// COMPLETE THREAD

pgp 2.6 stupidity

4 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child

NODE 0cce858epgp 2.6 stupidity
Personally, I find the PGP 2.6 announcement to be based on an
extremely flawed premise.

PGP 2.3a and earlier were not American software -- they were written
and produced overseas and were IMPORTED into the U.S.

They infringe on no patents or copyrights when used overseas.

Well, I have lots of correspondants overseas, using perfectly legal
software. They cannot legally use PGP 2.6 -- it isn't exportable.

Therefore, this idiocy will act to cut me off from my overseas
correspondants. I will not be able to use the current version of PGP
and still communicate with them. I will therefore be forced to use
older versions -- probably repeatedly patched versions of 2.5.

Perry
NODE c30804c0Re: pgp 2.6 stupidity
> 
> Personally, I find the PGP 2.6 announcement to be based on an
> extremely flawed premise.
> 
> PGP 2.3a and earlier were not American software -- they were written
> and produced overseas and were IMPORTED into the U.S.
> 
> They infringe on no patents or copyrights when used overseas.
> 
> Well, I have lots of correspondants overseas, using perfectly legal
> software. They cannot legally use PGP 2.6 -- it isn't exportable.
> 
> Therefore, this idiocy will act to cut me off from my overseas
> correspondants. I will not be able to use the current version of PGP
> and still communicate with them. I will therefore be forced to use
> older versions -- probably repeatedly patched versions of 2.5.
>

Personally, I can't see any compelling reason, save legality, for
domestic or international users of PGP to upgrade beyond 2.3a. 

This whole PGP 2.5/2.6 fiasco is ridiculous.

- paul
NODE 40463fadRe: pgp 2.6 stupidity
Paul Ferguson scribbles:

> >
> 
> Personally, I can't see any compelling reason, save legality, for
> domestic or international users of PGP to upgrade beyond 2.3a. 
> 
> This whole PGP 2.5/2.6 fiasco is ridiculous.
> 
> - paul
> 
>
NODE 5664519aRe: pgp 2.6 stupidity
[...]

> 
> PGP 2.3a and earlier were not American software -- they were written
> and produced overseas and were IMPORTED into the U.S.
> 
> They infringe on no patents or copyrights when used overseas.
> 
> Well, I have lots of correspondants overseas, using perfectly legal
> software. They cannot legally use PGP 2.6 -- it isn't exportable.
> 
> Therefore, this idiocy will act to cut me off from my overseas
> correspondants. I will not be able to use the current version of PGP
> and still communicate with them. I will therefore be forced to use
> older versions -- probably repeatedly patched versions of 2.5.

Perhaps you should consider adopting the more internation and just as 
secure Clipper system.

This will eliminate all your hastles and it's freely exportable!

> 
> Perry
> 

-uni- (Dark), who would put a smiley in, but it seems no laughing matter.


-- 
073BB885A786F666 nemo repente fuit turpissimus - potestas scientiae in usu est
6E6D4506F6EDBC17 quaere verum ad infinitum, loquitur sub rosa    -    wichtig!