Re: Bernstein ruling meets the virus law

[tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)]

At 3:05 PM 4/20/96, Bruce Marshall wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Apr 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:
>
>> It should be interesting to see what happens when the Bernstein ruling
>> (assuming it is further upheld as the court case and appeals proceed) meets
>> the proposed law making the writing of virus code a crime.
>>
>> If crypto  software is essentially speech, albeit in a non-traditional
>> human language, then virus software is no different.
>
>    I think the determination of whether virus software will be
>considered free speech (and thus legal) or speech needing limits
>(illegal) will be based entirely on whether that code is active in system
>memory or just sitting on a hard drive.

I of course was being careful to specifically say "the proposed law making
the writing of virus code a crime."

I think most of us will agree that destroying someone else's data via
viruses may well be a crime, depending on circumstances.

However, the talk of trying to felonize the _writing_ of virus code,
irrespective of whether it is ever used criminally, is what I think the
Bernstein decision bears on.

--Tim May


Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1  | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."