I've placed my notes from and a report on last Friday's Karn crypto- hearing online in the "Afterword" section of netlynews.com. (Incidentally, Netly relaunched yesterday. Stop by and check it out). The oral arguments were a battle of metaphors: is the text of a cryptographic algorithm more like a tank guidance system or a Shakespearean sonnet? At one point Judge Williams compared a floppy disk to "a machine." Judge Ginsberg is known as somewhat of a libertarian, a fellow who home schools his child; he was considered for a Supreme Court seat until reports of marijuana use derailed his bid. Judge Williams is a conservative and a bit of a First Amendment purist -- at least in traditional media. I think it was Williams who (correctly) dissented in the _Turner_ "must carry" cable broadcasting case. -Declan --- Full text at "Afterword" -- http://netlynews.com/ United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Karn v. U.S. Department of State January 10, 1997 Ken Bass, attorney for Phil Karn: The government says this diskette cannot be exported. Period. They claim to make an argument that even though it is identical information, it's worth restricting this diskette... We submit that it is an arbitrary, capricious, and totally irrational decision for the government to draw such a distinction... Judge Ginsberg: Can the courts evaluate the military and security distinction between the disks and the book? Bass: The Supreme Court said it can. The mere intimation of national security is not some talismanic trump card. Judge Ginsberg: But that's not what they're doing. They're putting something on the munitions list. In what way can we say that's not significant militarily? Bass: Courts are not incompetent to review decisions to see if they're irrational... [...]