Re: Anti-Electronic Racketeering Act of 1995 (fwd)

[Carl Ellison <cme@TIS.COM>]

>Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 11:19:29 -0400
>From: "Brian A. LaMacchia" <bal@martigny.ai.mit.edu>


>>In the subsection that explicitly mentions crypto, it says that it's
>>unlawful to put (non-GAK) crypto on an open net, "regardless of whether such
>>software has been designated non-exportable". If the phrase "nonexportable"
>>means the same thing in the context of this subsection, then provision (b)
>>would only seem to apply RICO to stuff that already falls under ITAR.
>
>What worries me is the first sentence: "each act of distributing
>software is considered a predicate act."  


The crypto section has no GAK exclusion.  It makes it as illegal to release
GAKed crypto on a net as PGP.



I believe that the concern about defining predicate acts this way comes
from the RICO requirement that there be TWO instances of a crime in order
to pass the test of perpetrating a *pattern of crime* and therefore be
ranked as a mobster subject to RICO.  My guess is that the intent is that
from one placement on an FTP server or one posting to a newsgroup, the
perpetrator of that heinous act will have passed his RICO qualification and
therefore be subject to having all he owns taken from him.

-------

Meanwhile, the Federal civil forfeiture fund goes to good things.  The last
$9M (I believe it was) went to buying up AT&T DES phones to be made into
Clipper phones.  Of course, the conversion hasn't happened yet and the DES
phones are sitting in a warehouse someplace -- but the $9M fund went to
really good use, saving the world from AT&T DES.

(sarcasm off)

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison    cme@acm.org    http://www.clark.net/pub/cme/home.html  |
|PGP: E0414C79B5AF36750217BC1A57386478 & 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2  |
|  ``Officer, officer, arrest that man!  He's whistling a dirty song.''    |
+----------------------------------------------------------- Jean Ellison -+