[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Netscape
Rich Graves writes:
: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
:
: On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Mark M. wrote:
: > On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Tom Weinstein wrote:
: >
: > > Why not consider what the consequences will be? Do you seriously
: > > believe that this will make the government stop enforcing ITAR?
: >
: > The government has yet to enforce ITAR. The only thing they have been doin
: g
: > is threatening companies who make products with strong crypto. If anyone w
: as
: > ever actually put on trial for a violation of ITAR, it would almost certain
: ly
: > be found to be unconstitutional.
:
: So do it. None of this anonymous bullshit, or trying to drag Netscape into
: it.
:
: I'd donate whatever I could to a Cypherpunk Legal Defense Fund. We only need
: one volunteer with a lot of time on his/her hands.
:
Fortunately one does not have to be prosecuted to test the
constitutionality of the ITAR as they apply to cryptography: the
Bernstein and Karn cases have already been brought and at least one
other is in the pipeline. But no one seems to be setting up a Legal
Attack Fund to support such litigation. Perhaps some of those active on
the cypherpunks list would be interested in creating and supporting such
a fund. One would hope that those corporate interests who keep
complaining about how the ITAR cut into their potential profits would be
willing to contribute.
--
Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
Internet: [email protected] [email protected]