Interesting comparison of NIST-PKP-DSS licensing arrangement as `stamp tax' with proceeds to `private company'. Originally in RISKS. - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jul 93 17:05:57 -0700 From: Mark Seecof <marks@wimsey.latimes.com> Subject: DSS as a stamp tax Many people raised in the U.S. are unfamiliar with general stamp taxes. We know about excise taxes (e.g., liquor) with payment evidenced by stamps, and tax stamps to validate specific documents (e.g., hunting licenses). But (to my perhaps inadequate knowledge) the U.S. hasn't had a general stamp tax since the War of Independence. England had one years ago... most signatures on receipts for money or bills of sale were invalid unless scrawled across postage stamps. England still imposes stamp taxes on some business transactions, e.g., transfer of real property. NIST's proposal to "license" the DSS to PKP, forcing "the rest of us" including all who wish to transact business with the U.S. government to pay PKP every time we sign something digitally amounts to the imposition of a general stamp tax. Worse, it is a tax imposed by the government for the benefit of private persons (those who are paid by PKP). Attempts by George III's government to impose various stamp taxes on American colonists 200-odd years ago fueled revolutionary sentiment among them... ------- End of Forwarded Message