PGP 2.confusion

[Robert A. Hayden]

I guess I'm sorta confused.  2.3x cannot 'legally' be used in the U.S., 
and it seems that the release of 2.6 is motivated in part so that U.S. 
users of 2.3 can become "special friends" of the RSA goonsquad.  Yet, 2.6 
cannot be used by anyone outside of the U.S./Canada.  

So what is the solution that will be legal, secure, and useful for the 
whole world?

Do we (the cypherpunk community) perhaps need to come up with EBP 1.0 
(Even Better Privacy) that abandons the RSAREF patent problem with some 
other public-key system that is functionally equial and just as safe?

Sorry, I'm babbling, but as I said, I do not relish the thought of 
becoming a special friend of RSA's lawyers.  (Or worse, what if 
'exporting' a digital signature violates ITAR and makes you a very special 
friend of an over-ambitious federal district attorney?)

____        Robert A. Hayden       <=> hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu
\  /__          -=-=-=-=-          <=>          -=-=-=-=-
 \/  /  Finger for Geek Code Info  <=> I do not necessarily speak for the
   \/   Finger for PGP Public Key  <=> City of Mankato or Blue Earth County
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1)  GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
		       n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)