On Sat, 23 Mar 2002, Declan McCullagh wrote: > If you are comfortable with your ability to publish code anonymously, > and do this through the methods that have been oft-discussed here, > including chained remailers, perhaps coupled with physical identity- > shielding schemes, there is no need to consult a lawyer. > > In other words, if you think there is a near-zero risk of identification > and subsequent legal action, why bother with an attorney?
In fact, consulting a lawyer becomes dangerous in that situation. Assuming you are consulting a lawyer in meat-space, and he knows your true name, you have just created a huge weakness in your plans to remain anonymous. (Assuming that your lawyer is On Your Side[tm], and respects the Attorney-Client Privilege[tm], you still have to trust him to be competent in concealing your identity from those who might not.) If you know something is illegal, and choose to do it anyway, placing your trust in available anonymity systems to protect you from jail, torture, or public disdain, there is very little a lawyer can tell you that will be of any use. If your method of remaining anonymous is full-proof, lawyers are an irrelevant distraction, if not a liability. The people who will need lawyers are those who operate the anonymity systems you choose to use, and whose true names are known. -MW-
