On 29/11/2019 19:49, grarpamp wrote:

"GRIFFITH was arrested at Los Angeles International Airport yesterday
and will be presented in federal court in Los Angeles later today.
U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman stated: "As alleged, Virgil Griffith
provided highly technical information to North Korea, knowing that
this information could be used to help North Korea launder money and
evade sanctions. In allegedly doing so, Griffith jeopardized the
sanctions that both Congress and the president have enacted to place
maximum pressure on North Korea's dangerous regime." Assistant
Attorney General John Demers said: "Despite receiving warnings not to
go, Griffith allegedly traveled to one of the United States' foremost
adversaries, North Korea, where he taught his audience how to use
blockchain technology to evade sanctions. By this complaint, we begin
the process of seeking justice for such conduct."

>What the frag. How could that "conduct" be illegal? Didn't the US Gov learn about the idiocy of trying to keep math and algorithms secret with the whole encryption = weapons thing decades ago now?

>Surely the North Koreans can just read all they need to know about blockchain via any number of freely available publications or websites. Github would be a good place to start, for example. Isn't this just pointlessly persecuting someone for doing something that no sane person would think of as illegal or criminal and which could, at worst, be of only trivial benefit to any putative enemy.

I agree with you. This is the indictment of Griffith. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download

50 U.S.C. 1705, mentioned in Paragraph 6, does not possess any wording mentioning extraterritorial application. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1705

31 C.F.R. 510.206, mentioned in Paragraph 11 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.206 does not contain any exterritorial language.

31 C.F.R. 510.212, also mention in Paragraph 11, https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.212 does not contain any extraterritorial language.

31 C.F.R. 510.405(d)(1) says:

(d)

(1) For example, U.S. persons may not, except as authorized by or pursuant to this part, provide legal, accounting, financial, brokering, freight forwarding, transportation, public relations, or other services to any person in North Korea or to the Government of North Korea, the Workers' Party of Korea, or any other person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 510.201(a).

"Speech" is not listed as one of those "services" this statute purports to prohibit. Given the existence of the First Amendment, I think it's questionable whether this paragraph would apply to mere speech to North Korean people. If I had access to a LEXIS law library computer, I could search for legal cases which mention this statute (50 U.S.C. 1705) and these CFR's, to determine what legal precedents may apply.

Jim Bell