-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com> writes:
Mike wants to protect himself against a PGP-style investigation into export of software. But if 1.2 is put up for FTP, it could conceivably lead to such an investigation. And Mike would presumably be a potential target.
This is a confusing situation. What rights does Mike have to control a derivative product like 1.2, given that he is releasing it under the Gnu Public License?
Legal questions aside, one might hope that within the Cypherpunks at least there might be more of an ethic of respecting the wishes of an author. Edgar seems awfully casual about exposing other people to legal difficulties without their consent, and justifying that by some bullshit technicality doesn't change the reality of it one bit. I for one am most unimpressed. -- Will -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLTfaV/fv4TpIg2PxAQG8TgP7B1RCFmNquI1ctKdLqVutIcWy8S8ycM3F wjZXGuCRiDZnRQh6q+WTp7aG5p07suF0qmVCFZnvAmrLBZx/PfsFxRPuSZML5J4R b+Clw9uq2rADxUbClgekp7oL4MXmOuXjYCiXdc2CoogME2s4fZRdT9cdteS6hieW kQOWTzfGQzw= =CQtw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----