(Was referring to the govs ability to control communications *with them*)

Perhaps I do not understand your point. They can perhaps control the communication between them and me, but not between me and everyone else.

Ok please view my three points fromn the standpoint that so much of the total traffic would be affected by at least one, that "uncontrolled" communications would be minimal.

...

2) communications using someone else's equipment/network (university, employer, etc)

Employers nor universities have any jurisdiction over whether you use encryption in your transmissions while using their networks unless it specifically does not allow it when you first agree to have an account with them.

I think you had better review the concept of "property rights". Unless you have a contract that says you can, or can establish "expectation", the property owner who allows you to use their equipment may control how it is used.

...

3) communications with anyone (Internet merchant, etc) who says "this is not what <MasterCard|Visa|AmEx> approves..."

I don't quite understand your meaning. I am a merchant and I encourage my customers to use PGP when they send information over the internet, whether to me or to anyone else.

That is fine but what if MasterCard refuses to accept this method ? (Not saying they will, just "what if" ? You are free to use digicash if you want but is not "legal tender for all debts public and private".

Comments? Bring 'em on! :-)

I dood it. Warmly, Padgett