Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 11:19:29 -0400 From: "Brian A. LaMacchia" <bal@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
In the subsection that explicitly mentions crypto, it says that it's unlawful to put (non-GAK) crypto on an open net, "regardless of whether such software has been designated non-exportable". If the phrase "nonexportable" means the same thing in the context of this subsection, then provision (b) would only seem to apply RICO to stuff that already falls under ITAR.
What worries me is the first sentence: "each act of distributing software is considered a predicate act."
The crypto section has no GAK exclusion. It makes it as illegal to release GAKed crypto on a net as PGP. I believe that the concern about defining predicate acts this way comes from the RICO requirement that there be TWO instances of a crime in order to pass the test of perpetrating a *pattern of crime* and therefore be ranked as a mobster subject to RICO. My guess is that the intent is that from one placement on an FTP server or one posting to a newsgroup, the perpetrator of that heinous act will have passed his RICO qualification and therefore be subject to having all he owns taken from him. ------- Meanwhile, the Federal civil forfeiture fund goes to good things. The last $9M (I believe it was) went to buying up AT&T DES phones to be made into Clipper phones. Of course, the conversion hasn't happened yet and the DES phones are sitting in a warehouse someplace -- but the $9M fund went to really good use, saving the world from AT&T DES. (sarcasm off) +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Carl M. Ellison cme@acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme/home.html | |PGP: E0414C79B5AF36750217BC1A57386478 & 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 | | ``Officer, officer, arrest that man! He's whistling a dirty song.'' | +----------------------------------------------------------- Jean Ellison -+