Re: I@Week on crypto export loophole 6/24/96

[Will Rodger <rodger@interramp.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


>As I see it, the most important issue is not the legal status of the one 
>actually doing the export/mailing, but in fact the organization which is the 
>recipient and thus, the beneficiary of this act.  _THAT_ organization will 
>be well-identified, yet will not have done anything obviously illegal.  Is 
>there any indication that Baker was trying to distinguish between the one 
>physically mailing it, and those receiving it?

Yup. He was speaking only of the US company. As you mentioned, odds of anyone 
getting caught are fairly low in many cases, but even lower for anyone
outside the US.
 The odds the US would go after a foreign company would seem pretty remote,
unless
 based in a country that strongly suppported US policy. The UK comes to
mind, but few
 others. I'll leave it others to decide who else should be on that list.


Will
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMebLF0cByjT5n+LZAQF3Owf5AbJCUK/9sbaUGDVV4eZcqggSuOgH+ubr
fbx3W7HXaXcAlqvATFRt+mw5h6GMubNrRCC+Ka6CJYC60QESWnHCw8/XX000I2UQ
ucBwRMTID+KZuNHN9vD4/hE+JBLkWDQyu2S4IDWkCR0+7UJDFQQ9z3kSVmqgczlB
jGyOtUwVpNHETg0yGreuQVCMz6gzxX1eZf0Hv38BJQqD8ROOLVCmYC1grRlrltRV
VJqRohsVustzqgu35OoKKzZES3hJxqvmXaNHIDMKhZmnbeHiZeAKs0tQ9hJz7Znp
oNAGcwIugB7S7mANIr6bd0EPHiljOP2Ipe13LgMAtkhidipTDQgtRQ==
=6+G6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----