[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LYNX-DEV SSL, Lynx & US Law
From: |
Scott McGee (Personal) |
Subject: |
Re: LYNX-DEV SSL, Lynx & US Law |
Date: |
Tue, 10 Dec 1996 10:38:00 -0700 |
I hope you will all pardon a reply to Philip's note that only glancingly
touches on Lynx issues.
Philip, while I enjoyed the humorous tone of your note, I won't quote it
here due to length. Instead, let me just throw out a few responses.
First, I dare say I love my liberty as much as you. I agree that
complacency when it comes to government intrusion is eroding this liberty.
On the other hand, I prefer to combat it by voting for those who uphold my
views, and by spreading awareness of what I see as a problem, rather than
flaunting "bad" laws.
Keep in mind that as a Canadian, you risk far less in talking about
exporting crypto (in the form of Lynx SSL) than I do. You not only have to
get the US government upset enough to act, but then they have to convince
your government to act too. I forget the guys name (well known on the
Internet, though) but one guy merely had something involving crypto on his
FTP site (details are only approximate here, look it up for facts)(can
someone remind me of his name?) but the government didn't care that he had
no intention of violating export laws, they are/were hounding him and
driving him bankrupt with court costs.
I have a wife and young children to support. I am not as worried about the
current US crypto export laws as I am about my family, so I don't risk
running afoul of them. I do try to help others understand how these laws
are hurting our country and our global society, and thus I do what I can
within reason to address the problem.
As for guns, let me assure you, I better like the town in Texas that passed
a law REQUIRING gun ownership than those passing gun control laws. I do own
a gun, but a hunting rifle isn't really suitable for keeping under one's
pillow, and I am not that paranoid anyway.
Here is the heart of the matter. If you feel that you should obtain and
share Lynx SLL despite US export laws, that's your decision. I would really
love to see you and/or others outside the US develop a good set of Lynx SSL
stuff that was NOT covered by US laws, and that could be shared globally.
If, on the other hand, you want me to run afoul of US laws to help you
export a version that is controlled by US laws, well, it isn't going to
happen. I'll do what I can to help change the law, but I won't set out to
violate it, or conspire with others to do so.
Philip, we are moving rather far from Lynx, so if you decide to reply to
this, let me encourage you to do so by private email (address@hidden)
rather than on the list.
Scott
Scott McGee: Salt Lake Community College Webmaster | When in danger,
___________________________________________________| or in doubt,
Email: address@hidden (Scott McGee) | run in circles,
Web: http://www.slcc.edu/infotech/webmaster.html | scream and shout.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the College. Trust me!
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send a mail message to address@hidden
; with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
; quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;
- Re: LYNX-DEV SSL, Lynx & US Law, Robert Bonomi, 1996/12/09
- Re: LYNX-DEV SSL, Lynx & US Law, Scott McGee (Personal), 1996/12/09
- Re: LYNX-DEV SSL, Lynx & US Law,
Scott McGee (Personal) <=
- Re: LYNX-DEV SSL, Lynx & US Law, Scott McGee (Personal), 1996/12/10
- Re: LYNX-DEV SSL, Lynx & US Law, Nelson Henry Eric, 1996/12/11