Re: Bernstein ruling meets the virus law

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

At 7:50 PM 4/20/96, Computer Virus Help Desk wrote:
>At 09:08 PM 4/19/96 -0700, Tim 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.

My point. (Also a point made by Mark Neely, I just noticed, when he wrote a
couple of days ago: "Well, that puts legislation making virus authoring a
crime
into a new (and difficult) position.")

>To the best of our knowledge simply writing Virus Code including it's
>"distribution" is not a crime in the United States.  However, the
>deliberate, malicious upload or infection of another's computer or system is
>a crime in many states.

Again, my point. I was not saying such virus writing is currently against
U.S. laws, at least not at the national level (the fifty states and various
other local governments have their own laws, as the Georgia example about
remailers is only the latest example of).


>We don't see the "Bernstein" ruling as having an effect in the U.S. one way
>or the other.  Virus Code seems to be treated just like "speech" right now.
>Use "it" to yell "fire" in a crowded theater and see what happens.
>Deliberately and maliciously infect another's computer or system with a
>computer virus and see what happens.
>
>What proposed law making writing virus code a crime were you referring to ?

I was referring to the general discussion reported here and in places like
"Risks" about illegalizing the generation of virus software. (A search of
the archives, when they come back up, will reveal debates here on this.)

(And I dimly recall at least one state legislature passing a law making
"virus software" ipso facto illegal, regardless of being used in a trespass
situation. The archives may produce more on this.)

I don't think such a law is Constitutional, which is my point. Judge Patel
seems to recognize this, as it relates to the Bernstein case.

--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."