"Educating" the Court about Cypherpunks Considered Harmful

Declan McCullagh declan at well.com
Sun Apr 1 11:19:07 PDT 2001


On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 09:04:39AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
> The notion that Bell's defense will be "helped" if only the Court or 
> its various prosecuting and defending attorneys are given an 
> education in The Cypherpunk Way is just plain ludicrous.

Sounds reasonable to me. Some things just can't be explained succinctly,
and even if they are understood may be perceived to be objectionable.

> Also, I don't recall Bell being charged on anything relating to his 
> AP ideas, even if his writings helped make a prosecution more likely. 
> The "interstate stalking" stuff doesn't seem to have _any_ contact 
> with the Cypherpunks list. So why would educating the Court and its 
> officers in Cypherpunks issues help?

True, except for one point, and that was (what I recall) the
conversation on cpunx over the CIA possible front in Bell's area. But
that could have happened on many lists, and the "cypherpunk
philosophy" -- to the extent there is a philosophy -- should not be
particularly relevant here, it seems to me.

> I probably should have said nothing to this journalist. If Declan is 
> forced to testify,  beyond a very basic acknowledgement that he was 
> the author of the articles in question, I sure plan to refuse to ever 
> speak to any journalist again about anything which someone might 
> twist in front of a jury. "Hey, Declan, nice weather we're having, 
> eh?" I'll continue to be Declan's friend, presumably, but I just 
> won't talk to him about anything that may get extracted from him in 
> this or in any future star chamber prosecutions.

The sad thing is, I agree with Tim. If I were in his position, I would
likely feel the same way.

-Declan





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list