Michigan First With A Law That Could Outlaw VPNs

zaren writes "Holy frell, Taco, we're gonna be criminals! I was checking out Freedom to Tinker after reading the posting about that multi-state anti-VPN-style legislation, and I saw a new posting that says that Michigan has ALREADY passed such legislation, and it goes into effect on MONDAY, MARCH 31, 2003 . Guess I better tighten down the base station and batten down the hatches..."

Comments

Not one but two !!!

[mritunjai]

(Yes I did RTFA)

This law has not one but two offensive clauses-

1(b) Conceal the existence or place of origin or destination of any telecommunications service.

1 (c) To receive, disrupt, decrypt, transmit, retransmit, acquire, intercept, or facilitate the receipt, disruption, decryption, transmission, retransmission, acquisition, or interception of any telecommunications service without the express authority or actual consent of the telecommunications service provider.

While 1(b) is probably the most obnoxious clause, 1(c) is not far behind... it makes it a "felony" to eg. hook two televisions on single cable connection and even make it a felony offense to put NAT boxen !! At our dorm, for World cup we put a computer with TV tuner card connected to cable connection and then used it to stream the transmission for people to watch in their rooms... HELL now we'll be criminals (and that too 'felony'!!) for that...

Fuck.

Who said "America- land of free" must now be turning in graves.

Re:Not concealing anything.

[MillionthMonkey]

Every IP packet I pass through my ISP contains a source and destination IP address.
What else do they need to know?

Sec. 540c.
(1) A person shall not assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise an unlawful telecommunications access device or assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise a telecommunications device intending to use those devices or to allow the devices to be used to do any of the following or knowing or having reason to know that the devices are intended to be used to do any of the following:
(a) Obtain or attempt to obtain a telecommunications service with the intent to avoid or aid or abet or cause another person to avoid any lawful charge for the telecommunications service in violation of section 219a.
(b) Conceal the existence or place of origin or destination of any telecommunications service.
(c) To receive, disrupt, decrypt, transmit, retransmit, acquire, intercept, or facilitate the receipt, disruption, decryption, transmission, retransmission, acquisition, or interception of any telecommunications service without the express authority or actual consent of the telecommunications service provider.

The rest of the bill appears to provide support and procedural infrastructure for the section above.

Sorry.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO APPEAR AT A FORUM FOR THIS LAW

[HoneyBunchesOfGoats]

...then the above post makes a great analogy for the uninformed, uncaring politician:

Does the water company charge me more because I have more sinks than my next door neighbour? They may charge me more if I use more water but having more sinks doesn't matter, it is the flow that matters. Same should be true with a network.

This kind of simplification is what really appeals to politicians. Makes sure, if you attend a public formum to gauge opinion on such laws, that you say things like this. Is there anything else that should be said in simplified politician-speak? Please list anything and everything you can think of!

Re:What a strange world

[pi_rules]

Apparently it is legal to have a concealed weapon, but having a concealed cell phone or disabling caller ID violates the law.

I'll bite. I presume you're making a reference to Michigan relaxing it's handling of permits to Carry a Concealed Weapon (CCW) that occured about a year and a half ago from today. The media around here wasn't too for the idea, and they made it sound like every idiot out there could get one. I'm sure you looked up the legal rules behind getting one if this matter concerns you, but I'll repeat some of them here for other Slashdotter's that might not be from Michigan:

• You must be 21 years old.
  
• You must have a clean bill of mental health.
  
• You must complete an 8 hour pistol safety course.
  
• You must provide every adress you've lived at in the last 8 years.
  
• You must be fingerprinted, on your dime.
  
• You must provide them a photo with proper dimensions for your license.
  
• You must have not commied a misdemeanor in the past 3 years.*
  
• And there's a list of crimes that you cannot have commited in the last 8 years.
  

Once you meet all this criteria, you're subjected to a 30-90 day waiting period while they evaluate you, and before approval you must appear in front of a board so they can take a look at you and make sure you're not a total nut that talks to himself.

Now, my asterik after the 3 year misdemeanor thing. This means any type of misdemeanor, you know, like an expired license plate, fishing without a proper license (mistakes happen), getting caught with a beer when you're 20 years old.

On top of that, there's a slew of places that you cannot take one into. Namely schools (where they're probably needed most), any establishment that serves alcohol (Pizza Hut, Red Lobster), college classrooms or dorms, and religious worship buildings (unless you have permission). You can carry it to school though, if you stay in your car, and if the child you're dropping off is your own blood child. You can't drop off your step kids though, because people that drop off step kids at school are more likely to pull a gun and start firing that people dropping off their blood children. Or something.

Ah, and to go along with that rule about not taking it anywhere alcohol is served, you can't carry if you've got a BAC at or over 0.02 percent. That's less than a single beer. Come home from work still strapped, have a beer, and then take out the garbage and you'd better remember to remove your weapon before you step out of the house. You're in violation of the law if you don't. Wonderful.

So, if you really think Michigan's full of a bunch of gun toting conservatives you're wrong. It's full of a bunch of liberals who actually tightened the restricions on a CCW while making it look like every nutjob in Michigan could carry a pistol just to scare the snot out of people.

One more point, there's another segment of the population that can carry a gun: criminals. They don't have any of the restrictions the law abiding population does though. Nice that we gave them a list of places where they know good people CAN'T have guns now, isn't it?