Timothy May writes:
I suggest that we as a community seriously reconsider our basic support for PGP. Not because of any flaws in the program, but because of issues related to Clipper and the potential limits on crypto.
[Cites several reasons why it's inconvenient that PGP users don't have legal licenses to use RSA's stuff]
With all due respect, fuck that. I agree that it would be much much better if PGP users could be licensed; but your letter convinced me that it's even more crucial that we get Bizdos, et al., to give or sell us a license for PGP. Yes, it is important that we have a legal and above-board product available to us. Walking away from a well-written and well-distributed (and FREE, with source) piece of software to assuage the egos and wallets of a few folks in California is bullshit. If I need to choose between "legitimacy" and privacy, privacy wins. Every time. This is the carrot for Bizdos: our money, and more market share. This is the stick for Bizdos: some of use are gonna use it anyway. He can have our money to use it - or not. RSA's choice. This entire issue pisses me off - the work that created the "patentable" stuff in the first place was supported by with public money. I think that makes it ours. I'd be willing to play along with this game if it was possible for me to do so in a reasonable fashion; but it is not. My money went to fund the development of an algorithm that now I'm not allowed to use? NOT!
I'm arguing that we should look carefully and see what the real issues are, who the real enemy is, and then make plans accordingly.
The real enemy is people who tell us that some folks can own an algorithm or a process; and other people who tell us that we can't use properties of mathematics to ensure our own privacy. It may be that within months or years the US Government will tell us that certain mathematical processes cannot be applied to streams of data, without criminal penalties; we are all able to see that's clearly unacceptable. Why is it so difficult to see that it's also unacceptable for PKP to tell us that we cannot apply those same processes without risking civil penalties? The legal minutiae behind those two statements may differ; but the end result is the same. Other folks want to tell us what we can and can't do with our data and our computers. Fuck that. -- Greg Broiles greg@goldenbear.com Golden Bear Computer Consulting +1 503 465 0325 Box 12005 Eugene OR 97440 BBS: +1 503 687 7764