawyers -
400 South Beverly Drive * Suite 214
Beverly Hills, California 90212-4402
Tel: (310) 364-3444 * Fax: (310) 858-7458
Tuesday, June 1, 1993
John L. DeAngelis Jr., Esq.
P.O. Box 37
Melbourne, FL 32902
Dear Mr. DeAndelis:
I write on behalf of Glen L. Roberts, the editor and publisher of the
magazine, Full Disclosure, in reply to your May 26 letter addressed to
him. In addition to advising Mr. Roberts, I serve as privacy law
columnist for his publication and co-host with him of "Full Disclosure
Live," a one-hour live radio program carried across the country on the
Let's Talk Radio Network.
It is shocking sophistry on your part to have characterized Full
Disclosure's editorial expression about the product, "Triggerfish," as
an "advertisement" Of course, I recognize your procrustean need to do
that, because "advertisement," is the operative word of the criminal
statute you cite.
Had you taken time to research even a few of the many cases in which
"advertisement" not only has been defined as the space one associated
with a product purchases from a publisher, but as well distinguished
from editorial expression or news reporting by such a publisher or his
or her subaltern, for example, an editor, you might have saved your
company the embarrassment that well may flow from your misguided
missive. Cary Grant couldn't make an Esquire magazine news article,
which used a photograph of his head, into an advertisement in the
Southern District of New York 20 years ago; I doubt you'll have any
greater success today, venue notwithstanding.
Respecting your assertion of trademark use without permission, we are
unable to locate any authority, statutory or decisional, that even
suggests that editorial mention of a product or service, which enjoys
registered or common law trade or service mark protection, obliges the
publisher to include an indication of such status or forbids such
publication "without permission." Perhaps, given your stated role as
intellectual property counsel, you can afford us the benefit of your
expertise in this realm.
What I find most troubling about your letter is your apparent
indifference to First Amendment law. A careful reading of the 1968
legislative history of 18 USC 2512 acquaints one with the fact that
Congress did not seek to abridge free press rights in proscribing the
advertising of "bugging" devices.
unknown." It continues to be Mr. Robert's persistent and pervasive
theme that for our democratic society to defeat the depredations of
privacy-invasive devices, it must know that they exist and how they
Hence, attempts like yours to chill or impair free exercise of
expression in the arena of such public affairs can only be viewed as
inimical to the legislative underpinnings of the statute involved. You
use of it is akin to the drunkard's fondness for the lamppost: more
for support than illumination. Really, sir, for a lawyer to tell a
reporter that there's potential criminality involved in writing about
a product in the marketplace should make you tremble to know that God
The First Amendment, you seem to require reminding, is an absolute bar
to the imposition of such government restraints of the press as you
erroneously think your cited statute imports. The press must be free
to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship. Guarding
little secrets, like the existence of your "Triggerfish," at the
expense of an informed representative government is about as tawdry a
legal proposition as I can imagine.
Let me add that your menacing Full Disclosure's editor with the
prospect of criminal charges, in our opinion, implicates issues of
professional responsibility. When lawyers in jurisdictions with which
I am familiar try that technique to obtain an advantage in a civil
dispute, they are subject to discipline. Is there no such sanction for
I invite your reply on the points raised, including your proposal as
to how we might avoid formal proceedings to right the wrong you have
done Full Disclosure. Failing your willingness to apologize or submit
this matter to an alternative dispute resolution mechanism for a
declaration of rights, I shall advise Full Disclosure to proceed with
an action under 28 USC 2201 as a possible predicate to seeking further
As a matter of professional courtesy, I wish to inform you that the
Harris Corp. officers and directors shown as recipients of copies of
this letter and its enclosure are not being sent a copy of your letter
to Mr. Roberts; it, I believe, more appropriately should reach them
from you. For your further information, the two other copy recipients
in addition to Mr. Roberts, namely, Messrs.. Ward and Rudnick, are,
respectively, our intellectual property adviser and our litigation
counsel. You doubtless know Mr. Ward from his prominence at the
trademark bar. Mr. Rudnick, who would handle a Rule 57 matter, if such
proves necessary, is a former federal prosecutor with the Los Angeles
Sincerely, /s/ Will Dwyer II
Copies: Richard L. Ballantyne, Esq., Mr. John T. Hartley, Mr. Joseph Boyd,
Mr. Lester Coleman, Mr. Ralph D. Denunzio, Mr. C. Jackson Grayson, Jr.,
Mr. George I. Meisel, Mr. Walter Raab, Mr. Robert Cizik. Mr. Joseph
Dionne, Mr. Alexander Trowbrige, Mr. Allan J. Huber, Mr. Glen L. Roberts,
Marvin L. Rudnick, Esq., Thomas J. Ward, Esq.
End of Computer Underground Digest #5.46