Re: Crypto moves forward: Commerce Dept panel and SAFE markup

At 11:13 4/25/97 -0700, Ernest Hua wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 18:17:09 -0400
>> To: fight-censorship-announce@vorlon.mit.edu
>> From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>> Subject: FC: Crypto moves forward: Commerce Dept panel and SAFE markup
>
>> It also creates new criminal penalties for using encryption to
>> further a criminal act ...  Remember that Maryland bill that would
>> criminalize sending "annoying" or "harassing" email? If the
>> Goodlatte bill became law, Marylanders who signed their messages
>> with PGP or telnetted to local ISPs could be slammed with an
>> all-expenses-paid trip to the Federal pen for five years ...  In
>> other words, SAFE would turn state misdemeanors into Federal
>> felonies.  This is not good.
>
>Ok.  So it's kind of bad in this respect, but let's face it ... we
>can't have everything OUR way, the FIRST time around.  Washington
>politics is just not that way (not that you need such a reminder).

I think you misunderstand the situation.  The government is in somewhat of a
disadvantage by virtue of the fact that there is relatively little
pro-censorship and anti-encryption legislation.  Absent such legislation,
the status-quo moves in a relatively free fashion, which is why the Internet
is mostly unregulated today.   


>> A coalition of groups is sending a letter to Goodlatte tomorrow supporting
>> the bill but expressing concern over the criminalization provision.
>> Interested in signing on? Email David Sobel: sobel@epic.org.
>
>Let's let the legislative process (whatever you think of it) take its
>course.  

That's precisely what they want us to allow, and that's exactly why we
shouldn't accept it.  As Tim May has repeatedly pointed out, we are probably
better off with NO legislation than bad legislation, and all we've been
offerred so far this year is bad legislation.




Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com

My lord, I'm agreeing with Jim Bell!

Right now, no controls exit on domestic crypto, though strict export
controls are in place.

The question is: Do we want to give up any domestic freedom in exchange
for a relaxation of export controls? (Congress is, after all, built on
compromises between warring factions.)

My instinct is to say "No." Let the courts strike down ITAR, EAR, and its
progeny, while we keep our freedoms domestically. 

-Declan


On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Jim Bell wrote:

> At 11:13 4/25/97 -0700, Ernest Hua wrote:
> >> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 18:17:09 -0400
> >> To: fight-censorship-announce@vorlon.mit.edu
> >> From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
> >> Subject: FC: Crypto moves forward: Commerce Dept panel and SAFE markup
> >
> >> It also creates new criminal penalties for using encryption to
> >> further a criminal act ...  Remember that Maryland bill that would
> >> criminalize sending "annoying" or "harassing" email? If the
> >> Goodlatte bill became law, Marylanders who signed their messages
> >> with PGP or telnetted to local ISPs could be slammed with an
> >> all-expenses-paid trip to the Federal pen for five years ...  In
> >> other words, SAFE would turn state misdemeanors into Federal
> >> felonies.  This is not good.
> >
> >Ok.  So it's kind of bad in this respect, but let's face it ... we
> >can't have everything OUR way, the FIRST time around.  Washington
> >politics is just not that way (not that you need such a reminder).
> 
> I think you misunderstand the situation.  The government is in somewhat of a
> disadvantage by virtue of the fact that there is relatively little
> pro-censorship and anti-encryption legislation.  Absent such legislation,
> the status-quo moves in a relatively free fashion, which is why the Internet
> is mostly unregulated today.   
> 
> 
> >> A coalition of groups is sending a letter to Goodlatte tomorrow supporting
> >> the bill but expressing concern over the criminalization provision.
> >> Interested in signing on? Email David Sobel: sobel@epic.org.
> >
> >Let's let the legislative process (whatever you think of it) take its
> >course.  
> 
> That's precisely what they want us to allow, and that's exactly why we
> shouldn't accept it.  As Tim May has repeatedly pointed out, we are probably
> better off with NO legislation than bad legislation, and all we've been
> offerred so far this year is bad legislation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jim Bell
> jimbell@pacifier.com
> 
> 
>

Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> writes:

> My lord, I'm agreeing with Jim Bell!

Declan is showing promise.

> Right now, no controls exit on domestic crypto, though strict export
> controls are in place.
>
> The question is: Do we want to give up any domestic freedom in exchange
> for a relaxation of export controls? (Congress is, after all, built on
> compromises between warring factions.)

Most folks who are trying to sell crypto products will say YES.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> My lord, I'm agreeing with Jim Bell!
> 
> Right now, no controls exit on domestic crypto, though strict export
> controls are in place.
> 
> The question is: Do we want to give up any domestic freedom in exchange
> for a relaxation of export controls? (Congress is, after all, built on
> compromises between warring factions.)
> 
> My instinct is to say "No." Let the courts strike down ITAR, EAR, and its
> progeny, while we keep our freedoms domestically. 
> 
> -Declan

I emailed Rep Goodlatte, but didn't get a response about this issue.  My
main problem is that it becomes a felony to use encryption for anything
that can be prosecuted if I take the legalese literally.  So if I have a
GSM cell phone in a car that is illegally parked, it seems that I would
fall under the definition.

I would mind it less if, 1. There had to be a conviction for the main
crime.  2. The main crime must be a serious felony (i.e. something far
worse than a single overdrawn check).  3. The penaly for using encryption
in furtherance should be less than that for the main crime.  4. encryption
had to play an intrinsic role in the main crime.  5. It must go beyond
common, everyday uses of encryption.

tz@execpc.com
finger tz@execpc.com for PGP key

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


In <97Apr26.185020edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>, on 04/26/97 at 04:50
PM,
   tz@execpc.com said:


>On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>> My lord, I'm agreeing with Jim Bell!
>> 
>> Right now, no controls exit on domestic crypto, though strict export
>> controls are in place.
>> 
>> The question is: Do we want to give up any domestic freedom in exchange
>> for a relaxation of export controls? (Congress is, after all, built on
>> compromises between warring factions.)
>> 
>> My instinct is to say "No." Let the courts strike down ITAR, EAR, and its
>> progeny, while we keep our freedoms domestically. 
>> 
>> -Declan

>I emailed Rep Goodlatte, but didn't get a response about this issue.  My
>main problem is that it becomes a felony to use encryption for anything
>that can be prosecuted if I take the legalese literally.  So if I have a
>GSM cell phone in a car that is illegally parked, it seems that I would
>fall under the definition.

>I would mind it less if, 1. There had to be a conviction for the main
>crime.  2. The main crime must be a serious felony (i.e. something far
>worse than a single overdrawn check).  3. The penaly for using encryption
>in furtherance should be less than that for the main crime.  4. encryption
>had to play an intrinsic role in the main crime.  5. It must go beyond
>common, everyday uses of encryption.

What I find troubling with the whole thing is the ideal that I *NEED* the
US Congress to pass a law giving me permision to exercise my 1st Amendment
Rights.

This is just another "bait and switch" scam by the government.

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
                          
Finger whgiii@amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info
- -----------------------------------------------------------
 
Tag-O-Matic: Friends don't let friends use Windows.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000

iQCVAwUBM2RzQY9Co1n+aLhhAQFatAP/RLO83JvFuU4gIddlSdvSgGxLd1fM2DlV
GMWTJ8tuzCclvGLp+mnkfzviQjhoV17DZKz9JeDMUpnDYC0X5O8ixLEnYLOkwWiB
yF0avwsN+s9kQESFHNd8p/fybHvud007Oyg48g/WHQulLcRM01phhw2wcYx8ZuyO
VYFE5rPrHPY=
=ghIK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

At 06:50 PM 4/26/97 -0400, tz@execpc.com wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>> My lord, I'm agreeing with Jim Bell!
>> 
>> Right now, no controls exit on domestic crypto, though strict export
>> controls are in place.
>> 
>> The question is: Do we want to give up any domestic freedom in exchange
>> for a relaxation of export controls? (Congress is, after all, built on
>> compromises between warring factions.)
>> 
>> My instinct is to say "No." Let the courts strike down ITAR, EAR, and its
>> progeny, while we keep our freedoms domestically. 
>> 
>> -Declan
>
>I emailed Rep Goodlatte, but didn't get a response about this issue.  My
>main problem is that it becomes a felony to use encryption for anything
>that can be prosecuted if I take the legalese literally.  So if I have a
>GSM cell phone in a car that is illegally parked, it seems that I would
>fall under the definition.
>
>I would mind it less if, 1. There had to be a conviction for the main
>crime.  2. The main crime must be a serious felony (i.e. something far
>worse than a single overdrawn check).  3. The penaly for using encryption
>in furtherance should be less than that for the main crime.  4. encryption
>had to play an intrinsic role in the main crime.  5. It must go beyond
>common, everyday uses of encryption.

It is kind of similar to the laws involving guns and crime.  If they find a
gun anywhere near the crime scene they tack on bigger and better penalties. 
(For example: they break down the door of someone who has some quantity of
illegal molecules on their property and find a gun in the search.  Odds are
they will try and tack on the "gun used in commission of a crime" penalties.)
 Anything that can become a threat to those in power will become eligible for
such additional penalties at some point.  

"In the future it will be extra jail time for using fire and/or the wheel in
the commission of a crime.  and the people to bring it to you?  The TLAs!"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQEVAwUBM2OnKOQCP3v30CeZAQGXIAf+JS45w58k062qNfMAOPs8zDrwi2V7LkrD
U1ibZoTCA8zr5PMP8/JqOEhY7vxWsduO53OHYJPKj46cqZ5WkLpTJdQUzJ1vRLTZ
/hvd84/MgWnThb+zVZoqywH3Ss049vq6RWSJQkNXkGzMrTi3920uOrAXd+55LclN
jDjsvEMTnyQN1ziF2v4SMaMNnd0zN0xVG+/xmm4CHcQL2FR0wJhSZGiyYilL21w6
9qIilgQmpx6t7Ma4V94CnFS/mJzPNc/0DHRvnuIBdSD/XPRvJdVdA+gwDXKDoMJk
SBhAI3mbrTvPRAP9AE+bco7ecxuDDhJElcTJDU2PjBowu4gfPL3WwA==
=72ny
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---
|            "Mi Tio es infermo, pero la carretera es verde!"            |
|"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer:         |
| mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!"  | Ignore the man      |
|`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key  | behind the keyboard.|
|         http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com|