[6890] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Junger wins in Appeals Court - Junger v. Daley, 6th Cir.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Stewart)
Wed Apr 5 10:12:03 2000
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20000405010637.00917b10@idiom.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 01:06:37 -0700
To: cryptography@c2.net
From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Peter Junger's export case just won in the Appeals Court! Yee-hah!
>: > Junger v. Daley, 6th Cir. No. 98-4045
>: > http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00a0117p.06
>: > http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0117p-06.pdf
>: >"Having concluded that the First Amendment protects
>: >computer source code, we reverse the district court
>: >and remand this case for further consideration of
>: >Junger's constitutional claims in light of the amended regulations."
...
>: >>Because computer source code is an expressive means for the exchange of
>: >>information and ideas about computer programming, we hold that it is
>: >>protected by the First Amendment.
To clarify what's going on, I wrote to Peter
>: Am I correct in my understanding of the actions?
>: - Peter Junger filed in Federal District Court for Northern Ohio
>: - Court awarded summary judgement to the Bad Guys
>: - Junger appealed to the 6th Circuit Appeals Court
>: - The Appeals Court just decided the Constitutional issue of law,
>: holding that source code is protected by the 1st,
>: reversed the summary judgement, and
>: remanded to the District Court
And he replied
>Right
>: - The District Court now needs to hold the full hearing,
>: but given the important finding,
>: it should be a slam-dunk for Junger?
>
>The remand is partly to determine the effect of the new regulations.
>The lawyers are going to have to decide what we will do next. I
>am just a satisfied client.
>
>But just because the new regulations are such an improvement, the
>really significant point is that we now have a circuit court decision
>holding the computer programers are entitled to the same constitutional
>protections that pornographers receive.
>
>: Or can Junger file to get a summary judgement in his favor?
>
>I suppose we could, don't know if we would.
>
>: - If the Feds still want to appeal, they've got to
>: go to the Supreme Court? (Or win in another Circuit first
>: and then try appealing to the Supremes?)
>
>Yes. But they may want to see what happens on remand before appealing.
>(And, of course, it is theoretically possible that we would lose on
>remand.) In that case the appeal would be back to the Sixth Circuit.
Thanks!
Bill
Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com
PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639
Thanks!
Bill
Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com
PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639
