On 10/06/15 07:36, Adrian McCullagh wrote:

Dear All,

I with 4 colleagues of mine (3 at the Queensland University of Technology (Cryptographers all)and one from the University of Queensland (Legal E-commerce researcher) have been working on a paper dealing with the Australian Defence Trade Control Act which corresponds to the proposed US ITAR changes.

Sounds interesting, They are basically trying to reintroduce the "born secret" principle, which in US law exists only in an unchallenged part of the Atomic Energy Act; though that concept has not been tested against First Amendment rights as the only previous case of note (United States v. The Progressive, 1979) was dropped by the Government before it reached the Supreme Court. But it's "born again secret" as well as "born secret, again" - it applies to all previous technical data, whether widely disseminated or not. -- Peter Fairbrother

Without giving everything away on our forthcoming paper, it appears to me that if this type of regulation had been in place in Germany in 1938, then it is highly likely that Einstein would never have read the Hahn - Strassmann paper dealing with splitting a uranium atom. That paper written in 1938 (December I believe) was read by Einstein in March 1939 and it directly lead to Einstein sending a letter to Roosevelt, which in turn resulted in 1942 to the establishment of the Manhattan project. Now if NAZI Germany had restricted that publication NAZI Germany could have developed the bomb itself which could have completely altered the outcome.

Basically, if regimes like the DCTA/ITAR rules are expanded then it works both ways and there could be a stifling of publication research due to bureaucratic mishandling. Though it could assist in the spy business as in the cold war.

Dr. Adrian McCullagh Ph.D. LL.B.(Hons) B. App. Sc. (Computing) ODMOB Lawyers Mobile 0401 646 486 Skype. Admac57 E: ajmccullagh57@gmail.com E: amccullagh@live.com The contents of this email are confidential between the sender and the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient then no rights are granted to you because of this error and as such you are requested to promptly inform the sender of the error and to promptly destroy all copies of the email in your power, possession or control. The sender reserves all rights concerning this email and its contents including any privilege, copyright and confidentiality associated with this email. Even though an email signature block has been appended to this email, and notwithstanding the Electronic Transactions Act (Qld) or the Electronic Transactions Act (Cth), the signature block does not exhibit the senders intention to be bound by an offer previously sent by the intended recipient, unless the email in its body specifically indicated that the sender hereby accepts such an offer previously sent by the intended recipient.

*From:* alfiej@fastmail.fm mailto:alfiej@fastmail.fm *Sent:* ‎Wednesday‎, ‎10‎ ‎June‎ ‎2015 ‎1‎:‎54‎ ‎PM *To:* Cryptography Mailing List mailto:cryptography@metzdowd.com, cypherpunks@cpunks.org mailto:cypherpunks@cpunks.org

Snap, from Australia:

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/security-it/dangerous-minds-are-maths-teachers-...

"Australian academics who teach mathematics may need to run new ideas by the Department of Defence before sharing them or risk imprisonment.

Some academics are set to become much more familiar with the department's Defence Export Control Office (DECO), a unit that enforces the Defence Trade Control Act 2012, Australia's end of a 2007 pact with the US and UK over defence trade.

Until recently, DECO only regulated physically exported weapons and so-called "dual use" items such as encryption, computing hardware and biological matter.

However in March the act was updated to include "intangible supply", which is intended to prohibit the transfer of knowledge from Australia that could be used to produce weapons."

Alfie

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015, at 05:36 PM, pete wrote:

...

Proposed US ITAR changes. New regs, for comment, not yet in law or in force.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-gun-blogs-videos-web-forums-threatened...

...

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-06-03/pdf/2015-12844.pdf

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-06-03/pdf/2015-12844.pdf

...

Actually, it says, for the first time explicitly, that publishing widely on the internet would be enough to put data into the public domain [000]. Sounds good?

www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

_______________________________________________ The cryptography mailing list cryptography@metzdowd.com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography