GAK boycott, What are legal implications?

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

Here is a question for all of you cyber legal types out there.
This question presupposes: 

The NIST will complete its work on the GAK standard. But no law will be
passed (yet) regulating the use of encryption in the U. S. (The GAK standard 
is an attempt to create an environment in which such laws can be passed.) 
In the U.S., Big Company INC will start marketing a GAKed encryption 
product domesticly.

A bunch of cypherpunkish types will immediately try to organize a boycott
against BIG COMPANY.

What are the cypherpunks legal risks?

I seem to remember that back in the 70s, the NAACP lost a big case
with respect to their boycott in a southern city. As I recall there were people
in the street begging money for the NAACP because there was a > 10**6 $
judgement against the NAACP and they needed that much just to appeal.


- -- 
Paul Elliott                                  Telephone: 1-713-781-4543
Paul.Elliott@hrnowl.lonestar.org              Address:   3987 South Gessner #224
                                              Houston Texas 77063

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

iQCVAwUBMNnJ8/BUQYbUhJh5AQGbsgP/T0n31SqeuHt+7AbizymcEhu/78DUuym5
sj+MO3ruA9WcEBQUXfabuf/PgOwlrtUAcC3dISPvXwGbdygc9oHBfxSglLi48g7d
dvDS4wziRHF7N8sBsYn0ee9YyKhPd9U7Ci0ovOc5frFGSZ2Bt4hU703d7bR+6cB+
iHHqsPaAa6o=
=EPoj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Thu, 21 Dec 1995, Paul Elliott wrote:

Gee, being legally responsible for lost revenue over a boycott.  Rev. Donald 
Wilmond is going to be very broke!  I don't know anything about the NAACP 
case, but it seems to me that free speech & merely *urging* people to 
boycott would be a perfect defense.


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> Here is a question for all of you cyber legal types out there.
> This question presupposes: 
> 
> The NIST will complete its work on the GAK standard. But no law will be
> passed (yet) regulating the use of encryption in the U. S. (The GAK standard 
> is an attempt to create an environment in which such laws can be passed.) 
> In the U.S., Big Company INC will start marketing a GAKed encryption 
> product domesticly.
> 
> A bunch of cypherpunkish types will immediately try to organize a boycott
> against BIG COMPANY.
> 
> What are the cypherpunks legal risks?
> 
> I seem to remember that back in the 70s, the NAACP lost a big case
> with respect to their boycott in a southern city. As I recall there were people
> in the street begging money for the NAACP because there was a > 10**6 $
> judgement against the NAACP and they needed that much just to appeal.
> 
> 
> - -- 
> Paul Elliott                                  Telephone: 1-713-781-4543
> Paul.Elliott@hrnowl.lonestar.org              Address:   3987 South Gessner #224
>                                               Houston Texas 77063
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.2
> 
> iQCVAwUBMNnJ8/BUQYbUhJh5AQGbsgP/T0n31SqeuHt+7AbizymcEhu/78DUuym5
> sj+MO3ruA9WcEBQUXfabuf/PgOwlrtUAcC3dISPvXwGbdygc9oHBfxSglLi48g7d
> dvDS4wziRHF7N8sBsYn0ee9YyKhPd9U7Ci0ovOc5frFGSZ2Bt4hU703d7bR+6cB+
> iHHqsPaAa6o=
> =EPoj
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 

Robert A. Jacoby	(speaking only for myself--not legal advice)
Assistant Law Librarian for LAN/Reference
George Mason University Law Library
(703) 993-8107
rjacoby1@osf1.gmu.edu

> Here is a question for all of you cyber legal types out there.
> This question presupposes:
> 
> The NIST will complete its work on the GAK standard. But no law will be
> passed (yet) regulating the use of encryption in the U. S. (The GAK standard
> is an attempt to create an environment in which such laws can be passed.)
> In the U.S., Big Company INC will start marketing a GAKed encryption
> product domesticly.
> 
> A bunch of cypherpunkish types will immediately try to organize a boycott
> against BIG COMPANY.

I think it's more likely that a group of people will work on
breaking Big Co's GAKed product.  Either finding a flaw
in it's algorithm or protocol that can be exploited, or
a flaw that renders it's GAK unusable, i.e. Matt Blaze's
LEAF hack on Clipper.

> What are the cypherpunks legal risks?
> 
> I seem to remember that back in the 70s, the NAACP lost a big case
>with respect to their boycott in a southern city. As I recall there were people
> in the street begging money for the NAACP because there was a > 10**6 $
> judgement against the NAACP and they needed that much just to appeal.

Well, NAACP is an actual organization with papers filed
with the IRS, officers or some sort of board members, offices, etc.

Cypherpunks is just a mailing list, and many of the members
of the list don't use their real identies on the list.

Who would they go after?


-- 
Eric Murray  ericm@lne.com  ericm@motorcycle.com  http://www.lne.com/ericm
PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03  92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF