[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Cypher Rant II: Why Private Cryptography should not be regulated.

To: cypherpunks <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Cypher Rant II: Why Private Cryptography should not be regulated.
From: Michael Froomkin <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 1995 09:38:39 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Sender: [email protected]

forgive me for the advertisement, but I *am* a lawyer, and I think this 
well-intentioned rant gets some stuff wrong.  If you want to know why I 
think this, visit my homepage and follow the link to my Clipper paper.
Please note the homepage is a bit mobile right now; this address is 
temporary, but the next one should be stable.

A. Michael Froomkin        | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Associate Professor of Law | [email protected]
U. Miami School of Law     | 
P.O. Box 248087            | It's hot here.  And humid.
Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA |
See (soon to move to its real home): http://www.law.miami.edu/~mfroomki

References:
- Cypher Rant II: Why Private Cryptography should not be regulated.
  - From: Paul Elliott <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Cypher Rant II: Why Private Cryptography should not be regulated.
Next by Date: Day 2, nist GAK meeting
Prev by thread: Cypher Rant II: Why Private Cryptography should not be regulated.
Next by thread: Day 2, nist GAK meeting
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread