On Friday, November 29, 2019, 02:56:35 PM PST, Comet Dweller
   <cometdweller@outlook.com> wrote:

   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.  [1]https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222
   646/download
   50 U.S.C. 1705, mentioned in Paragraph 6,  does not possess any wording
   mentioning extraterritorial
   application. [2]https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1705
   31 C.F.R. 510.206, mentioned in Paragraph 11
   [3]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,
   [4]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. [5]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 [6]person in North Korea or to the [7]Government of North Korea,
   the Workers' Party of Korea, or any
   other [8]person whose [9]property and [10]interests in [11]property are
   blocked pursuant to [12]§ 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

References

   1. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download
   2. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1705
   3. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.206
   4. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.212
   5. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.405
   6. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.405
   7. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.405
   8. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.405
   9. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.405
  10. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.405
  11. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.405
  12. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/510.201#a