regarding the loans of Walters and Good
because Neal was virtually totally dependent
for his income during this period of time
on those two individuals' contributions to his company.
Now, it's my understanding that Silverado
was in bad shape as early as 1987
with, I believe, one audit saying
that it should actually be closed.
What happened to delay a closure of Silverado?
Well, probably the thing that played the biggest role
in its delay was, yes, they did know by 1987
that Silverado was in serious trouble.
And certainly by 1988, they knew that this shop
should have been closed, and there's plenty
of regulatory documents that show that they were being warned
by their front-line examiners that this shop
was hemorrhaging red ink.
But there was a little problem in 1988.
We had an election coming up.
Ronald Reagan was closing out his eight-year term,
and George Bush was coming in behind him.
And the last thing in the world George Bush needed
during the campaign was to have his son
wrapped up in the kind of mess,
public relations mess, that we now see.
So the Colorado Savings and Loan authorities,
the state authorities, wanted to close Silverado
in October of 1988.
They were ready to do it.
The Fed stepped in from Washington and stopped it
and held off that takeover until after the election,
and in fact, the closure order on Silverado was issued on Wednesday,
November the 9th, 1988, one day after the presidential election.
Does this have any implications for others who have been involved
in these kinds of SNLs?
Well, you know, it's symbolic, I guess, more than anything else.
It's the government's way of saying we are going to handle these cases
even-handedly no matter who's involved.
And I guess we'll have to, when this all sorts out,
see whether, for example,
Neil was also named in the $200 million lawsuit.
The government filed recently to reclaim some of the losses at Silverado.
He's a defendant in that lawsuit.
And if they lose the case,
he will have his personal assets, theoretically anyway,
attached to pay whatever the settlement ends up being.
Of course, he's already begun preparing for this.
He bought a half-million-dollar home recently in Denver
and put it in his wife's name, not his name.
And when asked why he did that, his excuse was, quote,
it was for estate purposes.
But I suspect it was for legal purposes
because he knows he has some liability here.
Stephen Pizzo is author of the book Inside Job,
The Looting of America's Savings and Loans.
And I want to thank our engineer tonight, Anthony Sloan,
and our editors and reporters, Julie Cohen, Jenny Bourne,
212-279-3400.
Keep those phone calls coming in.
Also thanks to Paul DiRienzo, 212-279-3400.
I'm Amy Goodman in New York with Don Rush in Washington
for the WBAI Evening News.
And the following program you're about to hear on WBAI is rated NC-7.
If you're a child under seven years of age,
turn on Nightline or something.
Goodman in New York with Don Rush in Washington.
This is your captain.
This is your captain.
We are about to attempt a crash landing.
Please extinguish all cigarettes.
Place your tray tables in their upright locked position.
Your captain says, put your head on your knees.
Captain says, put your head in your hands.
Captain says, put your hands on your head.
Put your hands on your hips.
This is your captain.
This is your captain.
We are going down.
We are all going down.
Together.
And I said, uh-oh.
This is going to be someday.
Stand long.
This is the time.
And this is the record of the time.
This is the time.
And this is the record of the time.
Uh, this is your captain again.
You know, I've got this funny feeling I've seen us all before.
Why?
Because I've got eyes in the back of my head.
Why?
It's the heat.
Stand long.
This is the time.
And this is the record of the time.
This is the time.
And this is the record of the time.
Put your hands over your eyes.
Jump out of the plane.
There is no pilot.
You are not alone.
Stand long.
And this is the record of the time.
This is the time.
And this is the record of the time.
And this is the record of the time.
I've got five days ago.
And this is the record of the time.
I've got a link.
Let's go.
And this is the record of the time.
And this is the record of the time.
This record of the time.
It's the record of the time.
訂 wie sorry.
And this record of the time.
Unfortunately.
The record is worthétait de pequeñity.
Take care.
It's the record ofập imperial killer.
Judy is goingioso.
Schmidt will be issue.
And this record of the time.
It's cold outside.
It's cold outside.
Don't forget your mitten.
Hey, pal, how do we get to town from here?
And he said, we'll just take a right where they're going to build that new shopping mall.
Go straight past where they're going to put in the freeway.
And take a left to what's going to be the new sports center.
And keep going until you hit the place where they're thinking of building that driving bank.
You can't miss it.
And I said, this must be the place.
Oh, so . . .
Golden cities, golden towns . . .
Golden cities, golden towns . . .
Golden cities, golden towns . . .
Golden cities, golden towns . . .
Golden cities, golden towns . . . .
Golden cities, golden towns . . . .
And long cars and long lines
And great big signs
And they all say
Hallelujah
Yodelahiyu
Every man for himself
Mm-hmm, cool, cool
Gold city
Gold town
Thanks for the ride
Big sign
Hallelujah
Big sign
Beautiful
Beautiful
Beautiful
Beautiful
Beautiful
Beautiful
Beautiful
Beautiful
Aren't you
Lovely
Up mind
The
이번에
ues
Beautiful
B 가
You know, I think we should put some mountains here.
Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off of me?
And what about stairs?
Here's a man who lives a life in danger.
Everywhere he goes, he stays a stranger.
I'll be a stranger.
Mind if I smoke.
And he said...
Every man, every man for himself.
Every man, every man for himself.
All the way you say, I...
Big sign.
All they do...
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
Big sign.
cycle of computing that was used. Out of 4,000 laboratory employees, maybe a quarter used
the main computers. Each of these 1,000 accounts were tallied daily with the lectures kept inside
the computer.
And those are the sounds of Laurie Anderson after so many years. Back in 1982, that record
came out, Big Science, her debut album. We heard From the Air and Big Science, and that frantic
voice you heard in there towards the end was the voice of Clifford Stoll, reading from his book
The Cuckoo's Egg, which is a whole other story. And this is Emmanuel Goldstein. The program is
The Fifth Corner, and we have a special expanded marathon edition tonight. And there's a purpose
in mind with the special expanded marathon editions. The purpose is to raise money for this radio
station. And we want to make that process as painless as possible for all of you out there.
By showing your support for this radio station, you're enabling programs like this to continue,
and programs that have not yet even been thought of, to one day go on the air. It's a very important
thing to have in New York City, and that's why we need your support at 212-279-3400. To make it
easier for you, and to make it appealing to the folks that like to listen to this radio program,
we are offering subscriptions to the Hacker Quarterly 2600 magazine for every pledge of $55.
That's just $10 above the regular BAI membership pledge. So if you give a call to 212-279-3400,
you can take part in that offer. And for a pledge of $55, 2600 magazine will come faithfully to your home
for the next year. It's as simple as that. So we don't want to spend too much time on this because
we've got a lot of interesting things to talk about tonight. A couple of special guests are with us.
We have to bring in five new members this hour. So if you're out there, and you're not a member,
we need you. We need you to become a member, and you can become a member by pledging.
Pledging any amount, really, but you'll get something back immediately by pledging a minimum
of $45. And if you pledge $55, you will get $2,600 the Hacker Quarterly. Now, we also need
volunteers to come in and staff our phones, and that's throughout the week coming up, day and night.
So if you're interested in that, also give a call to that number. We have volunteers now in the tally
room. Things aren't too busy down there. We have a caller on the line, but I like to see two or three
phones ring, you know, because when you know there's people out there listening, you know,
you feel inspired to move ahead and keep going. We have a lot to talk about tonight, folks. We're
talking about computer hackers and the government and the threats that are in the eyes of each of
those from the others and all that kind of thing. So we want to get started with that. We want to keep
going. We have an expanded show tonight. We're going till 3.30 in the morning, but we do need to hear
from you at 212-279-3400. And the beauty of this is that there's a limited number of people in the
tally room. We have other people throughout the station, and when those phones start ringing,
it means people from all throughout the station go running down to the tally room, and it might be
the only time all night long that they see each other. But pleasantries are exchanged, and new people
are met, and everyone's happy. So we have three lines ringing. That's great. That's really great to
see. All those people can take advantage of the 2,600 offer. $55 pledge, you'll get one year of
2,600 magazine, the hacker quarterly, the only hacker magazine that dares to call itself a hacker
magazine. More about that later. Again, the phone number 279-3400. Four lines lit. Boy, I hope those
are all pledges. I mean, that is incredible. If those are all pledges, I am very, very happy. And
by showing your support, boy, it sure makes me look good. I mean, imagine if I can get five new members
like right away. Maybe I don't have to have to pitch anymore for the whole hour. Won't that be
incredible? Well, we'll be in touch with the tally room, but are those phones ringing? Yes,
there are phones ringing down there. 212-279-3400. Computer hackers in the news. You've noticed it
more than ever before over the last several months or so. And one person that has been learning
something, been covering that story and sort of developing along with the stories is a reporter
from the Village Voice, who we have on the phone with us. Julian DiBella, are you there? Yes,
I'm here, Manuel. Hi. How are you doing? I'm all right. Thanks for joining us tonight. And you are
kind of new to the computer hacker world, is that right? Yeah, well, you know, I'm still, you know,
outside of it looking in rather than a part of it, and definitely new. Uh-huh. We also have with us
from St. Louis, or close to St. Louis, actually, a person who has probably been the focal point of
the entire hacker world this year, the publisher of FRAC newsletter, the electronic newsletter, who
recently faced quite an ordeal, a trial where the government was attempting to prove that he was
publishing proprietary information, something the whole hacker world, the whole computer world,
as far as a potential threat to civil liberties and freedom of speech and that kind of thing.
On the phone with us is Craig Neidorf. Craig, are you there? I'm here. Okay. We have quite a few
things to ask you and, uh, and to talk about between the both of, uh, both of you. Uh, let me
start with Julian and ask why you saw an interest in computer hacking. You first, uh, I remember you
started, um, was it last year? Yeah, it was, uh, it started with a, uh, article I wrote for Spin
Magazine. Um, it was very introductory and it goes back before that. Um, when, uh, I started getting
interested through other sort of subcultural realms, um, you know, through the cyberpunk fiction of, uh,
William Gibson and through a sort of techno-utopian post-hippie school out on the West Coast, you know,
the whole whole, whole earth catalog thing that has recently gotten into a, a much more, uh,
technologically open, uh, perspective, um, seeing in, in new kinds of technology, um, not as much
of a threat as, as one used to in the, in the bad old days of the sixties and things, but,
um, um, also the threat, but also, um, you know, new possibilities for passion and for,
uh, kinds of liberation and communication that, that weren't there before. Um, and so, you
know, my sense in theory, having read, you know, these exciting science fiction books that
talked about, you know, computers and, and also, you know, read these West Coast people, uh,
was that, yeah, in theory, uh, there are possibilities, but where, where is the practice? And, uh, when
I got my first copy of 2600 magazine, I said, well, here it is, you know, these are, uh, people,
you know, a kind of lived anarchy going on here, um, you know, in the best sense of the word,
um, in relationship to the new technologies that are, you know, sort of growing up around
us. Um, and so, you know, and I had my own computer and a modem and I had been sort of
roaming around the world of, of bulletin boards, which anyone who's just, you know, sort of dived
in head first knows that, you know, bulletin boards in general are pretty stuffy, uh, can
be pretty pedantic stuffy places to hang out. Um, and, you know, and here in the back of
the 2600 were some numbers for some bulletin boards. And, uh, so I called one and immediately
I thought, whoa, this is a different scene. You know, this is, people were actually swearing
online, you know, using curse words and, uh, you know, without fear of being kicked off
by the sys-ops and people were actually using handles, you know, and not their real names.
It was just like a much more freewheeling sense of things. Um, that's kind of a microcosm,
I guess. Hackers feel free to use four letter words. So I guess that, uh, that sort of says
something about their attitude towards, uh, freedom of speech. Right, exactly. And, and,
uh, you know, uh, increasingly, you know, in the, given the, the cultural climate in this
country, you know, it's becoming increasingly politically significant, pathetically enough
to, you know, to use that type of language. Um, but that was just, you know, a vibe. Uh,
there wasn't a lot of specific, you know, technical, technical information being traded on this
particular BBS and, uh, uh, because it was, you know, such an open, uh, board. Um, and
then, you know, eventually I saw a reference to another board that I could call and, and
this was a more quote unquote clandestine board or more, uh, private board where, you know,
we, when you call, you're greeted with a whole questionnaire that says, you know, explain what
this acronym means, explain what, you know, are you a fad, you know, do you ever work for
a public? I think I know the board you're talking about too. Um, it's, it's, I guess what you
would call it would be an elite bulletin board. That's a hacker terminology. Right. Um, although,
you know, later after I wrote the piece and this came out, uh, you know, I, I got a lot
of help for, you know, suggesting that this board I had called actually was elite, uh, you
know, that because, um, I would say, and I hesitate to, to criticize, you know, anything
in, in the, in the hacker world, uh, because there's so much criticism going on outside of
it anyway. Um, but there is a certain elitism within the hacker community. Um, you know, so
I thought, yeah, here's an elite board, but then, you know, I was later told, no, this isn't
really elite, but it, you know, I was impressed when I first got on, uh, basically by bluffing
my way in, you know, looking through the pages of 2600 and saying, hmm, well, uh, you know,
this, this acronym must mean this and so forth. Um, well, since then you've written, uh, was
it three pieces? Uh, uh, there's no, I don't know any Frank. No, no, no Frank's here. Okay.
Someone, someone's doing an emergency interrupt. Uh, that's, that's, that's real clever. Uh,
but the only, the only consolation there is that it costs them a pretty penny. I think
emergency interrupts cost about $2 now. So, uh, uh, anyway, um, you've gone on to write
several articles for the voice, um, on hacking, each one seeming to get a little bit more intense.
So what I'm wondering is how, have you, uh, become kind of an expert on hacking?
Well, I, you know, I'm no expert. Uh, I could never, I mean, the, the, the funny thing about,
you know, as, as, as many hackers have pointed out, um, Eric Bloodaxe pointed out, you know,
in a, in a, something he wrote for the net a while back, um, Telecom Digest, in Telecom Digest,
uh, you know, part of the thing that, that people can't handle about hackers is, is that these
are, are teenagers and, uh, young adults who, who are, are experts beyond, you know, far beyond
what, you know, older people have achieved. And I, and I certainly would never claim, you
know, around a hacker to be an expert in, you know, in the hacker world. Um, but relative
to other journalists, boy, you know, I, I, I would say that I have, you know, a better
knowledge of what goes on. I mean, I called, uh, uh, just for instance, recently I, uh, talked
to, uh, uh, a guy with the police, police department here in Long Island, um, who was
involved in arresting a 14 year old kid in Manhattan, uh, and a number of other, his name
is, uh, Delaney, right? Delaney, yeah. I forget what his first name is, but yeah, he's, uh,
he's had quite a bit to say about hackers in the past few weeks. Yeah. And, uh, you, you
spoke directly to him. Yeah. And, and, and, you know, and I, and he, you know, I started
asking him, well, they'd had a list of, of, uh, people's names in the, in the paper that
had been arrested. And, uh, so I asked him, well, what are their handles? Can you give
me their handles? And he, you know, paused for a second and said, you know, of all the
journalists that have called me in the last few weeks, you're the first one that's ever
asked, you know, what the handles are, you know, which just gives you a sense of, of the
conception, you know, and the degree of, uh, education that, uh, journalists in general
have about the hacking community. You know, there's a very, uh, low amount of education
on this. And I'm told by other people that on most stories that the media does, uh, they
know virtually nothing about the stories that they're covering. And that's, that's sad.
It's also quite dangerous. Uh, what has happened in the hacker world, the hackers do not trust
the media and for a very good reason, because, uh, they've been misrepresented so many times.
Um, to give an example of the most recent case, um, uh, one of the hackers that was raided in
New York city fairly recently within the last couple of months, um, was said to have accessed,
um, free telephone lines somehow. So the New York post took that to mean that he actually
went underground through manhole covers and, uh, was able to, to access the lines that were
underneath there. And that's, that's exactly what they printed in their pages.
Indiculous.
Uh, and you know, not to pick on the post, although I do like doing that. Uh, it's, um,
it's something that happens in media of all kinds, radio, TV, uh, newspapers, magazines.
So it's, uh, it's unhealthy and it's good to see somebody come along that, uh, that seems
to be learning something. I've noticed that with your articles, uh, the last one, the, the
front page article about hackers in the village voice, uh, it really seemed to capture the
spirit of, of what it's all about. Uh, someone reading that article, it's not going to sit
back and say, well, these, these hackers are, you know, should be locked up and, uh, and,
uh, they're a threat to mankind. They're going to invade my personal life, you know, and all
the garbage you get when you, when you read the, the normal newspapers, you know?
Mm-hmm. Um, yeah. Also, I tried to give, you know, a sort of, uh, flavor of just the
whole cultural milieu, um, which a lot of people have a very stereotyped sense of, you know, well,
white, middle-class, nerdy, uh, you know, socially inept kids, right? Um, and, you know,
here in New York, uh, in any case, the, uh, the hacker world is, is multiracial. It crosses
class lines, um, and just from, you know, as a lot of people could tell from looking
at the picture on the cover of the voice, um, you know, these are not nerdy-looking
kids. In fact, we got a number of, you know, calls or, or a number of reactions from people
saying, well, why didn't you use real hackers? Why did you use models? You know? Um.
That's, that's really something. The, uh, the hackers showed up, though, with, um, uh, masks
on. Yeah. Well, that was because our lawyers wouldn't let them appear on the cover with
their, you know, faces exposed. And, you know, some of them also had quite legitimate.
Now, you know, I, I suppose a lot of people would say at this point, well, you know, if,
if hackers believe that what they are doing is not wrong, why all the fear? Why do they
protect their identities and cover up their faces? And I think perhaps this might be a good
lead-in, uh, to, to the story of Craig Neidorf, um, the, um, actually, by definition,
Craig is not even a hacker. He was a publisher of, uh, material that, uh, is of interest to
hackers and anybody that's interested in how telephone systems and computer systems work.
Uh, the ordeal that, uh, that he has been through over the past several months, uh, is
enough to, uh, to shock just about anyone, I think, and to, uh, to pretty dramatically illustrate
the need for protection from, uh, those eyes that are always out there watching, eyes and
ears. It's a frightening situation, folks. And with that, uh, let me give the, uh, floor
to Craig. Craig, if you could tell us, uh, when it all began. First of all, give us some
background as to what Frack was. That was the magazine that you worked on.
Well, I'll go into that in a second. I'd like to take a moment to focus what you were saying
about the anonymity, uh, ideal about the hackers with the, uh, you know, not wanting to be seen
wearing masks and that kind of thing. Right. Ironically, if I had taken that attitude,
uh, it's possible this wouldn't have happened. Um, it's because I was so public that they were,
you know, able to come after me so quickly. You made absolutely no attempt to hide your
identity, did you? Well, not, not really. We, uh, Frack, an electronic publication, uh, it's
been compared to, say, being a wire service as opposed to a magazine in some ways, just so people
get a better idea of what, how it, uh, worked. Every copy of the magazine that was sent over
this wire service, uh, carried with it the network address that it was sent from. This network address
translated at the University of Missouri, where I, a student, uh, came out as my student number,
which is unique to just, to, uh, to me, like a social security number might be.
So basically somebody would, would call a particular computer system, they would receive
mail from a certain location in the country, and that would be your identification code, correct?
That's correct. Okay. And it could only be received by computer. It was not mailed through
the U.S. mail. That's correct. Okay. Now, uh, what, what kind of information was, was in that
magazine, was it, uh? Uh, at different times, there was often news, uh, current events relating
to the hacker community, uh, such as, uh, announcements of conventions or maybe stories
about them, uh, raids of hackers, you know, that got into some sort of trouble. Oftentimes we
covered stories about litigation involving some of the telephone companies or concerning, uh,
nuke firms or divestitures and that sort of thing. Now, did you ever print material that
you thought was, uh, you know, might get you into trouble, illegal things, codes, passwords,
that kind of thing? No, we always made it our policy never to print any kind of, uh, legitimate
codes or passwords, you know, in frac. Uh, sometimes articles were sent that contained them. Uh, we
never knew if they really worked or not since we never tried them, but we just decided to take
the Safeway out and just sort of remove the material. Uh-huh. If it was ever received.
So, what, as you were putting out this magazine, and when, when did the magazine begin coming
out? Well, it started in, uh, well, the exact date of the first issue, or the release of the
first issue was November 17th in 1985. Now, in all that time as you were doing this, did you
ever think that the government would try to shut you down? Sometimes, you know, just because we,
perhaps they wouldn't like what we had to say. Uh, but as time went on and we never really heard any
kind of complaints, it just sort of didn't become a legitimate fear anymore. So, now the events of
this year, uh, the government tried, uh, to convict you, uh, based upon something that you published.
They tried and they failed, quite miserably, I might add, uh, which we'll get into in a moment.
But, uh, despite that, frack is no more. Uh, now perhaps you could embellish upon that a little bit
and tell us how they, they lost the case, but how they also won by, by accomplishing what it was
they set out to do. Well, in, in response to your earlier question about, uh, when the events started
taking place, it was, uh, January the 18th of this past, of this current year in 1990, I received a
visit, uh, originally from a representative of the University of Missouri who served me with some
papers concerning a, uh, a subpoena that had been made on my files, uh, not just my files from the
university mainframe, but for some reason, all of my academic files, grade transcripts and, uh,
things of that nature. Uh, with him and waiting just a couple floors below was two agents from the
United States Secret Service and a representative from Southwestern Bell Security. And that, that's
basically when it started. They, uh, I don't think they really knew what they were after exactly,
but they just took anything I had to say and just found ways to sort of twist around.
Now, what were your feelings at that point when, uh, when you realized they were there looking for
something? Uh, did you feel like things were going to work out? Did you feel it was the end of the
world? Well, I, I sort of had one of those, uh, sinking feelings, you know, in your belly,
going down your throat. Uh, it's not, I don't think it's fun to be confronted by an authority figure
in general, because, you know, it usually means that something's gone wrong or someone has found
some sort of, uh, displeasement of some kind. Originally though, the impression that they gave
me was that I was not in any kind of trouble at all, that they were just kind of conducting some
background information. So I was very open and honest with them. Uh, you know, I didn't have
anything to hide. And so I told them everything they wanted to know. Uh, with, you know, which it,
um, it helped me and it hurt me. It, uh, it hurt me because they, you know, they interpreted what I
said in a perspective that they wanted to rather than the perspective it was intended. But at the
same time, it, when it came out later at trial that I, you know, all the information, you know,
that I was open and honest about it, uh, that was, um, it was very good.
What eventually happened in the trial? Perhaps you want to, uh, detail that at this point.
Well, officially the trial went on for, well, the first day of trial was actually just jury
selection followed by three days of testimony. And on the fifth day, the charges were officially
dropped, uh, by the United States attorney's office in Chicago. Now this, this all centered
upon, um, the infamous 9-1-1 document. What, what was that document? Document. Well, uh, essentially
it was a, a text file, roughly 11 pages in length, sort of a, um, an overview of some of the
administrative and, and, and, I guess, bureaucratic functions of, um, the responsibilities of each
of the different offices within the telephone company. For instance, it might say that, uh,
this department will handle installation of 9-1-1 service, but, you know, this other department
will handle complaints and repair. And, you know, this department over here will handle maybe
upgrades. It, um, it just was real general. It had, uh, virtually no computer information
whatsoever. It was just sort of a... It was real boring, too, wasn't it? Pardon? It was
real boring as well, from what I recall. Uh, yeah, it, it was kind of boring. Uh-huh. Now,
uh, correct me if I'm wrong. The, uh, the government valued this, uh, this document based upon what
it was told by, uh, uh, uh, by Bell South, uh, valued at over, uh, 70, $79,000. Well, yeah, yeah,
Bell South, uh, experts, and experts is in quotes, obviously, valued the information or valued the
document that appeared in FRAC at, um, roughly, well, the exact figure they gave was $79,449.
Now, what did the document actually turn out to be available for?
Well, the... Actually, a superior document containing not just the information found in
the FRAC article, but even more information, is available from, uh, a catalog that's published
by Bellcore, which is sort of the think tank of all the, uh, regional Bell operating companies.
There's an 800 number that you can call to get this catalog and to order documents, and this
particular one retails for $13.
$13, so, uh, that's a, that's a, a bit of a discount there.
It's a considerable discount.
Now, for you...
You have to give them a little bit of credit, though, in that they did revalue the document
before trial to, uh, $23,900.
So they shaved about $50,000 off.
That's, that's right.
But, uh, while we can laugh at this and say it's absurd, uh, you've paid quite a price,
uh, for, for finding out that that document was, in fact, uh, virtually worthless.
Uh, you want to detail?
Anyone, I think, that, uh, ever took a look at it could see that it was a worthless document.
Uh-huh.
Yeah, I mean, as soon as I saw the document, uh, which was shortly after, actually, I saw
it last year when it, uh, was originally, uh, published.
Uh, but I took a close look at it after all this started happening, and in my wildest imagination,
I could not imagine how somebody could think that was worth something, or, or it contained
trade secrets, or was, uh, going to harm the company in any way by getting out.
It was, it was literally, you know, how 911 systems work, uh, and very, very fuzzy details
at that, um, something that I think everybody has a right to know, uh, and, and nothing
proprietary, at least nothing I could see.
Uh, it seems that that has been confirmed, finally.
They admit, yes, there is nothing really sensitive here.
It's available to the public, and it's not expensive at all, and it's, uh, you know,
there's nothing secret in here, yet you had to go through a trial to find this out.
Now, why?
How, how, how come it worked out this way?
I, I'm not sure.
I think, uh, a lot of people just didn't know what they were doing to a certain extent.
I, I, I'm not going to cast blame here.
I, in fact, it's a topic I kind of want to stay away from right now, as there's, uh, some
pending litigation concerning this, uh, you know, with relation to the telephone companies.
Um, what exactly have you had to go through?
Uh, well, it's, it's, it's not easy when, you know, the, uh, Secret Service appears on
your doorstep.
Uh, and like I said, on January the 18th, I, I was a little worried, but I still, at
the time, thought everything was going to be okay.
They'd left me with the impression that, you know, I cooperated, then they'd be putting
in a good word for me that I, I wasn't, you know, I wasn't really in trouble.
They just were trying to gather information on the person who had sent me the document.
Uh, uh, a, uh, federal search warrant was issued for, uh, my room in, I was living in a fraternity
house, and so I only occupied, you know, one room in the house.
So they had a search warrant for that room, and they, they generally have these, uh, descriptions
of what they're looking for, pretty broad.
Uh, and so I, I took a look at that, and I, I feared that everything I owned was about
to leave.
I didn't sleep for probably three weeks after that.
I mean, maybe I'd lay unconscious for two hours or something, but, you know, you don't
really sleep.
It was a lot of anxiety, uh, it was very rough on my parents.
They just, they just couldn't believe this was happening.
I couldn't believe it was happening.
Lots of my friends said to me that I'm just not the type of guy that's something I'm
like, this happens, too.
And maybe that was some of the irony of the situation.
My sister, in turn, kind of tried to ignore it completely.
Um, she just clearly couldn't, you know, handle what was going on to, to a much greater extent.
And, uh, I couldn't discuss it in front of her or around her at all, because it would,
it would just drive her, uh, kind of crazy, I guess.
Well, one thing I've learned dealing with, with many cases like this, of course, yours
is probably the most extreme, uh, people react very strangely when the government starts
moving against them.
And when you have a room full of Secret Service agents suddenly burst through your door and
start searching for anything computer-related, a lot of people act very strangely.
You say your sister acted strangely.
I imagine quite a few of your friends probably acted strangely, too.
That's true.
Uh, I had, some people, well, broke off ties with me altogether, um, prompted by, you know,
other reasons to be certain.
One of the, uh, people I was kind of involved with was, uh, my best friend, and was also
co-publisher of the magazine.
Uh, we had spoken immediately after this had started happening, but soon after that, both
our attorneys recommended that we, you know, we cease all communications, which was pretty
pretty rough to do, and we'd been roommates, uh, you know, prior to that, and best friends
since, I'd say, uh, the fourth grade.
Now, and you say that you were co-publishers, yet no charges were filed against, against him,
and all the charges were filed against you.
Oh, there's some reason for that, and, um, some of which I, I can't go into exactly.
Uh-huh.
But, uh, no charges were filed against him at the time.
I believe that they were using me sort of as a test.
If the government, I mean, the government, uh, prosecutor in this case, uh, did promise
that, and he is, you know, when, he said when he gets me convicted, that, uh, my co-publisher
would have been indicted within, you know, the first time the grand jury convened after
that date.
So it's not like they weren't attempting to go after him.
I think they were just, uh, biding their time.
Uh-huh.
So the trial began this summer in July.
Well, I'm, I'm, uh, moving up to that point.
Oh, okay.
Go ahead.
I, uh, this all started taking place, the 18th of January was sort of four days into the
school semester.
I had just come off of, uh, a semester in the fall where I, I finally, you know, started
doing very well academically.
I mean, I, I was an okay student, but I, I finally pulled some really decent grades, and
then I was looking to make another really good semester out of it.
Um, but I was, you know, I was turned around by this.
I had to drop almost all of my classes because of this.
I was, I was missing too much class.
I, I couldn't handle it.
Uh, I couldn't concentrate on anything because my mind was always, you know, wrestling with
what was going to happen to me because of the, uh, these government raids.
Um, which ultimately is causing me to stay in school an extra semester here, but, uh,
that's, that's getting something else later, but then, uh, I was always having to leave
town on the weekends.
The, uh, the fraternity I was living in, the trustees there, concerned partially about
bad publicity and so forth, convened to, there was some talk about having me fully expelled
from the fraternity just because I was accused of a crime, and what ultimately happened with
that is I was suspended.
I was allowed to live into the house, but I was not, uh, exactly a full member.
I wasn't supposed to actually attend any functions at the time.
They did this, they say, to protect themselves.
Um, but the bottom line is, when someone gets indicted, 95% of the time, yeah, that's a statistic
that just sort of goes around.
95% of the time, they are convicted, and because of that, people look at you, and when they
see you're on the news, when they see you are, you are indicted, to them, you know, you
are as good as convicted, and that's just the way, the way things go.
And I guess in some cases, even after you're found innocent, you're still thought of as
guilty.
Um, is that 95% figure, is that, uh, all indictments or just federal indictments?
I, well, I, I'm not sure.
Uh, I would imagine it's federal.
Uh-huh.
Um, the, uh, I, the first attorney I went to in St. Louis, he, um, we'd kind of started
to set up a meeting, you know, with the attorney's office, the U.S. attorney's office in Chicago,
where I would go up and, and just, you know, another question and answer session to kind
of hopefully explain what was going on, so they'd see that it was very harmless, and,
you know, nothing illegal was taking place.
unknown to me, the, uh, government had already been to the grand jury and presented all the
information they, they had to, uh, get me indicted, including testimony that the 9-1-1 document
was a program that could control 9-1-1, and that, of course, the fictitious value of, uh,
almost $80,000.
And that's, yeah, you just touched upon a very important aspect to all of this.
When this case first broke, it was being reported by all of the, uh, all the media sources as a
program, uh, that, that you were accused of publishing a program that could control the 9-1-1, uh, uh,
switches and all that kind of thing, and when in actuality it was an 11-page document.
How do you think things can get so distorted?
Well, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say that they didn't do it on purpose.
Um, perhaps it was just a, a miscommunication between, you know, the attorney's office and
perhaps some of the media, or between the reporter and his editor.
Well, uh, we have a, we have a journalist here, Julian DeBell from The Voice.
How do you think such a thing happened?
Well, it happened because the, the press release, uh, as I understand it, the, the press release
that, uh, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Chicago, um, published, uh, at the time of the announcement
of the, uh, of the indictment, uh, simply said that it was a program.
I mean, it was right in there.
And then, and, and it even said so getting into the indictment, but, but once, if you read
it carefully, um, you know, you could tell that what they were talking about was a document,
um, but journalists, as I said, you know, are, are already pretty hazy about the whole
world of computers and, you know, and they're pressed for time and, you know, they're not
going to sit around analyzing, uh, an indictment, um, you know, to the detriment of Craig.
You know, something interesting about the, the, uh, about, I guess, any government, uh,
press release concerning an indictment, there's a paragraph that follows these things at the
bottom that talks about how a person is innocent until proven guilty and, you know, how just
because they're indicted does not say anything about them.
Uh, and it's issued with all the press releases that go to the different news publications, but
you never see them print that part.
And you also never see them print in, uh, in, in big headlines when somebody is, is found
innocent.
Right.
Well, there's, you know, one exception I saw to this, as far as, you know, front page headlines
go with the Houston Chronicle.
They're the only paper I know that, you know, had a front page article talking about, uh, you
know, when the charges were dropped.
Uh-huh.
That's, that's something worth noting.
The Houston Chronicle?
Right.
The reporter down there, his name is, uh, Joe Abernathy.
Uh-huh.
Now, you know, there was also a very good article in The Voice.
Written by yours truly.
That's right.
Thank you.
Well, you know, there, there are several magazines, newspapers that do have reputable journalists
and, uh, uh, in the hacker world, we, we try to, um, uh, to keep in touch with those
people and not talk to the people that are just going to get the story wrong all the time.
And I don't think that's, uh, that's a bad attitude to have.
I think it's a very realistic one.
And, uh, I was talking about, uh, what took place throughout the semester.
I was always traveling, you know, to whether it be, uh, Chicago or St. Louis.
So not always just for lawyer meetings, but sometimes just because I, I couldn't handle
just being down there, you know, at school.
You know, I just had to get away, get, maybe just go home and, you know, kind of just make
sure my mom was okay or something like that.
Uh, now you were facing a pretty lengthy time in jail, right?
Well, at the time, now the first indictment, uh, in a sense, I guess I was indicted twice.
There was a, a superseding indictment in June, but in the first indictment, the maximum, uh,
time would have been something like, uh, 31 years.
And there was also like a fine of some $122,000 associated with that.
That's for publishing a newsletter in this country.
That's right.
That's, that's incredible.
Now, right at the, uh...
And how, how old are you, Craig?
Well, right now I'm 21.
You're 20, so you were 20 at the time of this?
Well, I was 19 when I published the article.
Uh-huh.
20 when I was indicted.
Well, now, what kind of message does this send to you as somebody, uh, aspiring journalist,
uh, to have such a harsh reaction from, from the government on, on something you published?
Well, it sends a message, all right.
Um, I'm not sure, you know, what it is or what...
It's, it's very much politics, I think.
Well, I mean, do you feel embittered by all this?
Well, it, it depends towards whom.
See, one of the things that kind of came out at the end of the trial was that, um, you know,
the man at the top actually, you know, uh, gave the word to, you know, dismiss the case.
And so I, you know, for a long time I just felt that the entire, the U.S. Attorney's Office,
you know, was sort of a corrupt organization because of this.
But as I learned, it really, you know, it really is not a bad office.
It's just sometimes some people, you know, get the message wrong.
Um, and, um, when it came time to do the honorable thing, that's what they did.
So you're saying basically the system works?
No, I don't think that, I'd, I'd say the system works.
If the system worked, this wouldn't have happened in the first place.
Uh-huh.
Uh, in, right at the beginning of May and just prior to the first day of, uh, finals week
at college, I received a call from the, um, assistant vice chancellor here at the University
of Missouri.
And the lady there was, wanted to speak to me about, uh, disciplinary action against me.
You know, remember, this all-star taking place as far back as January.
Now, the whole semester had passed by.
And the first day of finals week, they want to start laying something like this on me.
Um, which is sort of, I refused to meet with her at the time, because I was not going to
issue any kind of public statement or anything to that effect.
So you had to deal with, uh, with your frat house wanting to kick you out with, with the
school, uh, wanting to do some kind of disciplinary action against you right before finals.
You had to deal with the U.S. government breathing down your neck.
You had to deal with, with friends who were, uh, reacting in weird ways.
Relatives reacting in strange ways.
And plus, uh, your own inner self.
Uh, what, what gave you strength throughout all this?
I mean, I don't think I could do that.
I don't know.
It, sometimes I would get, um, I didn't have access to computers, really.
I mean, I just stopped using a modem altogether.
You know, I still, I had a computer to use for, you know, typing up an essay or a term
paper or something like that.
Uh, but sometimes people would send me printouts of discussions being taking place on bulletin
boards or, uh, in certain magazines like, uh, with the new, what's called the Computer
Underground Digest, uh, that's distributed from Northern Illinois University.
And that's also an electronic publication, as yours was.
Right.
Uh, that one's run by, uh, Professor Jim Thomas and, uh, Gordon Meyer.
Uh-huh.
And if there's one good thing to come out of all this, it's the creation of that newsletter.
Uh, because, uh, it's, you know, it's important to get the message out.
Uh, a voice of sanity in all this, uh, all this craziness.
You know, it's, it's such a precious thing to have.
Yeah, the, that, when I started seeing people's reactions, you know, and who was kind of there
for me and some of the talk going on, it helped.
It, um, you know, it helped a lot just to know that, that there were some people that,
you know, could see past all of the, uh, the, uh, a lot, you know, what really bothered
me the most was some of the newspaper articles that claimed that there were all these millions
of lives in jeopardy because of this.
Uh, there were actually people that were very upset with me when they, after reading that
because, you know, they, they believed it.
So, uh, to, to, to illustrate that, uh, you published a document explaining how, uh, the
911 telephone system works and that gets translated into you distributing a program that can actually
be used to disrupt the 911 system itself.
That's, that's how distorted it all got.
I think the way they came across to a lot of people was that I personally, uh, almost did
this.
Oh, that you personally logged in and, and, okay, take it one step further then.
Yeah.
Uh, in actuality though, uh, I believe you never even called any of these systems yourself.
You were a publisher.
I didn't even have a number to call.
Uh-huh.
Not that I would have called, but that, yeah, that's, uh, right from the onset.
See, and the article never gives any phone numbers.
Um, and that, that was pretty much what happened right there in May.
Uh, the original court date, of course, was scheduled for April, uh, fourth, well, April
16th, I guess.
And that was postponed, uh, mainly so I could finish the semester in school, but also largely
because we need more time to prepare.
We pulled together, uh, some motions to be filed, uh, three very important motions to dismiss
the charges, and those were filed at the end of April, and the answer to those was given
right towards the end of May, towards the beginning of June.
Um, and in one, one instance, some charges were, well, they weren't dismissed because
the, the prosecution decided that our motion was correct and dropped them themselves when
they went ahead and superseded the indictment in June.
You see, this, what they did with that is that they, uh, just before the new court date,
which was going to take place in June, they came up with a new indictment alleging a lot
more, uh, wire fraud charges, but dropping charges of concerning the Computer Fraud and
Abuse Act of 1986.
It was just, uh, you know, something else to stick us with.
So basically, you were re-indicted.
What was the maximum penalty for your new indictment?
Well, looking at, I don't know what, you know, how it's really tallied, because, uh, you
know, I wasn't paying too much attention to that.
I, getting, you know, having it happen to me, I just couldn't really face that possibility.
But, uh, the interstate transportation of stolen property, uh, counts, there was three
of them, have a maximum penalty of ten years each.
The wire fraud counts have a maximum penalty of seven years each, or, no, excuse me, five
years each.
There was, uh, an 11-count indictment where ten of the counts focused on me, and if you
add up seven wire frauds and ten stolen property counts, that comes out to be, uh, 65 years.
I don't even know what the fine would have been.
That's unbelievable.
We're speaking with, uh, Craig Neidorf, um, a, um, college student, um, who published a
newsletter and was almost put in jail for publishing that newsletter.
Uh, quite a shocking story, uh, a story of, of, of hell, really.
Uh, starting in January, only, only, actually, it has not yet ended because, uh, the ordeal
is still there with, with expenses and, uh, and, uh, aftershocks and all that kind of thing.
It's the, the kind of thing you just don't think can happen here, but it does.
It happens here.
And, uh, it happens to people that, as Craig said, it's not supposed to happen to people
like me.
Uh, it's, um, it's, it's, it's an, it's got me speechless.
That's what it is.
It's, it's something that we should all be concerned with and all be educated about.
And, uh, that's why we're talking about this tonight on The Fifth Corner.
Uh, my name's Emmanuel Goldstein.
You're listening to WBAI.
And we have to, at this point, ask for your help to keep this radio station going, to keep
news like this coming your way.
Actually, we don't want to keep news like this coming your way.
But, uh, if you don't hear about it here, you're not going to hear about it anywhere
else.
If you're sitting there at home or in your car or wherever you have got a radio turned
on, ask yourself this question.
Have you heard this story before?
Have you heard of what Craig Neidorf has gone through of, uh, of the real threat of putting
out a newsletter in this country and how you can, you can pay for it in many, many ways.
If it's something that you have not heard before, ask yourself, would you ever have
heard this story if WBAI were not here?
With that in mind, please give us a call at this point and show your support.
And what we are willing to do is throw in a year subscription of 2600 Magazine, the Hacker
Quarterly, where you can learn all the details about this and many other hacker stories, uh,
as well as when there's, when there's time, uh, stories on hacking itself, how hacking
really works, how computer systems are penetrated, how the phone company is, um, is either ripping
people off or is open to, uh, uh, to incursions themselves.
279-3400, area code 212, a pledge of $55 will get you one year of 2600 Magazine, the Hacker
Quarterly.
We do need to see those phones start ringing and then we can go back to, uh, Craig Neidorf
and, uh, um, Julian DeBell from the Village Voice.
Now, uh, we're going to cut over to the tally room and is our tally coordinator there?
And then you can call it up again.
Why didn't you?
Ah, I guess there's a conversation going on in there.
Okay.
Well, uh, while that's happening, uh, let's get those phones ringing.
There are no callers on the line.
Uh, 279-3400 is our phone number.
We need to see at least two more calls come in before the hour strikes and then we can go
back to, uh, to this shocking tale.
And I don't mean to sound sensationalist by saying shocking tale, but damn it, this is
a shocking tale.
This is not the kind of thing that's supposed to be happening in this, in this country.
Uh, there's supposed to be freedom of speech.
There's supposed to be the freedom to, to say and to publish and to do what, what you've,
you want to say.
Uh, there was no illegal information posted or spread about here.
There was no fraudulent, uh, goings-ons yet.
But you see the results here.
We see someone that has almost had to drop out of school, someone who has been forced
to, uh, to curtail his publication, someone who has a massive, massive legal expense to
deal with.
And, uh, if you're feeling really generous tonight, folks, we'll, we'll be giving out
the address for, uh, the Legal Defense Fund in just a few minutes too.
But we do need to see those phones start ringing 279-3400.
Show your support for WBAI.
Keep the, uh, the, the news as it happens coming to you.
Because as I said before, you are not going to hear this anyplace else.
And if you don't hear it anyplace else, you're not going to know about it.
And if you don't know about it, it will keep happening and it will get worse.
And eventually, one day, you will be affected by it.
Now, uh, you know, I don't mean to overdramatize this and say if you don't support WBAI, uh,
we're going to fall into a totalitarian state.
Now, that's not quite what's going to happen.
But, we may fall into an ignorant state.
And ignorance is, uh, a very good friend of totalitarianism.
Believe me.
279-3400, area code 212.
We do need to see those calls start coming in.
For a pledge of $45, you'll be a, a regular member of WBAI.
You can proudly walk down the street and say you're a regular member of WBAI.
And people will step aside for you, I'm sure.
For $55, only $10 more, you can get a full year of 2600 magazine
mailed straight to your house or your P.O. box or your grandmother's house or anywhere you want.
You'll learn all about these things as they happen, which, uh, is a lot sooner than most people will.
I mean, imagine how many people out there don't even know,
don't have a clue as to what's going on in, in the hacker world.
You've probably at some point said to yourself,
what does computer hacking have to do with me?
Well, if you're listening tonight, listening to the story of Craig Neidorf and, uh,
and how his magazine was shut down,
you can see that it can relate to many, many other ways of life.
You know, maybe it's a, it's a hacking magazine today.
Maybe it's a, it's a cultural magazine tomorrow, you know, or,
or somebody doesn't like the way certain art is presented,
or somebody doesn't like a certain political ideology.
You know, it's all connected and, uh, it doesn't even have to be,
you know, a plot of some sort.
It doesn't have to be somebody saying, okay, we've got the hackers.
Now we're going to, you know, we're going to get the, uh, the gays and lesbians.
Now we're going to get the minority groups of, uh, whatever choice we feel like doing.
You know, that doesn't have to be a plot,
but it just sort of happens, you know, it, uh, you, you attack one group,
there's one less group, then you attack the next group.
It just happens.
It's, uh, it's, it's, it's sort of the public, uh, public way of looking at things, you know?
So we have to be educated.
We have to know what's happening.
We have to, uh, remain alert.
We have to spread the word, you know?
You should, uh, tell somebody what you heard tonight on the radio
because odds are there's a lot of people out there that did not hear this.
So you can help out by talking to other people, by educating them, by spreading the word.
But you can help us out now, most immediately, by calling 212-279-3400.
I'm going to attempt to speak to Tali again.
Tali, are you there?
I guess not.
Okay, well, they don't have the speaker up.
That's why they can't hear me.
But it sounds like, sounds like they're busy down there.
It sounds like they're talking to people.
Tell you what, one more call comes in.
If I see one more pledge come in, we'll go back to Craig and, uh, and Julian.
And, uh, we'll be continuing with this story because there's a lot more to talk about.
Remember, 212-279-3400 for a pledge of $55.
You will get thrown in, on top of everything else, a copy, uh, or a full year of 2600 Magazine,
The Hacker Quarterly.
And in addition to that, of course, you'll be getting the WBAI Folio every month.
So you know what is on the air.
That's right.
We're the only radio station around that actually has programs that change from month to month.
So the Folio is a very necessary tool.
212-279-3400.
Thanks to all those of you who called in.
And if you're thinking about calling, please do because it's one sure way you can make a difference.
And, uh, hopefully Craig and, uh, and, uh, Julian are still here.
You guys still there?
I am.
Okay.
Sorry to, uh, to, uh, put you on hold like that.
We do want to continue with the, uh, with the story.
Uh, before we go back to Craig, Julian, any, um, any perspective on what, what you've heard
so far?
Um, has this jived with what, uh, what you understood the story to be?
Absolutely.
And, and, you know, Craig has really gone through a, uh, a nightmare.
And, you know, a lot of scary issues have, have, uh, come up, especially about the status
of, uh, the press in a computerized society.
Um, you know, this, this is how the First Amendment gets eroded.
I mean, this is, uh, we have a whole history of this in, in this century, uh, as new technologies
of communication come along, uh, that are basically analogous with the press.
That existed at the time of the Constitution, um, people willfully or not, um, refuse to
see the analogy between the new technologies and the press, uh, and, and use that as an
excuse to rope off areas of communication from the protection of the First Amendment.
And, and that's clearly what's happening in, in the case of frack.
But it's also important to, uh, to note that there's always, you know, there's always an
excuse that they're giving it.
And here, uh, the action against, uh, frack and Craig was part of, of a larger campaign
that really heated up earlier in the year, um, against the hacking community at large.
There were a number of raids that went on, uh, throughout the spring, um, on hackers and
particularly on the whole notion of a hacking culture, um, which seems to really offend a
lot of these law enforcement people.
You know, you know, Gail, Gail Thackeray, uh, really, uh, uh, an attorney out in Arizona
who's really active about, uh, prosecuting hackers.
Um, I just read a quote from her recently and she was just, just offended at the thought
that a group of quote unquote criminals could have conventions and their own publications.
You know, this is an outrage and this is the first thing that has to go because, uh, you
know, hackers represent a threat to our national security, to commerce, et cetera, et cetera.
And it's just, you know, an outrage that they can, they can, you know, have their own culture
and their own, uh, you know, sense of community.
And so this is what they targeted.
They targeted FRAC and they targeted another, uh, organization.
I don't know if that's even the term for it, the Legion of Doom.
I mean, uh, one thing that also came along with that original press release about Craig's
indictment was, you know, the, the statement that yes, you know, he associated with members
of the Legion of Doom, which is, um, I don't know if I'm the best person to explain what
that is here, but, uh, it's, you know, it's sort of an honorary society of, of hackers, very
loosely organized, um, and, and very much not about, you know, conspiracy and concerted action.
Um, and the media just ate it up and the prosecutors did too.
And, and every time there was an indictment, uh, of hackers, they made a big point of saying
that, you know, they were members of, or they associated with members of the Legion of Doom,
a closely knit group of hackers, you know, who, uh, conducted a number of activities in
various states, blah, blah, blah.
But you see, Julian, the, the media wants a story and the prosecution wants a victory, you
know, and, and when you, when you're able to successfully say computer hacker equals criminal,
and then you refer to them as criminals, it makes it so much more easy.
You know, you can say, well, we have to lock these criminals up and it's, you know, it's
just like the Soviet counterpart where you call every, everyone under 15, a hooligan, you
know, or, uh, you know, you, you, you just categorize people as terrorists or, or drug dealers
or criminals of some sort.
It makes it so much more simple.
You know, uh, Julian, along with the, the press release and actually comments in, in
my indictment with reference to the Legion, it was interesting to note that while the indictment
alleged that it didn't, the indictment didn't allege, the indictment stated this as a definition
of what the Legion was.
It listed, uh, a different number of activities, uh, inherently illegal that they, you know,
had, had done.
Yet at the time of that indictment, I, I can't recall a single, one of their, uh, single member
of that organization that had been convicted of any of those offenses.
You know, it was really just what they suspected they might've done.
Again, that does not show up in the headlines when somebody doesn't get charged with a crime
when, when they are suspected of, uh, of being part of a crime.
Well, that makes, uh, you know, that makes the front pages.
Uh, Craig, at this point, before you continue with your story, I'd like you to, to answer
two questions.
Number one, how much has all of this cost you?
And number two, how can people help?
Well, if, are you speaking financially?
Financially, yeah.
This is, I don't know about emotionally what we can do there.
Well, there's, there's even more beyond than that, but.
Well, financially, it's, it's actually kind of hard to say, uh, with any certainty.
I still haven't seen the final legal bill as of yet.
Uh, I'm told that it's roughly comes out to be, you know, in the realm of $100,000.
That's not including fees paid to the, the first attorneys that we hired in St. Louis,
uh, which was probably, uh, another additional $8,000 went to them.
The, uh, I'm still waiting to see the final breakdown.
I'm told it was actually much higher than that, but the, uh, the firm that is Ken Mouchin
and Zavis in Chicago had found different ways to cut certain parts out of the bill to other
things or reduce certain, you know, they just clipped the sum off.
Uh, just, I guess, in the spirit of good business.
But for those, you know, who are interested and, you know, I don't know, but, uh, if you're
interested, uh, stuff can't, um, well, I hate to say money, but that's what it kind of boils
down to.
That's what everything seems to boil down to, unfortunately.
Yeah, uh, contributions are, you know, greatly accepted.
Uh, you could send them to, then, care of Sheldon Zenner, Z-E-N-N-E-R.
That way, he's with the firm of Katton, K-A-T-T-E-N, Mouchin, M-U-C-H-I-N, and Zavis, Z-A-V-I-S.
Uh, they're located at 525 West Monroe Street, Suite 1600 in Chicago, Illinois, uh, 60606.
If you do decide to send anything in, you should include some sort of note on where it's supposed
to be allocated to, because otherwise, it's, uh, it's the general fund.
Uh-huh.
Uh, probably something on the, on the memo section of the check would be a good idea.
Uh-huh.
Now, we've, we've mentioned before, this has cut tremendously into your college fund, and,
uh, and...
I, I'd say it, it, it, it's kind of, um, there's nothing left.
There's nothing left.
And, uh, the, the ironic thing is that you weren't convicted, you know?
You, you, you won, for all intents and purposes, you won the case, but you've been devastated
financially, emotionally, uh, your academic future has been, uh, has been, uh, stomped upon
quite a bit.
Uh, so if people out there feel inclined to help, it's, you know, I, I, I'm sure it would
do something emotionally for you, so any contribution, however large or small, uh, will definitely have
an effect, and, um...
This, this case was indicative of the, the true fact, the unfortunate fact, that today's
legal system boils down to how much justice can you afford?
Yeah, you could have, you could have stopped at any, any time with a plea bargain, right?
But you didn't do that.
Why?
Well, an official plea bargain wasn't, uh, really offered up until sometime during the
middle of the trial.
Uh, the government prosecutors clearly believed that they had this one in the bag.
In fact, it's my understanding that they really just could not understand why I didn't
plead guilty, you know, why I wanted to go through with the trial.
Well, most people, when faced with such a situation, would plead guilty, right?
To avoid what you went through.
It, it depends.
Um, I know that, uh...
I mean, I know of hackers that have pleaded guilty to things that they didn't do, just
so that they didn't have to go through what you went through.
I had too much on the line for this.
I'm, uh, hoping to enter law school.
I was hoping for next year, but that's not going to be possible now.
Um, any kind of conviction just wouldn't be good for that, let alone a felony conviction.
Would be devastating.
There would be no possibility of, of, uh, entering any law school.
But, hello?
That's either somebody's call waiting or we're going to get another emergency interrupt.
Uh, no, that's, uh, I guess that's my call waiting.
Ah, okay.
Um, even a misdemeanor conviction is going to make them, you know, look twice and think
about it before they admit you into their school.
There was more than that.
Um, see, I, I didn't deny having received these files, having sent them, you know, put
them in the newsletter.
It wasn't about that.
It wasn't, this case was not a whodunit.
Uh, this case was about what, you know, the activity that took place, was that illegal?
And, you know, I, I said it wasn't.
And that, that's what this is about.
The activity being publishing the article.
That's, that's correct.
Now, we're at the stage where you're about to go to trial.
Do you want to fill us in on, on just how that worked out?
Right before the second indictment.
I'm sorry, could you say that again?
Right before the, uh, the superseding indictment of June.
In June, 1990.
See, it's around this time, well, a little before that, at the end of April, was a Newsweek
article.
Uh, it, it talks about, uh, Steve Jackson Games.
That's the company, the, uh, the book publishing company in Texas.
Now that, okay, to, to, uh, to clarify what that means, uh, uh, Steve Jackson Games publishes,
um, various, uh, well, various kinds of games and books and things like that.
Now, they were, uh, implicated by the Secret Service, uh, because, uh, supposedly one of their
employees was a hacker, so that was enough to have their entire offices raided, their
computers taken, and the company nearly driven out of business.
Uh, Manuel, actually, uh, on a side note to that.
Yeah.
Uh, this employee hacker was, uh, one of the subscribers to the newsletter.
Uh-huh, one of the subscribers to, to your newsletter.
Right.
They were actually raided in, in, in some kind of connection to my case.
I'm not sure, you know, the, with, the, uh, the, uh, the raid was spearheaded by the
agents from Chicago, the same agents that conducted the search on me.
Uh-huh.
So, uh, well, anyway, so that, I, I, the article is a good one.
It starts showing that people's rights are being trampled upon.
And, unfortunately, it still included me on part of the, uh, as part of the people that
deserve to be trampled.
How so?
Well, it didn't name me, but it named me, uh, sort of anonymously as one of the four Legion
members, although I wasn't ever a member of the Legion, indicted in a conspiracy to do
something to 9-1-1.
So they still didn't get it right that, that you, in fact, published an article about 9-1-1
and that you hadn't invaded the system and were trying to overthrow it.
Right.
Now, Newsweek later, uh, I'll get to that in a moment.
They later, you know, corrected themselves in the, uh, July 2nd issue.
But in the meantime, on June 3rd was probably the first positive article that, uh, was written
about me.
Well, it wasn't really about me exactly.
In the New York Times, on the front page of the, of the Sunday, June 3rd issue, was, uh,
an article talking about, you know, the civil liberties of people like myself being trampled
upon.
And it started talking about a, uh, hacker defense fund being put together by people like,
uh, Mitch Kapoor, and, uh, who later formed an organization with a few others like, uh,
John Barlow and Steve Wozniak that they refer, called the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
But this was, this was the first good news we got.
Um, in the meantime, let's see, as we get closer to the trial, the July 2nd Newsweek
article, which actually, of course, Newsweek comes out, you know, a week ahead of their
date, this article really got the point across that I did nothing more than publish an article
in a newsletter, very similar to, uh, what Terry Gross, he's an attorney with the firm of
Benowitz, Bowden, Staniard, Kriski, and Lieberman, um, they defended Daniel Ellsberg in the very
famous Pentagon Papers case.
Um, he basically said that my, what happened with me is virtually the same thing as with
the New York Times printing the Pentagon Papers leaked to them by Daniel Ellsberg.
It was clearly something that had, you know, already been ruled upon by the Supreme Court
as being, uh, legally protected activity.
And so I think, uh, this was very positive.
I mean, it made me feel good to see it.
But, uh, as we got closer to the trial, you know, originally, you know, I just wanted to
get to it and get it over with, but as we got closer, you get a little, you know, apprehensive,
a little scared just about the, the true seriousness of what's about to happen.
Because it's easy to try and ignore it, especially for someone like me who's, I guess, a pre-law
student, you know, working with attorneys and just sort of seeing how the process goes, taking
an academic standpoint on the whole thing.
Uh, roughly, I...


received word that there were some videotapes.
Now this was very odd because we had filed motions back in April
that, you know, for the government to turn over any and all electronic surveillance of me that they had.
This motion was granted, you know, meaning that they had to do so.
They had nothing to turn over.
All of a sudden, they had a videotape, 15 hours of videotape,
that took place from a hotel room at the Ramada Inn in Westport.
It's part of St. Louis County, where on July 22nd of 1988,
I and several others had held a convention that we called SummerCon.
And it was mostly a gathering of, you know, hackers and the like.
What was pointed out later was ironic about that date is because on July 22nd, 1988,
in the New York Times, reporter John Markoff had received an article
about some internal workings of a Pacific Bell telephone out in California.
He'd received that from a hacker and printed that, I believe, on the front page of the New York Times.
You know, almost identical to what happened with my situation.
While that was going on, they were secretly videotaping our convention,
you know, by drilling a hole through from one hotel room wall into the next
and hiding three video cameras behind a mirror.
Well, how did they get you into that hotel room with the hole in it?
Or did they do it after you checked in?
Well, see, that's another story as well.
And I hate to keep jumping around through time like this.
But we had reserved a room, we being the organizers of the convention,
for that date under one of the names of the organizers.
And for some reason, when we got to the hotel that day, the room had been canceled.
Now, the staff at the desk said it was some sort of computer error.
But, you know, I didn't really think that was an acceptable answer.
Interesting choice of words, though.
Right. It's a kind of ironic choice of words.
In the meantime, there was a very young man who had appeared in the lobby
who had been sort of, I guess, waiting for us to a certain extent.
He asked if we were the guys there for summer con, and we said yes.
And so he started kind of hearing about our dilemma and offered to allow us to use his room.
So who did that friendly person later turn out to be?
Well, you know, I'm still not clear 100% on who he is.
He was either an agent of the Secret Service,
or just someone, you know, an informant of somebody that was working with the Secret Service.
He was from Phoenix, Arizona, where Gale Thackeray is located.
I don't know if there's any kind of connection between that.
I would imagine there is.
So we got in there, and what makes this taping...
See, the government got out of not, you know...
Technically, in my opinion, they violated the court order.
The reason they got out of it is because they said they didn't intend to use any of the videotape at trial,
and there's a very good reason for this.
The reason being, of course, that there's absolutely nothing illegal
on these videotapes taking place whatsoever,
with the exception of there are some minors drinking some beer.
Maybe a curfew violation or two. I don't know how that would apply.
What do you suppose they thought they were going to see in that hotel room?
I can't even begin to speculate on, you know, what they thought they would see.
At one point, we were having quite a party in there.
Somehow, some of us that lived in St. Louis, we'd invite a lot of girls over,
and there must have been 30 people jumping around in the room.
The agents next door had called the room, spoken to their man inside,
gotten him to clear the room out.
Apparently, they couldn't pick up anything other than, you know, too much talking going on,
so they couldn't distinguish any individual conversations.
So they must have gotten upset by this idea.
I mean, I've had a chance to view all 15 hours of this tape,
you know, when it was turned over to us before the trial.
We weren't allowed to use it either. We had asked to be able to use it, but...
So you wanted to use their evidence against them?
That's right. The government objected violently, and the judge sided with them on this.
I can see the judge's point.
Well, the reason we wanted to use it was because July 22, 1988, is a very important date.
I mentioned actually in the indictment, you know, as a date that I supposedly began
what they called the fraud scheme, you know, right on that date.
And considering I'm on 15 hours of videotape on that date, not doing anything illegal,
not talking about any kind of fraud or planning any kind of scheme whatsoever,
we thought this was fairly important, because, you know, how many hours are there in a day?
But because it's 15 hours and not, like, 24 hours, the...
I guess the idea was that, well, maybe it wasn't doing anything in these 15 hours,
but maybe it's some other point on that day, or something like that.
Well, now, how did they allege to know that you were scheming on that day if they don't have any proof?
Well, I believe that that comes from an article I'd written announcing the convention,
that convention, saying it was going to take place starting on that day.
Uh-huh.
So it's very shaky at best.
Yeah, I agree with that.
So we weren't allowed to use the videotapes either.
And, let's see, the trial, you know, proceeded with different witnesses testifying.
What was kind of weird about this was that the trial almost seemed not to be about me,
because the witnesses that took the stand were led into talking about the three hackers
that live in Atlanta, Georgia, members of the so-called Legion,
who had just earlier that month pled guilty to having gotten into computers owned by Bell South Corporation.
And so the security experts that were called talked all about how these guys got into the Bell South computers.
But when, under cross-examination, they were asked if there was, you know,
anything to even suggest remotely that I'd entered into any of these systems,
they all replied that no, there wasn't anything to suggest that.
You know, so really, it was confusing as to what the prosecution was trying to prove.
It appeared as though they were trying to prove that the guys in Atlanta had broken into things and they were criminals,
which really wasn't a matter of debate anymore since they'd pled guilty.
But then it was just a matter of trying to link me to them for knowing them.
It was a guilt by association kind of thing.
And it eventually failed, correct?
Well, yeah, I think the most important element of the trial came when one of their experts, you know,
admitted to the fact that the information contained in the frac file was, you know,
even less than information you could get from this $13 pamphlet that's published and freely available,
well, publicly available by Bell Corp in New Jersey.
Because at that point, the value, because under the federal law governing interstate transportation as stolen property,
the property in question has to be worth at least $5,000.
So I think that's what...
That's what got the price up there.
Right.
The price of the document.
That might have been one of the things that led them to dropping the case
because I don't think they would have been able to, you know,
get anyone to believe that the value was over $5,000 after that.
You know, and rightfully so because they shouldn't have believed that.
We're talking with Craig Neidorf, former publisher of Frac Magazine,
an electronic publication that was, in effect, shut down by the government earlier this year for publishing
what they said was sensitive information was later proved not to be.
However, the magazine remains shut down,
and Craig Neidorf has huge legal bills to deal with and a life to put back together.
We're also talking with Julian DeBell, reporter from The Village Voice.
And we're going to take a very short break and come back.
You'll have a chance to give us a call, too.
But we do need your help at 212-279-3400 to keep programs like this on the air,
to keep ideas like this coming,
and to be able to continue educating people as to what is happening out there.
We want to hear all sides of the story.
Right now, it seems as if only one side has been presented.
212-279-3400, for a pledge of $55, you'll get a full year of 2600, the Hacker Quarterly,
and you can keep up to date on what is now an extremely hectic way of life.
Anyone who calls himself a computer hacker has got a lot of things on their minds
that computer hackers of the past just would not have worried about.
Computer hackers of the past would be interested in getting information about computer systems
and figuring out how everything ties together.
Now, if you call the wrong phone number, you could have the secret service at your door
in a matter of days, weeks, who knows.
We're going to take a very short break here.
I'm going to wander over into the tally room and see how we're doing.
And if we're doing good, then we'll come right back and take some phone calls
and talk some more with Craig and Julian.
If not, I'm going to have to beg a little bit more in the air, but keep those calls coming in.
We just need a couple more, I understand.
212-279-3400, and take advantage of this special offer only being made tonight
to receive the Hacker Quarterly.
We'll be right back.
1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4.
It's all alive when the air is high.
Just pull some squatters in the slide
and get that gold on your helmet guy.
Just do one quarter to lose a life.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
There's no time without pity, there is no time.
No signing an apology from us.
Cause you pay your money and you take your chance.
And there's damn time to pay in advance.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
2 on 2.
He shoots a 3.
He shoots a 4.
He shoots a 5.
He shoots a 6.
He shoots a 7.
He shoots an 8, and it's much too late.
He comes and he's ready to shoot
with a .38 stuck in his boot.
Cause he's loaded with bin and he's loaded with boots.
Cause the stinker he get, the sharper he shoot.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Well, if you see this man, don't hesitate.
Just make your break and don't be late.
Cause you're way too drunk and you're way too late.
When all your money goes down when he gets to you.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
Talkin' about poolside, poolside, poolside, poolside.
279-3400, Craig and Julian, are you still there?
Yup.
Okay, Julian, I'd like to sort of bounce off you for a moment
to reflect upon what Craig has told us so far.
And do you have any kind of feeling as to that electronic media?
Do you think because FRAC was an electronic publication,
it was that much more of a target?
Well, yeah, I mean, as I pointed out before,
there is a venerable tradition in this country
of using technological innovation as an excuse
to start roping off types of communication
from the protection of the First Amendment.
We saw it in the medium that you all are listening to right now.
When radio first came out, Congress said,
well, radio isn't the press.
It's a whole different technology,
and it has a whole different set of rules.
So we're going to let government regulate
what can and cannot be said over the airwaves.
So now there are certain words that if I said over the air,
then the AI could lose its license.
And that wouldn't be the case with any kind of print medium.
And that's something that's been in effect for quite some time.
Can you think of current-day parallels
to what's happening with the electronic media?
Well, FRAC, for instance, is an obvious parallel.
And just the fact that a lot of communication takes place
over telephone lines.
Telephone lines are not censored, but they are taxed,
which is something the Constitution prohibits,
any special taxes on newspapers and publications of any kind.
The use of the telephone is taxed,
and therefore the use of telephone lines
can be regulated by the government.
These are getting into subtle areas.
The case of FRAC, though,
clearly there's been an attempt to use the public's confusion.
And it's not just a question of manipulation.
People in power, just because they're in power,
doesn't mean they understand the technologies
that are helping them run things.
They just don't see that a computer is a printing press, and it is.
And it's going to become so much more of a printing press in the future.
That's what worries me so much.
FRAC is only the beginning.
It's one of the first electronic journals to exist.
But I'm convinced that it's the way of the future.
Most Americans will probably wind up getting news electronically.
And if electronic media is subject to different rules than printed media,
then we're in for a lot of trouble ahead.
What's going on already?
I'm sorry to cut in on you, but, for example,
Associated Press stories are regularly circulated through CompuServe,
and New York Times has a subscription service
for people on the computer networks.
And they can get those stories sent to them on whatever topics they define
the day before they're printed.
Now, is that entitled to the same protection,
same First Amendment protection as a newspaper?
Those are the questions that we're asking here.
And, Craig, let me ask you, do you think this would have happened to you
if your magazine was a printed magazine?
I'm not really sure.
I think the other side to this happening
was more than just that it was an electronic magazine,
but quite possibly was that it was a magazine run just by two college students,
not by a big firm that had a lot of money
and could theoretically afford to have a big legal staff.
So basically you were an easy target.
Yeah, that's, I think, what it would come down to.
And that's an important dimension, that the technology, as it gets cheaper,
is going to make it easier and easier for common citizens to just set up shop.
And there will be more easy targets out there the easier it becomes
to set yourself up as a publisher.
So that's why I would imagine it's important for those people
that are worried about this, worried about the threat of all these independent publishers
that they clamp down now and prevent it from, quote-unquote,
getting out of hand in the future.
Yeah.
That's the ominous tone I see here.
It's been referred to as the chilling effect.
Yeah, quite a few times, the chilling effect.
If we have to label this year, it's going to be the chilling year of 1990.
So, Craig, tell us, we're up to, I guess, the last part of the trial now.
Well, I'll just kind of wrap things up a little.
On the fourth night of the trial, I believe it was Thursday, July 26th,
my attorney received a call from the prosecuting attorney.
And it was at this point that they decided they wanted to start talking about
working out a plea bargain.
I wasn't informed about any of this until very early on Friday morning.
And from the moment I heard it, my answer was no.
I wasn't going to let this happen.
I wasn't going to cop out like that.
What they had on the table was the idea that I would plead to a misdemeanor charge
having something to do with the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,
which are, of course, the same charges that were dropped originally
from the first indictment into the second.
And my lawyer, Sheldon Zenner, he asked me to take some time and think it over,
and I did it with each of my parents first.
He wasn't advocating that I do it, but he gave me the rundown of what the difference
between a misdemeanor conviction and a felony conviction are,
the general statistics about the rates of conviction on people that get indicted,
the common idea that jurors, I mean, if they're there, they're in court,
the authority figures, the government, are saying that I did something bad.
They're going to be up there saying, well, he had to do something, otherwise he wouldn't be here,
never really coming into the idea that the government was just,
it shouldn't have happened in the first place.
So basically you were facing, I mean, you could have taken the offer and faced a misdemeanor.
What would be the maximum penalty you would have faced if you had accepted that?
I'm not certain.
I don't believe I would have had to do any jail time necessarily.
Well, I'll put it to you this way.
In accepting a misdemeanor count, I'll make it this way.
The felony counts would not have allowed for probation or anything of the kind.
With those charges, because of certain federal sentencing guidelines,
to get convicted on any of those felonies would have meant jail time for certain.
There's just no way out of it.
The judge's hands are kind of tied when it comes down to sentencing on these kind of issues.
There's a margin where he can go within, but there would be some jail time.
Okay, so you were presented with a choice in saying, okay, I'll take the misdemeanor and just swallow my pride,
but I won't go to jail, or saying, no, I'm sticking with this and I'm prepared to go to jail.
You chose the latter.
You actually were facing going to jail.
Why? Why did you do that?
I didn't feel comfortable with the idea of pleading guilty to something I knew I didn't do.
And that was part of it.
I wouldn't do that.
The idea that this wasn't a one-time deal, this was something that would follow me the rest of my life.
My credibility always called into question, always having to explain what was this conviction on my record.
I couldn't deal with the idea of having a whole—I'm fairly young,
and the whole rest of my life having to have that thrown in my face.
Do you think most people would do that, though?
Would risk going to jail to clear their name rather than take the easy way out?
If they were in the same exact circumstance as me, I would think they would have done what I did.
Because I had a lot of supporters by this time,
with people in the organization of the EFF and amicus briefs being written.
And the issues were coming out.
There were more articles.
The article in the Village Voice had just come out that week.
There were other articles, like the Christian Science Monitor.
People were understanding that this was a First Amendment, freedom of the press issue.
And I felt that if this case was going to set a precedent, it should be a positive precedent,
and I was going to make sure it happened that way.
As it turned out, it didn't really set a legal precedent,
because the government just withdrew the charges, so it's not a case that was decided.
It's kind of unfortunate in that respect.
I see.
Your initial reaction when you realized they were dropping the charges, did you feel like victory at that point?
At that moment, I did.
For the first time, while in the courtroom, I could smile, a real smile,
instead of the ones I tried to paint it on for my parents so they wouldn't be as worried,
which didn't really make a difference anyway.
I mean, they were worried.
But I kind of knew what was about to happen, and I just couldn't believe it when it was over.
The scariest part, I think, was that I had gotten used to the reality of the situation I was in,
and to suddenly have that weight lifted, it didn't sink in immediately.
But what pains me most is just, you know, when I put my family through,
although, as a lot of people have pointed out, it really was beyond my control.
It's not something that I did that was wrong that caused this to happen.
This was clearly caused by outside forces.
Did you say most people understand that?
Some people understand only what they want to.
You know, just that, well, the government raided you, so you were messing around with something.
So the government would not do this to you if you had not done something in the first place.
Is there a rationale?
Right.
Whether it be just the fact that I was messing with something,
you know, perhaps that I shouldn't have been.
You know, I wasn't messing around with something I shouldn't have been.
I was doing what the Constitution allows me to do.
But a lot of people just don't understand it because they don't understand electronic media.
Craig, for you to go through this and to defend yourself and stand up for what you believe in,
it's nothing short of courageous, and I really don't think most people would have gone as far as you went,
as demanding that your name be cleared.
Are you aware of other cases in the country of similar kinds of things going on?
Well, just touching on something else, a lot of people, I don't know from person to person who thinks what,
but some people have looked at me as some sort of, perhaps, I'm not sure, a martyr or a hero in respect to that.
But, you know, it's not fun.
I mean, I would gladly trade away the stardom that followed and everything else
for having to have this never happen ever in the first place.
If you had it to do over again, would you have ever started the magazine that got you into trouble?
Well, knowing that this would have happened, I have to say no.
I mean, you know, to cause the kind of emotional and financial stress on my family,
I mean, I practically pulled my entire family into bankruptcy.
I mean, we haven't paid this bill.
If we had to pay it, like, tomorrow, we'd have nothing left.
I mean, we'd have less than nothing left.
We're working out some sort of a very long-term payment plan
that I'm not sure how comfortable the law firm is with.
But if I knew back when I was 16 years old the effect that this would have had later,
in good conscience, I would have to say that there's no way I could have done it
if I would have started this magazine.
You have to wonder, too, what kind of effect this has on other 16-year-olds out there now
that see what happened to you, who started a magazine that the government didn't like the contents of.
I mean, do you think other people will curtail their plans for publishing because of what happened to you?
I've seen it happen already.
How so?
People that were intending on starting newsletters saw what I went through.
Despite the fact that I was correct, just the toll it took,
and decided that despite what they wanted to do and that it was perfectly legal,
they couldn't afford to go through what I went through.
So the result, then, is that these magazines won't be written, won't be published.
That's right.
And you mentioned something about some other cases going on.
In relation to the same, I guess, master plan of the government, what they call Operation Sun Devil,
there was a bulletin board shutdown in Chicago.
I mean, I think there was a number of bulletin board shutdowns,
which, in a sense, is just the same as running a newsletter, in that it's electronic publishing of information.
Probably four or five bulletin boards across the country were shut down in this fashion,
and none of these people have even been charged with any kind of crimes.
But the boards have been shut down.
Some by the government, coming in and taking their equipment away,
and some just out of fear that it could happen to them.
A shocking situation.
Julian, you work for the Village Voice.
Is there much concern at that publication of such actions?
Could something like that affect the Voice?
Well, no.
The print media are pretty complacent about this.
Everybody knows the place of the print media, and they feel that it's pretty secure.
When you have a situation where even people in the press aren't sensitive to the issues brought up by these new media,
by bulletin boards and electronic newsletters, we're in pretty sorry shape.
So that gives the government pretty free reign.
When you present it to them, though, when you say,
look, we're a newspaper, and this electronic publication is basically the same thing as a newspaper,
except it comes out in a different form, does it click?
Do they see it then, or do you still have to argue the point?
Well, I didn't have to argue the point too hard with my editors.
But as for their feeling threatened themselves, the print media are relatively safe in this country.
Relatively.
Because we have all kinds of problems all the time.
But it takes only a few people to really see what kinds of threats the new media are introducing.
Well, are you saying you don't think this could happen to a printed publication?
Even a small one.
Let's say two 16-year-old kids decide to start a newspaper, a real newspaper that comes out on printed paper.
Do you think they'd be as safe as The Voice and all the other newspapers around here are?
Well, see, that's the other element of it that Craig was getting into.
That, yeah, for instance, with desktop publishing in the state that it is,
with computers making it very easy for, for instance, two 16-year-olds to just whip it out on their Commodores,
put together a decent newsletter and feel like, yeah, let's get into the publishing business.
More and more people who are more vulnerable from a political standpoint may be getting into publishing.
So that's not an issue directly of the technology itself, but of what kinds of demographics the new technology opens up.
So yeah, but the larger press, because of the money and status that have accrued to them over the years,
yeah, I think they're still relatively safe because of the politics of who gets abused.
You have to also remember prosecutors have discretion over who they want to pursue.
If you make a paper like The Voice, if something happened to them, maybe let's say they were even shut down,
there's probably 10 other papers that would see that and just start writing all sorts of articles about it,
a lot of publicity, positive for The Voice, negative against the government.
And the government can't afford to have that kind of bad image.
Whereas electronic media, you wouldn't see the same thing?
I'm back to the second point I made concerning the size of publication.
The Voice has been around a while. It's well known.
And you'd probably, I guess, have the New York Post start talking about it if The Voice got shut down.
I don't know if we'd want that.
They might be a dance on our grave, perhaps, but then they might see that similar could happen to them.
It's interesting. The Post just faced a major crisis.
The Post went out of business two weeks ago.
And I found myself even saying, you know, I don't want The Post to go out of business.
I don't want there to be one less newspaper.
I mean, maybe the only thing I agree with in the whole newspaper is the comic pages, but still, we need that other voice.
We need to have variety on the newsstands.
And I think the same thing holds true of any form of media.
Was that a pun?
Where?
That other voice?
No, but once I said it, I realized it was.
We are speaking with Craig Neidorf, the former publisher of the now defunct magazine called Frack Electronic Magazine
that was shut down by the government.
The government lost the case.
However, the magazine has been shut down, and Craig has been plunged into debt as a result of this ordeal.
And perhaps, Craig, that would be a good opportunity for you to give out the address for your defense fund one more time.
Yeah, okay.
You have to look it up, huh?
It's kind of a complicated address, and maybe if you had a simpler one, more people would write.
Right now, it's in kind of dismal shape, I might add, and hopefully we can pick that up a little bit here.
Yeah, I think in total, I'm not going to drop names or amounts here.
I'll just tell you that we've had, I think, four people send in some contributions.
Four people in the whole world.
I mean, your case has been bandied about all throughout the world.
For only four people to respond, there's got to be something wrong there.
I don't know if people are afraid.
It's possible people think that if they contribute to your defense fund, then they'll become targets too.
But for God's sake, folks, the case was dropped.
He's not guilty of anything, yet he's facing all these incredible penalties.
It just doesn't seem right.
I mean, I know it's not right.
Right.
Well, anyway, that address one more time is in care of Sheldon Zenner.
And the next line is the law from here.
Katten, K-A-T-T-E-N, Muchen, M-U-C-H-I-N, and Zavis, Z-A-V-I-S.
In Chicago, Illinois, 60606.
And if anyone would send in a money order or check or something like that,
those would have to be made out to Katten, Muchen, and Zavis.
But there should be some sort of notation, whether it be in the memo of the check or a letter,
stating where that money is to be allocated, to whom, to my account.
Because otherwise it'll just end up going anywhere.
Right.
And I believe Craig writes personal thank you notes to everybody that sends in their contributions.
That is true.
So if you don't get a personal thank you note from Craig, then something's gone wrong with the check,
and you should find out where it went.
But, yeah, it's important that it goes to the right place and not to defend somebody else.
So do write Craig Neidorf's name in prominent letters all throughout that.
And perhaps you should spell your name, too.
Right. That spelling is N-E-I-D-O-R-F. F as in Frank.
Okay. Now when we come back, our listeners will have a chance to call up and ask questions.
However, we only have one line for call-ins tonight because, well, we're taking pledges.
Hopefully we'll take more pledges.
So that line is occupied right now.
We're going to go to that call.
We're going to ask people that call in on that line, 212-279-3407,
to make it very short to give everybody a chance and just ask your question.
Listen to the answer on the radio.
And for everybody else that is either just tuning in or has been listening for a while,
if you have not done so already, please give a call to our pledge line
and show your support for this radio station because, as we were saying,
variety in media is extremely important, and WBAI is one media source that is unique.
We want to keep it that way.
We want to keep stories like this coming to you.
But the only way we can do that is if we meet our expenses.
And since we don't have commercials, we must turn to you as our sponsors.
That number is 212-279-3400 to make a pledge.
And for pledges of $55, you will get a full year of 2600, the Hacker Quarterly.
A few people have been taking advantage of that offer, and that's good to see.
We at the magazine are donating these subscriptions to WBAI.
It's kind of our contribution to the radio station,
and we're happy to do this because we're all in this together, folks.
We're all in this as a group of people that want to see freedom of the press survive,
freedom of speech.
So by calling up 212-279-3400, showing your support at this time,
you're also joining that group of people saying that freedom of speech is important to you,
and yes, here is my contribution to keep you guys going.
And as a special thank you, we'll send you a full year of 2600 magazine
and also the WBAI folio.
So again, that number is 212-279-3400.
Please call now, show your support.
We do need to get a couple more calls to remain on schedule
as far as what we are expected to bring in for this program.
And again, to talk to our guests, Craig Neidorf,
former publisher of Frack Magazine in St. Louis,
and Julian DeBell, also of The Village Voice.
So to speak to our guests, Craig Neidorf and Julian DeBell of The Village Voice,
give us a call at 212-279-3407.
Again, though, we only have one line, so you'll get a busy signal
unless you have some sort of a redialer on your phone.
So we'll be right back after this.
If you let me take your heart I will prove to you
We will never be apart If I'm part of you
Open up your eyes now Tell me what you see
It is no surprise now What you see is me
Big and black the clouds may be Time will pass away
If you put your trust in me I'll make bright your day
Look into these eyes now Tell me what you see
Don't you realize now What you see is me
Tell me what you see
Listen to me one more time How can I get through
Can't you try to see That I'm trying to get to you
Open up your eyes now Tell me what you see
It is no surprise now What you see is me
Tell me what you see
Listen to me one more time How can I get through
Can't you try to see That I'm trying to get to you
Open up your eyes now Tell me what you see
It is no surprise now What you see is me
If you'd like the dead tune in in just about an hour and a half from now for live air.
Or is it dead air? Anyway, music and live stuff with partners in crime David Nolan and Doug Cheeseman.
And we'll have all kinds of music that you can really sit down and understand.
We're here live at WBAI in New York. We're still asking for your support.
We want to see one more phone call come in at 279-3400.
Not just a phone call. Somebody picking up and hanging up. We've all done that before.
Someone who feels seriously about this and wants to contribute and keep this radio station going and show your support.
212-279-3400. We have at this moment three levels of support.
$45 for those of you who consider yourselves students and senior citizens or senior citizen students or what have you.
$45 if you think you're a regular person. That's kind of offensive, I guess.
It's sort of assuming that students and senior citizens aren't regular people.
Many students and senior citizens are about the most regular people I know.
But we'll take that up at the next board meeting.
$45 for the regular level. But if you wanted the super extra supreme unleaded version of being a BAI person, pledge $55.
And you will get, as a very special thank you, a one year of 2600 magazine, The Hacker Quarterly.
And if, by the way, you already get that magazine or if you don't want that magazine, there's all kinds of other things you can get for that price level.
For any price level, give a call. 212-279-3400.
Talk to our friendly Tally people who are sitting twiddling their thumbs.
I went down there before and that's what they were doing.
I never actually saw people twiddling their thumbs before, but that's what they were doing.
We don't want them to do that.
We don't pay them, but we don't want them to sit around talking to each other or playing cards or whatever they do when calls don't come in.
So make those calls come in.
212-279-3400. You'll be making a lot of people happy, directly and indirectly.
We're with Craig Neidorf, former publisher of Frack Magazine, and Julian DeBell, writer for The Village Voice.
And we are going to be taking phone calls at 212-279-3407.
And are you folks ready to speak to the public of New York?
You bet. Bring it on.
Okay, again, we must ask that those of you calling in, since we only have one line due to the marathon, we only have one incoming line,
ask a question and listen to the answer on the radio and give someone else a chance to call in.
Good morning. Is anyone there?
No one's there. Okay, let's let that line open up again.
That's funny, because that line was ringing for a good hour and a half, and apparently the person fell asleep as they were waiting.
212-279-3407. Wait for that to disengage. Okay, just disengage and see if a call comes in.
Yes, all throughout New York and Connecticut, people are scrambling for that one open line, and someone has already gotten it.
212-279-3407. Good morning.
Are we on delay?
Yes, well, you're on delay. I'm here live.
You plan to take a civil suit which you are entitled to because of false arrest or false imprisonment or malicious prosecution.
I think it's Section 1983 of the federal statute which allows you that right, because I know several politicians who have taken it.
Have you talked with your lawyer, or would you like to talk with your lawyer about that?
Okay, and you'll listen to the answer on your radio. Thank you for calling.
It was difficult to hear the question, but my understanding of it is that we don't plan to file any kind of lawsuit against the United States government, if that was the question.
And there's a couple reasons for this, one of which is just known as sovereign immunity, where the government just has a protection against a lawsuit unless they consent to being sued.
And the other part of that is that more than likely the government's stance on the issue would be that they believed that they were acting in good faith.
And, you know, that's just something that may be true, it may not be true, I don't know.
Considering they dropped the case, it lends credibility to that statement.
However, we are seriously preparing to file a lawsuit against some of the Bell operating companies, but I really can't discuss that right now since it's still pending.
For obvious reasons.
We just had a call that hung up, so we have the line open, 212-279-3407, may the best man win.
So, basically, what came out of that was, and I didn't know this, that you were not allowed to sue the U.S. government unless they tell you you can do it.
Well, there are certain instances I think that you can.
Now, keep in mind, I want to go to law school, I'm not there yet, so I don't know a lot about this.
But my lawyer has told me that there just wouldn't be a way to sue the government right now.
Uh-huh.
Okay, let's go to the next call, 212-279-3407.
Good morning.
Yes.
I was wondering what the ACLU has said about it and if they offered any help.
Okay, thanks for calling.
Okay.
Actually, I didn't have any contact with the ACLU whatsoever.
I've been told a lot of people said, you know, you should contact the ACLU, the ACLU is interested.
But I don't think they ever actually contacted my attorney in Chicago, so we didn't have anything to do with them.
I mean, we would have appreciated their help.
In a lot of ways, the EFF, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, sort of served in a very similar capacity to the ACLU
when they had some law briefs filed called amicus briefs, which is Latin for friend of the court, on my behalf.
So perhaps they were sort of a substitute for the ACLU in this case.
Uh-huh, except one important thing that the ACLU provides is free legal service, and that's something you certainly didn't get.
Well, that's true, but I was not charged by the EFF for their services.
Uh-huh.
Okay, that's important to know.
And as long as we're mentioning the EFF, and by the way, that phone line is open again, 212-279-3407,
if you want to speak to Craig Neidorf and Julian DeBell of the Village Voice and myself, Emmanuel Goldstein here.
The address for the Electronic Frontier Foundation is 155 2nd Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02142.
And if you want to write to them and get more information on their views on this whole matter, that would be an appropriate thing to do.
Julian, any comments from you at this point?
Nope.
Okay.
You know, the line keeps lighting, and I don't know if there's something on our phone here or what,
but right now it's open, 212-279-3407.
We only have one line, but don't let that discourage you.
It's open right now, so if somebody wants to call in with a question, we're speaking to Craig Neidorf,
the publisher of Frack Magazine, that was shut down by the government earlier this year,
and the magazine is pretty much dead, is it not?
It is.
Yes.
That's regrettable, to say the least.
It just shows you the extent to which this goes beyond successful prosecution,
the degree to which intimidation is part of the whole strategy.
I mean, the fact that they tried to get a guilty plea out of Craig on the eve of dropping the case,
I mean, they basically already had all the information they were going to get that ultimately convinced them to drop the case,
and they asked him to cop a plea.
I mean, there's a certain extent to which the momentum behind this whole anti-hacker hysteria
just carries people beyond just the sort of ideal pursuit of justice,
and then intimidation becomes a factor, trying to achieve your goals outside of the rules of the justice system.
And this has happened in a lot of the raids where people haven't even been charged.
Craig's experience with the Secret Service seems pretty amicable,
and a lot of people have been woken up at dawn with guns held to their heads,
14-year-olds coming out of the shower and having a shotgun pointed at them by the Secret Service.
That already just makes you think, hey, this isn't worth it.
And that actually happened here in New York this summer.
Wasn't that in Brooklyn?
No, it was in New York City this summer, a 14-year-old coming out of the shower,
having a shotgun pointed to his head,
and having, I believe, 20 people from various law enforcement agencies,
Secret Service and whatever other agencies took part in that, New York State Police, I believe,
storming through the house, turning over everything.
It's scary.
This is 1990 in the USA, yet these kind of things are happening.
It's a justice system gone mad, in my opinion.
212-279-3407, we have a call.
Good morning.
Okay, we don't have time for prerecorded calls there,
and you just tied up the line for everybody else in New York City that wanted to get through.
So 212-279-3407, good morning.
Yes, we're on delay. Go ahead.
Hello?
Yeah, go ahead.
Okay.
Let me turn down my radio.
Good idea.
In fact, I should say that to all the people out there.
Turn down your radio when you get a ring on the phone.
That avoids confusion.
Hello?
Yeah, go ahead.
Okay.
The computer show had a whole broadcast for half an hour plus half an hour of phone calls,
a whole hour show about the case where, I don't know,
like 23 people were arrested one night by the Secret Service.
You mentioned that it had something to do with that company that had a game,
some kind of a game product.
That was Steve Jackson Games.
Yeah, that took place earlier this year.
Could you talk about that?
Because I'd like to know what happened with that.
Okay.
Thanks for calling.
212-279-3407.
And yes, that was the beginning of it all.
Maybe Julian can.
Yeah, Julian, you're as good a person to speak about this as anybody.
Well, actually, it's hard to say what the beginning of this all was,
but that was because Craig was charged at the beginning of the year,
as were three people in Atlanta, Legion of Doom members.
Oh, my God.
And then two more hackers were targeted in the Austin region,
and that's where they were raided in March, March 1st, I believe.
One of them was an employee of Steve Jackson Games.
So at about the same time that these two young men were being raided in their homes,
both of them approached with guns and a number of things confiscated from their homes.
One of them lost an arcade version of the Pac-Man game
and some Legion of Doom stationary.
The Legion of Doom had stationary?
Well, you know, he might have made it himself, but yeah.
And at the same time,
the Secret Service was also raiding the place of employment of one of these guys,
which was Steve Jackson Games.
It had the place locked up when all the employees showed up
and said no one could go in.
And when they finally let them in, the place was a shambles
Most of the computer equipment was gone.
And significantly, the files containing the rule book for a game
that Steve Jackson had been working on with this guy that worked for him that was raided
called Cyberpunk,
which was a role-playing game based on some very fantasized version of hacking
taking place in the near future.
So that was all confiscated.
And when Steve Jackson went down to the Secret Service headquarters the next day,
they wouldn't tell him why.
The only clue they gave him as to the raid was that this Cyberpunk rule book
was a hacker handbook, a guide to hacking, which is ridiculous.
So Steve Jackson spent the better part of six months, I believe,
without his... trying to get his equipment returned,
working on a new version of the rule book,
losing business all the while and operating completely in the red.
And I believe he's in the clear now.
Well, I believe he got most of his equipment back,
however some of it was damaged beyond repair from what I have heard.
But you know what's interesting about that particular aspect of this case?
Steve Jackson Games was a publisher.
The thing that was confiscated was a book, a printed book.
Which brings us back to this whole printed versus electronic argument
that we're engaged in.
And, you know, I still think that the printed media is a lot more endangered
than we might believe, whether it's people that print books
or people that print newspapers.
If the electronic media is dealt with in a certain harsh way,
that's only one step away from the printed media.
And I think in this particular case, that line was crossed.
Emmanuel, this really was a lot more of an even closer similarity
to the Pentagon Papers case,
in that this was a prior restraint on a printed material.
They actually prevented him from publishing his book
by taking away his equipment, his computers,
and the files of information stored on them.
Well, in July, I myself received a copy of this book.
So I've had a chance to look at it.
And essentially, it's just sort of a way,
it's kind of definitions and strategies
for sort of a Dungeons & Dragons style of game.
You kind of have to imagine different aspects of it.
And as far as being Emmanuel and how to hack into computers,
how you would break into a computer in this game is not,
and I don't know if I'm quoting somebody here exactly,
but it's been referred to as you roll a dice.
And I suppose if you get a six or something,
that means that you got in.
But if you get a one, it means that you didn't.
It's something like that.
You don't have to actually enter a password anywhere.
You don't call anything.
But you see, the idea is there that you hack into a computer.
Apparently, this was enough.
The fact that there was an idea that hacking was a method.
Well, you know, the funny thing is,
there is already a precedent for a certain paranoia
with regard to role-playing games.
Further out on the nut job fringe,
there have always been Christian groups,
fundamentalist Christian groups,
who say that these role-playing games, Dungeons & Dragons,
in which people are going around, quote-unquote, casting spells,
are really gateways into Satanism.
So it's interesting that the federal government now
is buying into this paranoia about a role-playing game.
I don't think that's what happened.
I think they went down there expecting to try and find something else
about this guy, about the employee of Steve Jackson Games.
And finding nothing, they said,
well, we're just going to have to go for broke.
They said, oh, well, this manual is to computer crime.
As far as I understand it, I've heard that the warrants issued,
the search warrants issued for that were unsigned,
and that a large part of it is still sealed.
In fact, no one has been able to find out
what was the justification for getting that warrant
on the officers of Steve Jackson Games.
Hopefully that's something we'll find out if we keep pushing for it.
Let's go back to the phones. 212-279-3407.
Good morning.
Good morning. Hi.
Yeah, go ahead.
I agree with the last call.
Sorry?
He makes excellent points.
Sir, are you on a cordless phone?
Are you on a cordless phone, by chance?
The amount of exercise of a man's cock.
I didn't understand a word he said.
Yeah, I'd repeat it, but I think you might get thrown off the air.
Ah.
Well, I wish I could have understood that, but 212-279-3407.
Don't use cordless phones, folks.
It makes it very hard to understand what you're saying.
I'm sorry, did I interrupt somebody before?
My eagerness to take that stupid call?
Yeah, he was talking about the size of his bed.
Uh-huh.
Yeah, or he referred to it as a cot.
Uh-huh.
Yeah.
Oh, I see. Okay.
Now I understand perfectly.
Good morning.
Cock.
Right.
Why is it those people dial faster than anybody else?
Come on, folks.
Are you out there?
212-279-3407.
We only have one line,
so the person with the fastest dialer gets there first, obviously.
212-279-3407.
And for those of you that are shy and don't want to speak on the air,
well, you can speak with your wallet by calling our pledge line at 212-279-3400,
showing your support for WBAI,
and keeping stories like this coming your way,
assuming stories like this are happening in the first place,
and keeping free speech a little safer.
Your money can help keep free speech just a little bit more protected.
212-279-3400 for pledging.
And, again, for $55, you'll get a full year of 2600 magazine.
The hack accordingly.
Good morning.
Hi.
I called earlier, but I saw the type of calls you were getting.
I had another question.
Okay.
I think that I really think, Mr. Nerdoff,
that your lawyer has given you incorrect information
because there have been hundreds of cases of people successfully suing the federal government for false arrests,
and it would be an absolute sin to see you get cheated out of perhaps several hundred thousand dollars
of compensatory impugnative damages that you could be getting because of ill advice.
And what also disturbs me was the fact that, I don't know if I'm recapping this absolutely perfectly,
but when the lawyer was alerting you to the possible advantages of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor,
he also gave you some sort of statistics about the ratio of guilty pleas and acquittals on the federal level,
which, you know, just going by what you said, that borders on malpractice
because everybody knows that each case individually is based on probable cause.
I didn't quite finish discussing that.
He had summed up when we had that conversation to the effect that he was glad that I decided the way I did
because he would have been very uncomfortable with the idea of allowing me to plead guilty to something I hadn't done.
He was not, you know, moving me towards the idea of a guilty plea,
but he wanted me to fully understand the differences and not to make any hasty decisions.
Also, I just think that you should consider getting several alternate opinions on your prerogative of suing federally
because there have been many, many cases, well-publicized cases, of people who have successfully sued for false arrest.
Instinctively, I'm sure that you would know that a society such as ours, if that prohibition was enacted,
it would have been almost an avalanche of people trying to get legislation to address it.
So just instinctively, you know that that preclusion that he told you about does not exist.
It is a preclusion under certain circumstances where the federal government has a discretionary immunity.
For example, you can't sue the prosecutor himself, and that is not only under the federal statute.
That's also the state statute.
You can't sue the district attorney.
But the law always allows for citizens to redress when they have been a victim of civil rights violations,
including civil rights violations by the system as well as civil rights violations by an employee of the system.
All right, thank you.
Okay, thanks very much for calling.
Craig, do you have any response to that?
Well, like I said, I don't know enough about it.
I will be meeting with my attorney next week, actually.
So I'll be able to voice those questions with him once more and see, you know.
Yeah, and that's something I guess we should touch upon, folks.
If you have any particular expertise or opinions on these kind of things, yes, we do need to hear those as well.
I mean, financial support is very important, but also any kind of moral support you can lend makes a world of difference.
So send that along too if you want to write to the address we gave out earlier for Craig's Defense Fund
or if you want to write to me here at the radio station, I can forward it on to him here at WBAI 505 8th Avenue, New York 10018.
And yeah, you know, there's a lot of knowledge out there, a lot of opinions.
And we need to tap the sources and see just, you know, how this situation can be prevented from happening again
and how we can repair the damage that has occurred as a result of what has happened to you.
Anyway, our telephone number is 212-279-3407 and 212-279-3400 for pledges.
Good morning.
Hi. I'm a little surprised at how Craig Neidorf, having won his case...
Well, I don't know if you want to use the word won. The case was dropped, but...
Yeah, I guess I wouldn't want to use that word.
I'm surprised that... I mean, if the case was dropped, doesn't that mean that his attorney's fee should be paid?
I mean, he's been plunged into debt.
Shouldn't the government or the other side, whatever, how it manifests itself,
shouldn't they be or can't they be made responsible to pay his attorney's fees or whatever?
Sounds reasonable to me, but that's not the way it works, is it, Craig?
Well, I think the concept of that comes from civil cases, where if one party sues another and the lawsuit fails,
then they're responsible for the fees because they made that person go get counsel to represent them.
And yours was a criminal case?
That's correct.
And this does not apply in criminal cases?
Pardon?
This doesn't apply, then, in criminal cases?
That's right. I think it should apply.
Absolutely.
It's just something, you know, there's just something really wacky about the whole thing,
and the fact that you've had to put all this money into your defense,
they drop the case, and you're stuck with the bill.
You know, this... I don't know, I mean, I guess...
Have you continued to contact all of these?
I mean, I know there's the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild, and what's Wayne Kunstler's organization, CC...
Does anybody know?
It's in New York. There's another lawyers...
I think what we're dealing with here is ignorance on the part of what it is we're talking about.
We're talking about, you know, computer law and electronic publishing, and, you know,
I've talked to the ACLU many times, and literally every time you talk to a branch office,
you have to educate them as to just what it is we're talking about and why it's important.
You have to tell them why it's important, and then, you know,
hopefully they'll tell their superiors it's important, and it's just, you know, it's a battle.
It's an ongoing battle.
What I'm wondering, though, is apart from the aspect of people having limited knowledge, as of yet,
about computer issues as they relate to law...
Hello?
Yeah, I think that's just somebody's call waiting.
Is this aspect, this part, this thing of, you know, just being stuck with the bill like this.
It just seems amazing, you know, it just seems outrageous.
Well, what's the scariest thing about that is a prosecutor can bring charges on anybody, you know,
more or less, and cause them to have to seek counsel,
and there's a lot of lawyers having instant fees right from the start,
and it's a matter of, like I said before, it's how much justice can you afford.
If you don't have money, you know, you can apply for a type of public defender,
although at the federal level I think it's more of an assigning of a regular attorney
to sort of be your public defender as opposed to an actual office.
But then, you know, and I don't mean to put down the public defender's office
or people that take these types of cases.
They're usually overwhelmed, and what happens is mostly they are working to get you
as opposed to getting you off.
It's a shame that, you know, that legal defense, like education,
has become a commodity in this country where, you know,
the more money you have, the better product you get.
You know, it should be equal rights for everybody.
That's how I understood it when I was born into this country.
Anyway, thanks very much for your call.
Yeah, sure, yeah, and thanks for what you're doing too.
And let's open up the line to some more people.
212-279-3407.
You know, I think when you explain what's happening here, you know,
people just naturally say that's not right, you know, and it's an instinct.
You know, the arguments everyone's been making tonight about, you know,
going after the government for the legal fees,
they're not arguments I haven't made before.
And I've talked to my attorney about it, and I really,
I still just don't understand it myself,
which is why I can't explain it to everybody that's listening.
But that's just what I've been told.
Well, there's a practical element, as you pointed out,
that, you know, given that they did drop the charges,
there's sort of a, you know, a presumption of good faith there
that they could very easily argue that
Bell South simply misrepresented the situation.
Nonetheless, I'm a little baffled too, because, you know,
if your lawyer, Sheldon Zenner, you know, he is an excellent lawyer.
He's also a former United States attorney himself.
Right.
He's been eight years there.
So, you know, if someone with similar training and background
could find this, you know, this very simple, you know, piece of information out
that the damn thing was only worth $13,
why couldn't, you know, the feds have done that, too?
And isn't it, you know,
isn't the burden on them to have done that in the first place?
What's especially interesting about that was that it was one of the prosecution witnesses
that actually revealed the fact that it was available for $13.
Under extreme pressure from Sheldon Zenner.
Exactly.
And I think we should also give credit to Craig's lawyer, Sheldon Zenner, for
I believe he was not really computer literate at the beginning of all this,
yet he learned quite a bit throughout
and now can almost be considered an expert in the field.
I don't know if I'd go that far.
Okay, let's say an expert in comparison to all the other lawyers that are out there
that know virtually nothing about this.
Yeah, I'd say he's got to be one of the, you know,
extremely more literate attorneys as far as computers go.
Now, if other people in various fields of knowledge can, you know,
can learn as much and be able to talk to other people,
we're making great progress if that happens.
You know, if people, in a way,
I see Julian DeBell here from The Voice
and your lawyer, Sheldon Zenner, are kind of parallels
because they both started out knowing very little about what it was they were covering
and they both learned tremendously
and now, you know, are at the forefront of it all.
So a few more of those and I think we'll be in good shape.
Yeah, I'm not a person who, you know,
who knows a lot about computers, you know, inside and out.
You know, on the one hand, we talk about how depressing it is that, you know,
people in the media, people in law enforcement
don't really understand this stuff,
but, you know, there's hope too.
I mean, it's not that hard to come to grips with the issues
that are raised by these new technologies.
Yeah, I think also once you say to yourself
you don't have to know all this about computers,
it becomes a lot easier because you don't have to know a lot about computers
to see, you know, what First Amendment rights we're talking about
and what is fair and what is not fair.
You know, computers are just the instruments being used.
You don't have to be experts.
Yeah, that's one of the arguments I've said about this case for a very long time
is that this case was not about computers
and it really, as much...


...about, you know, whether information is property and whether the activities I engaged in was protected by the First Amendment.
Okay, let's go back to the phones. Good morning.
Hello, is anyone there?
Yeah, go ahead.
Okay. A few months ago, the computer show on BAI had an hour program on the other case that you discussed.
Steve Jackson Games.
Right, right. They had an hour show on that case, and they had a lawyer from one of the top constitutional law firms in the country talking about the case.
I was discussing the question of the way in which the First Amendment would apply to this type of case.
And I don't remember his name or the name of his firm, but you could probably find out by asking any one of the computer people.
Yeah, I believe Craig was trying to answer that.
Well, the New York firm is Rabinowitz & Bowden, and Silverglade & Good is located in Boston.
Right. I mean, if he wanted another opinion on the case, I mean, you could probably get one from him.
Okay, thanks for the suggestion.
Our phone number is 212-279-3407.
And Craig, why don't you give out that address one more time for your legal defense fund, as I think a lot of people are interested in helping out in whatever way they can.
Okay.
That address, once more, is for Kerov Sheldon Zenner, Z-E-N-N-E-R.
And the law firm is Kattin, K-A-T-T-E-N, Muchin, M-U-C-H-I-N, and Zavis, Z-A-V-I-S.
They're located at 525 West Monroe Street, Suite 1600, Chicago, Illinois, 60606.
And for anyone who is sending some sort of check or money order, they should be made out to the law firm, Kattin, Muchin, and Zavis,
with some sort of notation on the check in the memo section or with the letter as to the account of Craig Neidorf.
And I guess the whole thing on the envelope should be addressed to Neidorf Defense Fund?
Uh, that, that'd be good, but definitely say something like Attention Sheldon Zenner or Kerov Sheldon Zenner.
Okay.
And, uh, our phone number here is 212-279-3407.
If you want to show some support for WBAI, please call our pledge line now, 212-279-3400.
Uh, we do have the special one-time offer for this, uh, for this marathon that will be ending, uh, tonight.
It's only going to be offered during this program of all $55 pledges, 55 and more, uh, we'll get a year of 2600 magazine,
which is your link to the hacker world, to, uh, to the news stories, uh, that are going on.
For instance, the, uh, the Craig Neidorf story, the Steve Jackson story,
all the other stories about hackers that, uh, or hacking-related material, um, that you don't read about in the mainstream media.
Uh, you'd read about it in a hacker publication.
In fact, you'd see it years in advance.
You would see what is coming, what is going to be happening.
We've been talking about this in 2600 for, it seems, forever.
Uh, it's, um, it's something that has been going on for as long as, uh, as people have been playing with other computers
and, uh, and learning things that a lot of people think they're not supposed to be learning.
There have, uh, been terror tactics and, uh, all kinds of ways of persuasion,
persuading people not to ask those questions, not to find out those bits of knowledge.
Uh, it's, um, an important topic that needs to be discussed more and more,
and we need to, um, to reach answers here.
We need to ask ourselves, are computer hackers criminals, and if not, then how should they be treated?
Should people be kicking in doors and, uh, and pulling guns on teenagers that log into, uh,
the wrong computer once or twice in their lives, or make a free phone call now and then?
You know, it's, it's a very disturbing question when things like this happen right in front of us.
Uh, by receiving that magazine, you will be, uh, in tune with, uh, with these events as they happen,
before they happen, and you can become educated in a way that perhaps you might not think you can become educated in,
but it is quite possible.
You don't need to know a lot about computers or, or anything like that.
And plus, there's a lot of other information in the magazine, too,
information about, uh, how, uh, various computer systems work, how various phone systems work.
For instance, uh, in the latest issue, the, uh, the summer issue, which just came out,
uh, there is an extensive article on, um, on customer-owned payphones
and how they work, how they don't work,
what you can do to make sure that you get your money's worth,
and, uh, a whole lot of other things.
The most extensive article, I think, ever to have appeared anywhere on these, uh, payphones,
these, uh, uh, one-armed bandits, some people are calling them,
that are popping up throughout, uh, the city streets.
Uh, you can become the most educated person on your block by,
by learning how these things work.
And it's written in, uh, in English,
so that you can understand exactly what it is that's being talked about.
Uh, it's not, uh, some kind of, uh, technical jargon
that, uh, no one outside the industry will understand.
So by calling 212-279-3400 and pledging your support to WBAI,
you will be pledging your support for freedom of speech
and also receiving, uh, a year's worth of 2600 magazine
and, uh, opening yourself up to this fascinating world even more.
So, uh, that's all I'm going to say about that.
I would like to see a couple more calls come in, uh,
before we, uh, we leave tonight.
212-279-3400, if you're thinking about, uh, about joining us
and, uh, and helping out the station and keeping us going,
please call.
All right.
212-279-3407 is our on-air line, and let's see who's on that.
Good morning.
And that was...
I don't like that voice.
That sounded like the exact same voice before,
and that's why I hung up so quickly.
212-279-3407, hurry up and call...
Oh, someone's already back?
That's incredible.
They must have called in the exact second that that line got released.
Good morning.
Yeah, uh, is there any way, uh, that Craig could give that 1-800 number
to get the Bellcourt catalog?
Uh, I don't know.
Do, uh, do we have that number, Craig?
I don't have it with me right now.
Yeah, I've been trying to get that number myself,
because I like to have it published in 2600.
You might, you might just try 800-directory-information.
Uh-huh.
Okay, uh, thank you very much.
And ask for Bellcore.
Yeah.
E-L-L-C-O-R-E.
Okay, why don't you try that?
In fact, uh, we're going to try that right now.
Let's, let's see if, uh, if we can actually get a response here
and, uh, find out that number for our listeners
as a public service here.
And, uh, we'll go back to the phones in just a second.
You know, we've got to fix these phones.
Every time it, uh, connects to something, it hangs up.
Let's try that one more time.
All right, now I mis-dialed.
This can take forever, folks.
Here we go.
You know, it might just, I don't remember,
it might just be 1-800-BELCOUR.
That's a possibility.
Let's see if we can get an answer here.
Oh, come on.
Three rings is unacceptable.
Director, Steve.
Ah, yes, hi.
I'm looking for the number for, uh, BELCOUR.
That's B-E-L-L-C-O-R-E.
What location?
I'm sorry?
What location do I have?
Uh, how many are there?
Seven, New Jersey or Illinois?
Uh, I guess New Jersey.
One moment, please.
Thank you.
The toll-free number is 800-274-2400.
Repeat.
800-274-2400.
If you have further questions,
a directory assistance operator will return.
We don't need the Illinois one, do we, Craig?
I don't think so.
Okay, so let's disengage that line.
But that's, uh, that's the number there,
and that's how easy it is to get.
And if you didn't hear it, call 800-INFORMATION.
It's free.
And, in fact, so is that number.
212-279-3407 are on air line.
And please, let's see some calls come into the pledge line
so we know that there's people out there that care enough to, uh,
I hate to say it.
I hate to say it, but I gotta say it.
Care enough to put their money where their mouths are.
Yes, 212-279-3400 is our pledge line,
or maybe we should call it our prayer line.
I don't know.
Give a call and, uh, talk to the friendly tally person.
Work something out, but show your support somehow.
Good morning.
Yes, I just wanted to say,
I called before, and I just wanted to say one other thing.
With the, uh, federal police going around
and arresting dozens and dozens of, uh,
hackers and computer people,
I think that it is really necessary to counterattack against them.
Now, you have this organization up in Boston or Cambridge or something,
and I think that someone ought to, uh,
mount a full-scale, uh,
a legal counterattack against them,
to say, because otherwise,
I mean, if you just let them go on,
uh, they're going to keep on doing it.
Well, what, what would you have them do?
Uh, I would have them do what the other fellow suggested,
which is sue, sue the federal government for, uh,
uh, phony, uh, uh,
for phony prosecutions.
The problem with most of these cases
is while there's been, you know,
uh, maybe 40 to 100 raids in the last few months,
there's actually been very few arrests made.
So, while these people are,
have had their equipment and things confiscated,
they haven't actually been arrested,
and in the meantime, the government can claim
that they're, you know, still checking into things.
It's, uh, it's a cop-out,
but unfortunately, it's an accepted one.
And, uh, Julian,
are you about to say something, Julian?
Well, I just wanted to point out that, that,
again, there, there is, uh,
nonetheless, whether they've been arrested or not,
there, there is the damage of, of confiscation.
Um, and this is, this is fairly unique,
um, to, and, and technology-specific.
Um, you know,
you, a lot of these attorneys,
you talk to them and say,
well, why in the world do you, you know,
you're looking for specific pieces of information,
uh, you know what the information might be,
might look like if you saw it printed out.
Why do you have to take the whole computer?
Um, why do you have to,
you know, it's like throwing the baby out
with the bathwater.
Well, that's not all they take.
They take the printer,
they take the telephone,
they take anything they can get their hands in.
Well, as I said, you know,
they took somebody's Pac-Man game,
they have stories of people's
Take answering machines, yeah.
They take the answering machines, yeah.
They take the answering machines, yeah.
Um, but, but their point is that,
well, you know, it's,
we can't just get it off the computer.
We have, this is very sensitive,
you know, technology,
and, uh, you know,
if we just sat there
trying to get it out of there,
you know, we'd be there for days.
In other words,
we don't know what the hell we're doing,
so we're just taking the whole thing with us.
Exactly.
That's, uh, that's frightening.
And, you know,
something else that's, uh,
that's becoming kind of, um,
uh, I guess a precedent here
is that, uh,
equipment is being seized
and not returned.
It's being forfeited.
That's, uh, the penalty now.
They don't charge anybody with anything,
but they say to them,
uh, we'll drop the whole thing
if you just agree to forfeit
all of your equipment, so, uh...
Emmanuel, I mean,
don't you see those ads all the time
for those big government auctions?
Uh-huh.
That's how they're paying back the deficit.
It's, it's the same thing
that, uh, that's going on with, uh,
you know, with the war on drugs.
Uh, basically, if you're,
if you're on a yacht
and you, you, you,
you smoke a joint or something,
technically the yacht can be seized
and sold off at auction,
which is, uh, you know,
kind of a crazy thing.
I think it's happened
to a couple of rock bands, actually.
Uh, but they're trying to apply
the same kind of logic
to, to computer hackers now.
If a computer hacker, uh,
does something,
allegedly does something,
he can either face
what you face, Craig,
and, uh, you know,
a long trial and, uh, uh,
you know, legal expenses
through the roof,
or he can just say,
okay, take all my equipment
and, and leave me alone.
Given the choice,
I probably would have opted for that.
Yeah, and most people would,
because most people
don't want to hassle
in their lives.
But, uh, think of the effect
that's going to have
on the future.
A very bad effect,
you know?
It's kind of,
it's kind of like blackmail,
I guess, but, uh...
Yeah, and as,
as the caller pointed out,
you know,
it's important to start,
uh, you know,
really going on the offensive
and saying,
people, you know,
this isn't acceptable,
and, uh,
you know,
not to let it just sort of
become the precedent.
I mean, that's,
that's the way
these,
you know,
dubiously constitutional
interpretations
of new technology
settle into
the law of the land,
because people just say,
well,
okay,
you know,
they, they go with the,
you know,
the people's first reactions
to the new technology,
and then that sort of
sediments into
law.
You know,
that's the way things work,
by precedent.
But, Julian,
perhaps there's something
that, uh,
as a reporter,
you might want to look
a little further into,
but I think that,
you know,
what's been going on
hasn't gone unnoticed
in that, uh,
I've seen, you know,
statements from
Senator Patrick Leahy
of Vermont.
He, he's the, uh,
chairman of the
Senate Committee on
Technology and the Law,
and, you know,
he has said things
to the effect of
that the government
has gone too far
in a lot of these
prosecutions
and some of the raids
that are taking place.
And I know that
he, he's, uh,
introduced new legislation
concerning the
Computer Fraud and Abuse
Act, and, uh,
to what he's done
exactly about the, uh,
the zealousness
or the overzealousness
of some of the
government agents,
I'm not sure,
but it might be
something to look into.
Yeah, I've heard
about that.
That's, I mean,
I think that's
probably, you know,
a step in the direction
of what we're talking
about.
Let's take another
call.
What we're talking
about.
Good morning.
Turn down your radio.
Okay, hold on.
Okay, I just wanted
to share a little
experience that I had
a few years ago.
Um, I've never been
a computer hacker,
but I have gotten
phony sprint codes,
or illegal,
shall we say,
sprint codes
and long-distance
codes, long-distance
telephone codes
from friends
that are hackers.
And a number
of years ago...
You do realize,
of course,
that the government
would classify you
as a hacker just
for the possession
of these items.
Oh, I know that.
That I know.
And you do realize,
of course,
that people who get
calling card numbers
aren't necessarily
hackers.
Yes, I know.
Okay.
Go ahead.
Um, well, anyway,
I've gotten...
As a matter of fact,
yes, I'm happy to say
that I still use them.
But about five years ago,
the Secret Service
showed up at my door
and asked for the person
that my phone
was listed under,
which, of course,
was myself.
And they basically
came in,
used a few scare tactics,
wanted to look
around the house,
which I wouldn't let them.
I didn't own a computer
at the time,
but Agent Raphael Figueroa,
who came in
to interrogate me
at the time,
hadn't realized
the fact that
I had worked
with other police agencies
over the years
in my line of work
and I know
and have studied
interrogation techniques.
So I know
when someone
has basically nothing.
They had me
on a few long-distance calls.
That was it.
And he was trying
to drill me
for information.
And the way
he interrogated me
at the time
was somewhere
in explaining to me
what the process was
and somewhere in midstream
he worked into
the sentence,
by the way,
you know,
you do have a right
to remain silent
and anything
that you da-da-da-da-da,
which sort of makes
your adrenaline
pop out just a little bit.
Someone says that,
you know?
Right.
I said, wait a minute.
Am I being arrested or not?
And he said,
no, no, no.
I just want you to know
that you have a right
to remain silent.
This is after he asked me
about two dozen questions.
Okay?
So what I told him was,
yes, I lied.
I told him
that I was on a conference line
in New York
and someone called
from California
and I said,
I can't believe
you're paying for this.
And he said,
of course I'm not.
Here's the code I'm using.
And I said,
well, that's basically
what happened.
I made a few calls.
So he pretty much
accepted that.
He took a few notes
and they left.
About a month later,
two more Secret Service
agents showed up.
Oh, by the way,
this is after getting
a call like once
every two or three days
from Agent Figueroa
and his partner.
Every two or three days
they would call
to say,
tell me something.
What does
X23781 mean to you?
And I'd say,
nothing,
which it meant
nothing to me anyway.
They'd call me
with questions like that
and when I would say
nothing,
I don't know,
they would just
simply hang up
in my face.
They were calling me
at their own whim
to see what I knew.
Like,
what does this mean?
What does that mean?
I didn't know
they'd hang up.
No goodbye,
no nothing.
They didn't even
say goodbye?
No,
no,
nothing,
nothing.
This is incredible.
So this went on
for a few,
this went on
for about three weeks
and then about,
like I said,
about a month after that,
two more Secret Service
agents showed up
with the same Xerox copies
that the other two guys had
and they had no idea
that anyone showed up
at my house
in the first place.
They had no idea
whatsoever.
This is how disorganized
these morons are.
These two guys showed up
asking for me again
and I said,
what,
again?
They said,
what do you mean again?
I said,
well,
two agents were here
about a month ago
and I pulled out
Raphael Figueroa's card
and showed it to them
and they apologized,
looked at each other,
kind of embarrassed
and left.
After that,
I realized that this was
just a total,
a total,
I can't say asshole,
can I,
moronic operation
that the people in charge
or the powers that be
or whoever is running
the show
or driving around
the countryside
and questioning people
has no idea
how they're distributing
information,
assigning tasks
and cases,
et cetera,
et cetera.
They had no idea
what they were doing.
Shortly after that,
about a month after
that even,
the partner
of Raphael Figueroa,
whose name escapes me
at the moment,
called me up
and said that
he decided
that I know more
than I told them
and that I am to come down
to World Trade Center
up to his office
and undergo questioning
and I just simply said,
no way,
no way,
and yes,
I used the F word,
I basically said,
no way,
and F you,
if you want to
interrogate me again,
you do it in my lawyer's office
next time.
and so he said to me,
well,
you know,
I think you know more
than you're telling us
and if I find out
any other way
than the SHIT,
he's going to hit the fan
and you're going to jail,
buddy,
that kind of crap.
And I haven't heard from them
in the last five years.
Did you ever sign anything?
No,
I didn't.
That's something that
I understand usually
they make you do
at some point.
Oh,
yes,
yes,
this was his idea.
To be honest with you,
I really think that they
forgot to make me do that.
In fact,
a very recent case
here in the city
involving a hacker
that was raided
by the Secret Service,
they basically said
his father had
a computer system
and they were going
to take that computer system.
Now,
that's the family's
livelihood there
is the father's
computer system.
So they said,
no,
don't take that one.
There's nothing
on that system.
So they were able
to get a lot more stuff
as a result.
They were able
to take all the equipment
belonging to the kid
and have him sign
all kinds of forms.
And one of the forms
that he signed
and that the father,
I believe,
had to sign
was that this was not
done under duress.
Oh,
wait,
wait,
wait,
as a matter of fact,
no,
I did fill out
a short statement
and sign it,
basically saying
that I met a guy
named Pete
or John,
whatever name,
I fabricated
in my brief statement
as to where I got
this long distance code
and I did sign
a statement
to that effect
saying that that was it.
And I,
of course,
knew what I was doing
unbeknownst to him
and within my statement
I added that I was
very uncomfortable
doing this
and did it
without the presence
of a lawyer
and hadn't spoken
to my lawyer yet
and was read
my rights somewhere
in mid-sentence
and they didn't
like that,
of course.
He was watching me
write and he said,
you know,
you really don't
have to write that.
I said,
but it's true
and that's what occurred
and I signed it
and that was it.
So I think
that's basically
why his partner
harassed me
two months later
but it might also
be part of the reason
that they never
bothered me again.
Interesting.
Well,
I'd be careful
if I were you
because they play
hardball out there
and I'm open
to all kinds of
suggestions
as to how to
deal with that.
Yes.
Thanks very much
for calling.
Okay.
279-3407
our call-in line
279-3400
is our pledge line
and we're going
to be wrapping
this up fairly soon.
Craig,
Julian,
any thoughts?
I just hope
that our last caller
hasn't tipped his hand
too much
by talking about
specific agents' names
and the ordeal.
Yeah,
well,
hopefully since it
occurred five years
ago,
people have been
transferred
or,
you know,
natural disasters
have occurred
or whatever
and hopefully
he's not involved
in that kind of
thing anymore
anyway.
212-279-3407
Good morning.
That's how they
show it.
I don't know
about that.
What was that?
Not good sound
quality at all.
Let's see what
this next one is.
212-279-3407
Again,
our pledge line
and I do want
to see some calls
come in
before we go off
tonight.
212-279-3400
Pledge your support.
Show that there
are people out there
who are willing
to pledge support
at 3 in the morning
here in New York City.
I know they're out there.
I know that there
are people out there
that care enough
to throw a few dollars
our way
and keep us going.
So give a call
to 212-279-3400
and show your support
for WBAI
at this time of need
or fall membership
drive.
We want to invite
new subscribers
to join and support
listener-supported radio.
It's not
listener-supported radio
if the listeners
don't support it.
So if you've already
joined,
you can always give
a friend a gift
subscription
and the same holds
true for the
subscription to
2600 Magazine
which you will get
with a pledge
of $55.
Again,
that number
279-3400
area code
212.
Just flip through
the dials.
See what else
you can find
that deals
with topics
like the topics
we deal with
here on WBAI.
And if you find
something else,
then that's amazing.
Let me know about it.
But I don't think
you will.
I think if you flip
through the dial,
you'll come back
and realize this is
one unique place.
We want to keep
it that way.
But the only way
we can do that
is with your support.
212-279-3400.
Good morning.
Hello.
How are you doing?
Yeah.
Is this WBAI?
Yes, it is.
Okay.
I'd like to speak.
Well, you're speaking.
Go ahead.
Am I on there?
Yes, you are.
Okay.
I was wondering,
do you take credit
cards for pledges?
Good point.
Good point.
Yes, we do take Visa
and we take MasterCard.
I guess I should have
mentioned that before.
That lessens the blow
for a lot of people.
So, yeah,
when you call up
279-3400,
keep that in mind.
We do take Visa
and MasterCard.
Great.
And what's the
subscription price
for pledging?
Okay.
For $45,
you can be a regular
subscriber to WBAI.
For $55,
you'll get a copy
or a subscription
to 2600 Magazine
for a full year.
And if you're a student
or senior citizen,
you can subscribe
for $25 to WBAI.
Great.
Okay?
Great.
Thank you.
I'll do so.
Okay.
Thanks for calling.
Okay.
212-279-3400
is our subscriber
contribution line
or pledge line.
Please have those
lines light up
so we can see
a last rally
before we go out.
We're here until 3.30.
At least,
I'm here until 3.30.
I think Craig
and Julian
might be nodding off
at this time.
Didn't really expect
them to stay this long.
I didn't either,
but it's so much fun.
It is fun.
Radio is incredible.
You know,
you can do so much
on the air.
And I think we're reaching
a lot of people tonight.
And that's what's so important
is, you know,
radio is a very intimate medium.
You know,
it gets you in your car
while you're drifting off
to sleep.
You know,
we have no idea
what people are doing
as they listen to us.
We often speculate
as to what people
might be doing
and how many people
are out there
and where they are.
But it's good to know
that we can say
what's on our minds here.
And we certainly have
a lot on our minds.
We've been through a lot.
And it makes a difference.
You know,
people are out there.
They listen.
They respond.
And that's what we're
asking for tonight
in many different ways
by responding
to the radio station,
pledging support there,
pledging support
to Craig's Defense Fund,
calling in
and becoming a part
of the dialogue,
writing in,
and, you know,
lending your expertise
wherever possible.
Again,
pledge line
212-279-3400,
call in line 3407.
Good morning.
Hi, this is PAI.
Yes, it is.
Hi, I have a question.
Go ahead.
Oh.
Turn down your radio.
Okay, let me turn down
the radio.
I have a question.
I didn't hear
most of this show,
so I don't know
if you covered this
earlier or not,
but why is it
that most of the
hackers you read about
are so young?
Is it that there aren't
older hackers
or that older hackers
just keep a lower profile
because they have a...
Well, you know,
my personal feeling
is that you see
so many young hackers
because think of young people,
think of teenagers.
They're always out
doing things
that adults tell them
not to do,
exploring,
being mischievous,
and that's really
what hacking is sort of about.
It's asking a lot
of questions.
It's moving about
in places that people
tell you to stay away from.
It's just satisfying
natural curiosity,
and I think that's
at its peak
in those years.
It's not, you know,
it doesn't take
a computer genius
to know how to log
into a system,
and people in their
20s and 30s
are certainly just
as capable of doing that.
However, I think
we've been a bit dulled
by, you know,
by the constant reinforcement
of what society
expects from us.
Right, but it seems
that hacking would offer
a lot of opportunities
for people to,
you know,
well, to take a lot
of money,
to, you know,
Oh, yeah, sure.
to enhance their own,
you know, finances,
et cetera,
and, you know,
doesn't...
That's where the criminal
element seeps in.
Yeah, and so I wonder
if there are older hackers
who are, you know,
who are criminals
or who, you know,
who just...
Well, you see,
once you become a criminal,
you sort of stop
being a hacker, you know,
one sort of stops
or the other takes over,
because being a hacker
means that you're
just out there
constantly pounding away
looking for an answer,
and if you're a criminal,
you've pretty much
found the answer,
and now you're just
using it to benefit yourself,
and you're not
being creative anymore,
you're just sort of,
you know,
living off the knowledge
that you already have
and using it
for your own purposes.
Is that hacking
is defined by,
you know,
sort of transgressing
of boundaries,
or is it defined...
I mean,
my understanding
of hacking
is that it's sort of
going in somewhere
and sort of,
I don't know.
Yes,
it's wandering about
in places people
tell you to stay away from.
Yeah,
that's certainly
what it is,
and that,
you know,
that is not
enough to justify
calling somebody
a criminal,
I don't think.
I mean,
yeah,
maybe they're mischievous.
I wouldn't think so either.
I just wondered
if there are
older people
who do this
kind of thing
and...
I'm sure
there are many people
of all ages
that do this
kind of thing
and if the turnout
we get
at the 2600 meetings
is an indication,
it crosses
all age lines,
all racial lines
of all sorts
because people
are interested.
As long as you have
a shred of curiosity
in your body,
you have the potential
to be a hacker
and there have been
hackers before
there have been computers.
Anybody that's
questioned
the way things
are set up
and gone out
to find their own answers
and learn things
on their own,
that's what hacking
is all about.
Yeah.
Well,
it's interesting to me
that I haven't heard
about hacking communities
of people,
say,
in their 30s and 40s
and I just don't know
if they don't exist
or whether they just
don't get as much.
There's a lot of
solitary hackers,
you know.
A lot of...
Yeah, Craig,
go ahead.
Throw something in.
Probably,
they're there,
there's not as many
of them
because a lot
of the,
and we're talking
about computer hackers
here,
separate from
what Emmanuel
described as
the hackers
before computers,
the technology
is fairly young
and so you have
a lot of young
people in high
school and college
with,
other than going
to classes
and,
you know,
the regular social
life and whatever,
don't have a lot
of else to,
you know,
to do.
They have more
time whereas
your older people,
your 30s and
your 40s,
I mean,
they've got
real jobs
and they've got
other real life
concerns
that perhaps
their parents
aren't taking
care of for
them.
So perhaps
these younger
people are
finding more
and venturing
more to look
around just
because they
have more
time to do
it.
That sounds
like a logical
reason.
All right,
thank you.
Okay,
thanks for
calling.
And that's
a very good
point because
a lot of
people wonder
why is it
that these
kids are so
young?
You know,
it's something
that,
think back to
when you
were that
age,
you know,
you were a
lot more
spirited as
far as what
you were
doing and
you also
had this
feeling of
immortality,
you know,
which is
kind of good
for some
things.
Like when
you were
exploring,
I guess,
in a sick
kind of way,
I guess that's
why the army
recruits people at
that age because
they think
they're immortal
and they'll
just do all
these crazy
things that
anybody with
common sense
would never
do.
But that's,
it does lend
itself well to
exploring and
that's why some
of our best
hackers are so
young.
Yeah,
there's an
element of
play to it,
you know,
that's...
Well,
Julian,
you've interviewed
a lot of
hackers.
What would you
say is the
average age?
Well,
you know,
I would judge
also from the
turnout at
your meetings.
You know,
you average
around 17,
I would say,
17,
18,
with a few
people up in
their 30s and
40s.
Look at John
Draper.
Well,
he doesn't come
to our meetings,
he's on the
West Coast.
But,
yeah,
for instance,
John Draper,
one of the
original,
well,
phone freaks,
you know,
who started
back in
the 60s.
But,
so,
so,
phone freaks
and hackers
have been
around for
as long
as there
have been
computers,
but it's
true that,
you know,
a lot of
the attrition
has to do
with people
going to
college or
getting jobs
and stuff.
And I would
suspect that,
you know,
as the caller
was just
suggesting that,
you know,
a lot of
your priorities
get refocused,
you know,
as you grow
old and
shaped towards,
you know,
survival and
that type of
thing.
I would
imagine that
a lot of
the quote
unquote hacking
or,
you know,
computer misdeeds
that go on
among older
people do
involve
forms of
embezzlement
or just
forms of
sabotage
against
companies.
You know,
there's,
it can be a
kind of
protest,
against the
workplace
to just
mess with
your computer.
I mean,
because a lot
of people,
a lot of
people are
put in a
position in
the workplace
because the
workplace is
oppressive
anyway of
not seeing
their computer
as something
liberating and
exciting,
but as part
and parcel
of, you
know,
the oppression
that they have
to deal with
in the
workplace.
Actually,
there's a
very good
article in
The Voice
a couple
of weeks
ago in
the
Electromag
section
about that.
William,
would you
say,
though,
in your
opinion,
from what
you've
discovered,
that the
types of
embezzlement
or computer
sabotage in
these companies
largely comes
from people
that work for
the company
or were
maybe recently
fired from
the company,
you know,
insiders,
as opposed to
your teenager
that's just
poking around.
Oh,
definitely.
yeah.
Yeah.
But,
and,
you know,
but I think
that's also
on,
you know,
sort of morally
ambiguous ground
too.
I mean,
yeah,
a criminal
is a criminal
and someone
who's just
embezzling money
from a
corporation
is,
well,
thank God
they're not,
you know,
stealing it
from grandma
down the
street.
But there
is,
you know,
it's hard
to get
behind that
in the way
that you
can get
behind,
say,
a teenager
just out
on a
sort of
electronic
joyride
and sort
of exercising
a healthy
disrespect
for authority.
But I
think,
I think
the motivations
of,
you know,
employees
who strike
back at
their corporations
can be
examined too
and examined
for,
you know,
some small
shred of
political
content.
That is
true.
I think
most of
the people
who are
still
teenagers
have
virtually
no element
of criminal
intent,
you know,
of wanting
to do
something for
a particular
motivation
or some
sort of a
gain for
themselves.
It's strictly
curiosity.
However,
if,
you know,
one of the
bad results
of what's
going on
these days,
if you
continuously
tell someone
that they're
a criminal,
if you
continuously
tell these
kids that
they're
criminals,
they may
very well
start acting
like criminals
because they'll
believe that
that's what
they are and
they'll never
be anything
more.
It's a
frightening
thing to
think about,
but that is
what is
happening now.
They're being
bombarded
with this
image from
the prosecutors
from the
government,
and it could
very well have
a detrimental
effect.
But Craig,
have you seen
that in your
experience?
I mean,
my impression
is that a
lot of
young computer
hackers actually
end up just
going into
computer security
as they get
older.
Most of
them that I
know,
that's their
goal,
to learn about
this stuff and
then end up
going into
computer security
jobs or
computer programming,
something like
that.
Although there's
a tendency now
to shut them
out of those
areas.
Yeah,
that's what
some of
these other
computer security
consultants,
I think people
like Gene
Spafford,
have suggested
that these
people should
be barred
from the
professions that
they would
probably be
the best in,
probably because
they fear the
competition.
But as far
as trying for
money and
things,
if for no
other reason,
computers,
they're getting
cheaper now,
but they
didn't always
used to be
so cheap,
if mommy and
daddy can
afford to
get their
kid a
computer,
the kid
probably
doesn't want
for too
much by
means of
materialistic
gains.
So they
don't have
any motivation
to steal in
the first
place.
Well,
that's never
stopped rich
people from
stealing in
the past,
but I see
the point.
I don't
think most
kids playing
with computers
are into
stealing at
all because
when you're
playing with
a computer,
it's so
inspirational to
just keep
getting answers
to the
questions you
keep asking
to see what
happens if
you do
this.
And it's
not really
that exciting
to just get
free money or
free products of
some sort.
That's, you
know, that's
passe almost.
It's more
interesting to
just see what
the computer
does if you
feed it this
line.
Well, yeah,
that's true,
but I think
there's also,
for very good
reasons,
within the
hacker community,
you know,
an attempt to
just say,
well, you
know, it's
just pursuit
of knowledge.
You know, I
just want
programming, so
this is why I
got into it.
And, you
know, as I
said, I think
there are good
reasons to
profess that
line, but I
think it's a
line.
I think, you
know, that the
fact that it's
illicit, the
fact that you're
breaking rules,
has a lot to
do with the
thrill of
things, which
is not to
say, you
know, which
is great,
because you're
breaking rules
and you're not
really hurting
anybody, in my
analysis of it,
you're not
preying on
anybody.
And I think
that shows a
healthy, you
know, just
sort of native
political instinct,
although, you
know, most
hackers you talk
to are, you
know, can be
all over the
political spectrum
if they're
political at all,
and for the
most part, they
don't, you
know.
What's unique
about the
hacker community
is that it's
not a community
at all.
It's a lot of
individuals with
different feelings
on different
subjects, but
together, maybe
despite what they
really want to do,
they do form a
community of
sorts.
It's just not a
unified community.
Yeah, that's my
ideal type of
community.
Let's go back to
the phones.
Good morning.
Yes, I wanted to
comment on a
couple of things.
Go ahead.
Well, I wanted to
ask, first of all,
Julian, did he
write the article
that was on the
front page of the
Voice, I guess it
was a month or two
ago about the
hackers?
Yeah.
Oh, okay.
Well, I just
wanted to say I
thought that was a
really excellent
piece, and I was
glad that it
appeared in, you
know, a big
forum like the
Voice.
Thank you.
There was that,
and I guess I
should say I've
done some computer
hacking myself, and
in relation to the
last caller, I'm in
my early 30s, and I
came into computer
hacking completely
out of a curiosity
about the technology,
and in fact, I've
read excerpts of
FRAC magazine, and I
don't really know it
well, but I've seen
it, and I've also
read 2,600 numerous
times.
I don't have a
subscription, but I
keep up with it
periodically, and
that's actually 2,600
is how I sort of got
into it in the
beginning.
I went to one of the
meetings, a couple of
the meetings that you
guys have at the
City Corps building,
and through that, I
met a couple of
people who became
instrumental.
They were almost
like mentors for me
as far as the
computer realm goes.
I don't know if
Craig or Julian are
familiar with these
guys, but maybe some
of the people out
there listening are
familiar with the
names CyberOptic.
Well, maybe we
shouldn't give names
out, because who
knows, even if they
are fake names, I
don't know.
Oh, really?
I'd say that that
name isn't even a
pseudonym anymore.
Oh, no?
Oh, okay.
But I am familiar
with it.
But what is your
point?
I mean, you learn
lots of things about
computers, is that
it?
Well, I guess part
of what I wanted to
say is, since I
knew some people
who were members
of the Legion of
Doom, as it's
known, and like
bonafide hackers, I
mean, these guys, I
got a really good
look at, a glimpse
into this world, and
participated in it.
And as far as I
know, just from my
own experience, the
whole thing was a
quest for knowledge.
It wasn't about
abuse of power or
corrupting systems or
planting Trojan horses
or any of that other
stuff that seems to
make the news.
The whole thing was,
even Legion of
Doom itself was not
this monstrous
conspiracy-oriented
group.
Most of the people
never had even met
each other face-to-
face.
the whole thing, as
far as my
experience was
concerned, was a
quest for knowledge.
And I think that
fact has been
overshadowed repeatedly
in the media coverage
of hacking in
general because, well,
I was going to ask
Craig this.
Did he feel like his
whole legal battle was
legitimate grievance
that the government
brought against him
or was it more, I
mean, they ended up
dropping the case.
Was it more of a
harassment type of
thing?
I think in some
ways it was an
effort to send a
message to the
hacker community
itself.
They had brought,
I don't remember if
he's ever got formally
presented, but I got
a chance to see him,
diagrams showing
FRAC and how it
was distributed to
Legion members, to
different hackers
across the country.
Clearly, the way
they wanted to
demonstrate the
case was to show
the evil of
hackers and then
show how FRAC was
sort of at the
center of it all.
In a sense, I was
on trial to
represent all
hackers in a way.
Right.
I see.
Well, see, that's
kind of my perception
of it.
And people, when
you think about the
technical literacy of
the public at large,
I mean, most people
cannot still program
their own VCRs, let
alone comprehend what
all the implications
are of computer
technology because it's
grown so fast and so
quickly.
And when you look at
the zeal with
which cases like
Operation Sun
Devil have been
prosecuted, when
you think about all
that, people don't
realize that this
technology has become
like a priesthood in a
way.
I mean, the people who
use it, who depend on
it, understand almost
nothing of how it
works.
And the people who
actually understand it
are a very small
technical elite minority
in this country.
And every day, more and
more of the system is
predicated on this, you
know, frail web of
electronic signals.
And when they've gone
after the hacker
community, I think, as
far as the government's
concerned, it's a
national security issue
because everything, even
the president, I mean,
if he were to, you
know, decide to launch
nuclear weapons, codes
would be transmitted by
certain microwave
channels and then
eventually sent out over
largely a commercial
telephone lines.
And here are groups of
what they consider
outlaw bands of kids
and pranksters who
are, you know,
corrupting this.
And I can see their
whole psychology of
why they feel like they
have to do this.
But people don't
realize, in my opinion,
don't realize the
reverse danger.
I think it's important
to identify people
that are elected
officials that
understand what it
is that's actually
happening, that
understand what
hackers are really
doing and what they
are not doing.
And I think that's a
major thing we have to
do is educate our
local officials as to
what's going on here.
Well, as far as I've
been able to tell,
there are not many
people in, like,
positions of governing
from one end to the
other who really
understand what's
happening with this
technology.
There are a couple.
I think there's a
Senator Leahy in
Vermont.
He's very articulate
as far as issues of
privacy and technology.
And I don't see him
as being taken in by
all this hackers
equal criminals.
There's also, I
believe, a California
representative, Don
Edwards.
That's true.
I've heard of him.
Now, one thing that
Don Edwards has been
instrumental in is,
and this is hilarious,
asking the FBI,
no, I'm sorry, it's the
Secret Service, asking
the Secret Service if
they have been watching
computer bulletin boards.
And their answer to
this was, no, we do
not have a list of
computer bulletin boards
that we have monitored.
However, if you supply
us with a name of a
computer bulletin board,
we'll tell you the
information that we have
on them.
So, if you think about
that statement, that's a
complete contradiction.
Of course.
I mean, they have to
have a list if they have
information on them.
They're just not going to
give it to you.
Of course.
I'm sure they do have a
list because there's a
very seriously perceived
threat as far as they're
concerned.
But it takes somebody,
you know, like
Representative Edwards or
Senator Leahy to
address this, and
something can actually be
done.
if you can actually get
through to somebody on
the elected representative
level, it will make a
difference.
That is really, I think,
the only way to go
because that and the
media.
If you can educate the
media and educate the
elected officials, you
stand a good chance of
actually being heard.
Well, that's true.
That's all true.
But to me, what's really
at issue, I mean, the
reason that I even got
into it in the first
place is because many
years ago I realized,
like, the implications of
all of computer technology
and where it was headed.
And the reason, the basic
reason I got into it is
because I know that the
threat to privacy of the
individual in this country
is enormous.
And, in fact, I kind of
feel like Big Brother has
already been created and
he's asleep now.
Well, let's put it this
way.
Doesn't have been woken.
Let's put it this way.
The desire for Big Brother
is here among many very
powerful people.
They want to be able to
constantly watch what
you're doing.
They want to always know
what your urine is
containing.
You know, what you're
thinking, what you're
doing, what you're
reading.
There's all kinds of
things.
Pressure on librarians to
supply lists of books that
people are taking out.
It's, yeah, it's there.
The desire is there and the
technology is very close to
being here.
Well, what fools us is that
Big Brother is not
centralized, too, as, you
know, as he was in 1984.
I mean, you have Big
Brothers all over the place
now that as the technology
itself decentralizes, you
have the Big Brothers, you
know, now he's your boss,
you know, now he's...
Yes, but the Big
Brothers of today, as
opposed to Orwell's Big
Brothers, are much more
technologically advanced,
much more.
Oh, yeah.
That's one thing that the
system in Orwell's book was
rather clumsy.
But if, you know, if
databases talk to each
other, if computers can
communicate bits of data
back and forth, you might
have a decentralized system,
but you've got all the
elements there for, you
know, a complete surveillance
system.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, there's thousands of
databases across the United
States that are linked to
some degree.
There's only really about
four or five laws left that
prevent databases from being
completely interlinked.
And if I, with my own
personal computer, with a
concentrated effort of a
couple of months or a
couple of weeks, if I could
really, with my own
ingenuity, put together a
profile of anybody, given
what little I know.
I mean, I was in the hacker
world for about a year under
the tutelage of these two
guys.
If I could do that, I mean,
what the government can do and
what they're leading the
public into a sort of
narcosis almost.
I mean, unfortunately, one
example is, unfortunately, my
bank is a city bank, one of the
world's evil banks.
But every few months when I
get my statement, I get a
little brochure about yet
another service I can
transact with my automatic
teller card.
And at the top of the
brochure is the statement,
one more step to a cashless
society.
Now, you have banks, the
major banks across the
country who are providing the
service and are working to
change the psychology, the
mass psychology of the
public into accepting more
and more these types of
transactions.
And for those of us who know,
I mean, it's well known that
there's a system that's waiting
to be implemented in the next
few years that will dispense
with cash altogether.
I mean, and once that
happens, everything else is in
place to virtually eliminate
individual privacy.
Because if you think about it,
once a cashless society is
instituted, every single thing
that you do, every transaction,
will be known, can be known by
somebody.
Well, it's like when you go to
the supermarket today, you know,
you get an itemized receipt
saying exactly what it was you
bought.
Sure, and the time?
Yeah, and the time.
In fact, you know, that's a very
good way to find out the time is
walking to a store and buy
something these days.
But that information, imagine
that information being tapped by
another source saying, well, who
bought what today?
What's this person buying?
Sure.
In fact, if you go into Radio
Shack, you know, they always ask
you for your name and address.
If you want to buy a battery, you
have to give them your whole life
story.
Well, you don't have to.
I know you don't have to.
I give them fake names all the
time.
In fact, it's funny because I see
the same person every time I see
him, I give him a different name.
I don't think he cares.
No, they do that because they get
their commission.
But I just tell them, look, I'm on
the mailing list.
I'm not giving my name.
But people, see, I was going to ask
Craig again, is there any plan to
resurrect his magazine at all?
Well, I don't have any plans to do it
at the current time.
Yeah.
The only, you know, the glimmer of hope
I like to leave people with is the
idea that, you know, maybe a year down
the road, you know, things will be
different.
Mm-hmm.
But, um...
Well, I'm sure, I mean, you're facing a
mountain of legal debt and whatnot that
you have to contend with.
But, uh, the reason I ask is because, to
me, uh, from my perspective, hackers might
be the only ones who, uh, have any kind
of edge in, uh, a world where, uh, this
becomes, these things that I've talked
about become a reality.
And that could be the reason why they're
number one on the hit list.
Yeah.
And that's certainly my, uh, feeling
about it, um...
Sounds like Steve Jackson's book to me.
Yeah, it's, uh...
And these guys themselves, they don't
even understand, I mean, they don't even
understand fully why they're, they're so
zealous in prosecuting this, uh, uh...
I think the feds like these cases because
they're going after people where they can
have a, somewhat of an assurance that
they're not going to get shot.
Well, you wouldn't know it, by the way,
they barge in with their guns drawn.
Yeah, uh, yeah, I've heard, uh...
I mean, imagine what that does to, you
know, to a, uh, you know, a young teenager
to have his home raided by, by 20
Secret Service agents with their guns
drawn.
Imagine what that does to you.
Sure, I, I was arrested once, uh, many
years ago when I was in college by, uh,
five police officers with drawn guns, and
I've never forgotten it.
Um, and, uh, I would, I guess, agree
with, uh, hello?
Yeah, I don't know what that is, but go
ahead.
What Craig had said a little earlier
about, uh, sending the chill through the
community, uh, which is, I'm sure, what the
government had really hoped for with, uh,
Robert Morris' uh, uh, case was to send
another chill.
Um, I just hope that the hackers who are
out there, I know the, uh, the community
is probably, uh, much smaller than it was
four or five years ago.
I mean, it was a completely different
world from what it is now, but I hope the
people who were out there who are still
interested and still able to, uh, do what
they can continue to, uh, pursue it and not
fall for this, uh, these, uh, you know,
tactics, because, uh, in my mind, they're
the only ones who may stand a chance to,
uh, liberate some, not to be, like, overly
paranoid, but, uh, I mean, it's there.
The whole thing is, the only reason that
it's not here now, Big Brother, and that
whole system for, uh, dispensing with paper
money, the only reason it's not here now
is because the public mind is not ready.
That's the only reason.
And every, every year, there's more inroads
made into changing and manipulating the
public consciousness about these things.
Quite true.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Thanks so much for calling, sir.
Thank you.
All right.
Bye.
Let's hope, uh, more people stay awake,
both, uh, you know, three in the morning
and throughout their lives.
Uh, we've lost Julian.
Uh, maybe he fell asleep.
No, I'm here.
Oh, then we lost Craig.
Uh-oh.
Oh, boy, that's too bad.
Uh, I wonder how that happened.
Well, uh, I do want to call back Craig,
so, um, that's it for the phone calls
that we'll be taking tonight.
Um, sorry, everybody else that, uh,
has been trying to get through.
Uh, we're going to go into some music.
We'll be back in about, uh, a couple of
minutes, I guess, and we'll, we'll say
goodnight to Craig and give out addresses
and phone numbers one more time.
Uh, thanks to everybody that called in,
and please, if, if you really feel strongly
about these issues, uh, show your support
in other ways.
Show your support to, uh, WBAI by calling
279-3400.
Call it now.
Call at three in the morning.
Yeah, show the folks in Tally Room
that, uh, there's actually people out there
now that, uh, they care enough to, uh,
to call in and pledge some support.
And you can get the, uh, the subscription
to 2600 Magazine for a $55 pledge.
Uh, we do take Visa.
We take MasterCard.
And, uh, we take pledge levels of pledge.
Wait, what do we take?
Pledges of all levels is what I'm trying to say.
Yes, that's what we do.
It's late, folks.
279-3400.
And, uh, let's, let's get those lines ringing.
279-3400 is our telephone number.
And we'll be back in just a moment.
That's BDP on the CD.
And once again, this style is dedicated to the Heavenly Father.
Because you know your rules!
Where can they go?
Where can they go?
Where can they turn?
When they're in your name, that fire burns.
That every soul.
Fire!
What can they do?
What can they say?
They can't live without your love.
What am I, bye?
Another day.
The bad, bad, bad, bad, bad.
Bad mind people and petty robber.
Straighten up your ways or you will suffer.
Well, go around, come around, and this is the law.
The man-made law, KRS-1 ignore.
I walk the streets as a rough-yed boy.
Very intelligent and full of joy.
Go to a concert and mash up the jam.
People in the world know just who I am.
I am what I am, cause I am not soft.
When the blind lead the blind, that's when you're lost.
But this a DJ dealing with negative nonsense messages are what they're ma' give.
BDP strong, cause Ja is the strength.
BDP long, cause Ja is the link.
BDP together, cause Ja is the link.
We are just a rise while the negatives sink.
Cause!
Where can they go?
Where can they turn?
When they're in your name, that fire burns.
Burn!
That every soul.
Link them down.
And what can they do?
What can they say?
They can't live without your love.
Another day.
Come!
Where can they go?
What can they do?
Bill!
We are not a front and we are no fraud.
Every hit record comes straight from the Lord.
We live in jail cell and we live in shelter.
If you help yourself, well Ja will help y'all.
Look to know man, but love everyone.
Stand on your own and work till you're done.
Follow the commandments that Ja set forth.
Cause man made laws, made man more fool.
Where can they go?
Where can they turn?
When they hear your name, that fire burns.
Put a bite, bite, bite, bite.
That very soul.
Fire!
What can they do?
What can they say?
They can't live without your love.
Another day.
They need you in their lives.
They know your love is right.
Always right.
You're the inspiration.
Yes.
That sweet revelation.
Oh, their hope and their salvation.
So what?
Where can they go?
Where can they turn?
We are not.
When they hear your name, that fire burns.
Their very soul.
What can they do?
What can they say?
They can't live without your love.
Another day.
Fire!
Fire!
Fire!
Fire!
Fire!
Fire!
In their lives.
They know your love is right.
You're the inspiration.
That sweet revelation.
And all of their hopes and their salvation.
Oh, where can they go?
Where can they turn?
When they hear your name, that fire burns.
Nowhere!
Can't move without the movement of Jah, see?
And what can they do?
What can they say?
They can't live without your love.
Another day.
Where do they go?
What do they do?
Where do they turn?
What can they say?
Where do they go?
What do they do?
We're without a hue.
Where do they go?
We're without a hue.
And it's music from Boogie Down Productions, Ghetto Music, the blueprint of hip-hop here on WBAI in New York.
And we want to thank those folks calling in to show their support.
Join them.
Join them.
You'll feel great about it.
212-279-3400.
And, again, this is the last possible time that we can say this.
The last possible time that you can pledge $55 and get that year of 2600 Magazine.
And become part of this whole unique world of computer hackers and technology people.
And learn about privacy issues, as the last caller was talking about.
We've been talking with Craig Neidorf, the former publisher of the now-defunct Frack Magazine.
And also Julian DeBell from the Village Voice Magazine.
Who I thank both of you for staying up so late.
I really didn't think you guys would last the whole show, but you did.
And lots of interesting things to share with the audience.
I suppose we should give out the addresses one more time for people that want more information and want to contribute and help out.
So I'll hand it over to you, Craig.
Great.
Okay, the last time I'm going to plug this.
Okay, if you're interested in sending any kind of contribution or correspondence whatsoever,
please send it to Sheldon, Zenner, Z-E-N-N-E-R, Katton, Mouchin, and Zavis, Z-A-V-I-S,
at 525 West Monroe Street, Suite 1600, Chicago, Illinois, 60606.
Any checks or money order, what have you, please make that out to Katton, Mouchin, and Zavis.
But be sure to make some sort of indication, like on the memo or with a letter,
that the money should be allocated to the account of Craig Neidorf.
Otherwise, it'll just go right into the general fund.
And we don't want that.
The intention of Sheldon Zenner.
Craig, I understand your hesitancy in pitching as it is, but it's a very good cause, folks.
Craig has really been through the mill here as far as protecting his rights,
but in a way he's protecting everyone's rights by sacrificing all of the things that he's sacrificed over the last few months.
It sure would be nice if this did not leave a permanent scar, i.e. bankruptcy or something along those lines.
So please, if you are in a position where you can help out,
I think we all owe it to each other to help each other out when things like this happen.
Craig, I do want to thank you, though, for standing up to all of this and remaining strong throughout it all.
So you've been an inspiration to a lot of people, and I sure hope it pays off in the end.
And thanks for being with us tonight.
My pleasure.
And Julian DeBell, thanks very much for staying up and for writing those good articles in the Village Voice.
Will we be seeing more of them, I hope?
Yeah, I'll be keeping this up.
And let me point out that Emmanuel here has been a central figure in all of this.
I mean, you know, he really got the word out about Craig's case
and really tipped me off to the whole situation that was going on there.
And, you know, whatever support there's been and really defense owes a lot to him.
Okay, thank you very much.
Thank both of you for being here tonight.
And thanks to all the listeners for calling in and for showing their support.
Again, if you still want to take advantage of the $2,600 offer,
it's going to be literally a few seconds more, 212-279-3400.
Remember to show your support for WBAI, though, throughout this upcoming fall membership drive
as we do need you to survive and we need each other to get by.
Thanks again to everybody and I'll see you again, I guess, in a couple of weeks.
I'm not quite sure what the schedule is.
It's confusing even me at this point.
But, again, thanks to everybody and we'll see you soon.
We'll keep you updated as to what's going on.
Good night.
Somewhere over the rainbow, way up high,
there's a wind that I heard once in a lullaby.
This is listener-supported, non-commercial, Community Barnyard Radio,
Pacifica's WBAI 99.5 FM, New York.
HUMBAI 99.5 FM, New York.
HUMBAI 99.7 FM, New York.
Me and Martha took her honeymoon.
Wow.
Down south by the slavery moon.
Wow.
She was 18 and I was 22.
Wow.
Now we're just to do what the young folks do.
It's time to get that out-of-the-boot-no-go
Ain't nothin' hick and dicks
Bulldogs killin' new tricks
New streets are lined with bricks
So out-of-the-boot-no-go
We better sign soon to get the whole thing wild
Thought it over, thought it ought to slang
I heard that the South plan really put things wrong
Change the wings, cock, make a sample dance
Please go south to get that out-of-the-boot-no-go
Ain't nothin' hick and dicks
Bulldogs killin' new tricks
New streets are lined with bricks
Of I-ca-Cよし
How he runs to Großee
Going down here
City could ros이
To get rid of all things
Bulldogs killin' too
And to bring the people around
And to walk around him
The would have been slow
And to walk in to put and trip
Also walk in the to-hold
It's more of just a way to pong
We won't go south, to get there, I can look on gold.
Ain't nothing it can't fix, old cops can learn to do tricks.
The rich trick are alive with bricks, so I can look on gold.
Mr. City Policeman, please let me walk on by, please don't check my eyes, cause I'm high.
I ain't got nobody, I can't prove who I am, Mr. City Policeman, be your friend.
Yes, I'm all alone in your big city, I got no place to lay my head, isn't it a pity, I'm
Mr. City Policeman, please let me walk on by, please don't check my eyes, cause I'm high.
Yes, I'm all alone in your big city, I got no place to lay my head.
Just lay my head, isn't it a pity, I'm all alone?
Mr. City Policeman, please let me walk on by, please don't check my eyes, cause I'm high.
Thank you.