GAK boycott, What are legal implications?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Here is a question for all of you cyber legal types out there. This question presupposes: The NIST will complete its work on the GAK standard. But no law will be passed (yet) regulating the use of encryption in the U. S. (The GAK standard is an attempt to create an environment in which such laws can be passed.) In the U.S., Big Company INC will start marketing a GAKed encryption product domesticly. A bunch of cypherpunkish types will immediately try to organize a boycott against BIG COMPANY. What are the cypherpunks legal risks? I seem to remember that back in the 70s, the NAACP lost a big case with respect to their boycott in a southern city. As I recall there were people in the street begging money for the NAACP because there was a > 10**6 $ judgement against the NAACP and they needed that much just to appeal. - -- Paul Elliott Telephone: 1-713-781-4543 Paul.Elliott@hrnowl.lonestar.org Address: 3987 South Gessner #224 Houston Texas 77063 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMNnJ8/BUQYbUhJh5AQGbsgP/T0n31SqeuHt+7AbizymcEhu/78DUuym5 sj+MO3ruA9WcEBQUXfabuf/PgOwlrtUAcC3dISPvXwGbdygc9oHBfxSglLi48g7d dvDS4wziRHF7N8sBsYn0ee9YyKhPd9U7Ci0ovOc5frFGSZ2Bt4hU703d7bR+6cB+ iHHqsPaAa6o= =EPoj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Here is a question for all of you cyber legal types out there. This question presupposes:
The NIST will complete its work on the GAK standard. But no law will be passed (yet) regulating the use of encryption in the U. S. (The GAK standard is an attempt to create an environment in which such laws can be passed.) In the U.S., Big Company INC will start marketing a GAKed encryption product domesticly.
A bunch of cypherpunkish types will immediately try to organize a boycott against BIG COMPANY.
I think it's more likely that a group of people will work on breaking Big Co's GAKed product. Either finding a flaw in it's algorithm or protocol that can be exploited, or a flaw that renders it's GAK unusable, i.e. Matt Blaze's LEAF hack on Clipper.
What are the cypherpunks legal risks?
I seem to remember that back in the 70s, the NAACP lost a big case with respect to their boycott in a southern city. As I recall there were people in the street begging money for the NAACP because there was a > 10**6 $ judgement against the NAACP and they needed that much just to appeal.
Well, NAACP is an actual organization with papers filed with the IRS, officers or some sort of board members, offices, etc. Cypherpunks is just a mailing list, and many of the members of the list don't use their real identies on the list. Who would they go after? -- Eric Murray ericm@lne.com ericm@motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF
On Thu, 21 Dec 1995, Paul Elliott wrote: Gee, being legally responsible for lost revenue over a boycott. Rev. Donald Wilmond is going to be very broke! I don't know anything about the NAACP case, but it seems to me that free speech & merely *urging* people to boycott would be a perfect defense.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Here is a question for all of you cyber legal types out there. This question presupposes:
The NIST will complete its work on the GAK standard. But no law will be passed (yet) regulating the use of encryption in the U. S. (The GAK standard is an attempt to create an environment in which such laws can be passed.) In the U.S., Big Company INC will start marketing a GAKed encryption product domesticly.
A bunch of cypherpunkish types will immediately try to organize a boycott against BIG COMPANY.
What are the cypherpunks legal risks?
I seem to remember that back in the 70s, the NAACP lost a big case with respect to their boycott in a southern city. As I recall there were people in the street begging money for the NAACP because there was a > 10**6 $ judgement against the NAACP and they needed that much just to appeal.
- -- Paul Elliott Telephone: 1-713-781-4543 Paul.Elliott@hrnowl.lonestar.org Address: 3987 South Gessner #224 Houston Texas 77063
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMNnJ8/BUQYbUhJh5AQGbsgP/T0n31SqeuHt+7AbizymcEhu/78DUuym5 sj+MO3ruA9WcEBQUXfabuf/PgOwlrtUAcC3dISPvXwGbdygc9oHBfxSglLi48g7d dvDS4wziRHF7N8sBsYn0ee9YyKhPd9U7Ci0ovOc5frFGSZ2Bt4hU703d7bR+6cB+ iHHqsPaAa6o= =EPoj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Robert A. Jacoby (speaking only for myself--not legal advice) Assistant Law Librarian for LAN/Reference George Mason University Law Library (703) 993-8107 rjacoby1@osf1.gmu.edu
participants (3)
-
Eric Murray -
Paul Elliott -
Robert A. Jacoby