Re: Netscape

At 13:27 7/22/96, Tom Weinstein wrote:

>Well, for starters, the genius who put it out there put out a beta,
>which has an expiration date, instead of waiting for the final release.
>Secondly, millions of people don't use PGP.

I am sure the final release will be exported the day you release it. The
government will not go after you because some third party violated the law.
Remember, even PRZ was only harassed, never charged. It is my opinion, and
that of many of the legal folks on this list, that the ITAR are
unconstitutional. Netscape is being intimidated by a bluff. And no, I do
not fault Netscape for not forcing the issue.

>Also, notice the simple verification system MIT was allowed to use, and
>the complex one we're required to use.

Sure. The feds are learning. They know that they can't prevent export. They
even know that their regulations don't have a leg to stand on. But they
also know that they can make the life difficult for anyone wanting to make
strong crypto available domestically , thereby reducing the number of
shrink wrap quality programs available for domestic users. Which, let there
be no mistake, is the true reason for the ITAR including software crypto.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.

At 9:15 PM -0700 7/22/96, Lucky Green wrote:

>Remember, even PRZ was only harassed, never charged.

Phil Z was not harassed, he was investigated.

When the government harasses you, believe me you will know it. Can you say
"IRS"?

David