🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct10.212848.6325@infodev.cam.ac.uk>, crj10@phx.cam.ac.uk (Clive Jones) writes:
> I'm no lawyer. I don't know what international, British, American, or
> any other law has to say on this subject. I don't even know what it
> says about international paper mail, telephone calls or faxes.
> However, it is clear to me that, in the same way as a ship from
> country A has to abide by country B's import regulations if it wants
> to send goods to that country, a country *should* be able to enforce
> its networking/telephony/postal regulations on those sending material
> to the country.

A country only gets jurisdiction over a shipper after that ship enters
their territory.  Since the shipper that is within U.K. territory is UKNET 
(or JANET, or BT TELCOM depending on your point of view) they are the ones
the british government has jurisdiction over.  The british government
is free to set up a customs node where the network enters their country
and examine every message for material illegal in the U.K.  Shippers and
airlines cooperate with local authorities because they risk the siezure of
the ship or airline that is within the country's jurisdiction.  So likewise
I would expect UKNET to cooperate with authorities in their own country.

What recourse does a country have against an entitiy not within their
jusrisdiction?  Well, they have several options.  They can ignore it, try
to jam it from within their territory, or they can attempt action in
whatever country the entity is in (a lawsuit, covert actions, or even
overt war).  This is much the situation the old soviet union was faced
with the voice of america radio broadcasts, or even the 100 "international"
phone lines that were all routed through moscow.