[52721] in Cypherpunks
Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jamesd@echeque.com)
Wed Mar 27 02:51:45 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:31:01 -0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
From: jamesd@echeque.com
At 11:06 PM 3/26/96 GMT, aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk wrote:
> ie I would have thought that getting rid of ITAR would be beneficial
> to internet commerce in general, and likely advance uptake of
> electronic cash (by several years?) For whatever reasons (best known
> to themselves) even big fish like netscape, and microsoft don't seem
> to have any stomach for taking on the USG in any meaningful way over
> the issue.
If the Leahy bill got rid of ITAR, then that would be a very great
advance. It is far from clear that it does get rid of ITAR.
If it was interpreted in a reasonable manner, then indeed it would
get rid of ITAR. But if ITAR was interpreted in a reasonable manner,
then that also would get rid of ITAR
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind |
of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the |
arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
