cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-09-10 - Re: Government shows its hand…good news!

Header Data

From: “James S. Tyre” <j.s.tyre@worldnet.att.net>
To: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
Message Hash: f1f38775fc85f0ec580ef6e3a65aecbfd7bc76f9362cfd57514231fc976b0457
Message ID: <34170A83.1205@worldnet.att.net>
Reply To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970909194656.9741B-100000@well.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-09-10 21:14:13 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 05:14:13 +0800

Raw message

From: "James S. Tyre" <j.s.tyre@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 05:14:13 +0800
To: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Government shows its hand...good news!
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970909194656.9741B-100000@well.com>
Message-ID: <34170A83.1205@worldnet.att.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Steve Schear wrote:
> 
> At 8:53 PM -0700 9/9/97, James S. Tyre wrote:
> >Tim May is correct (as is Declan's clarification of his earlier note).
> >If the amendment does become law, however, do not expect two things:
> >
> >1.  Do not expect that it will be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, as
> >was the case with CDA.  Instead, expect that it will start with the
> >District Court, take years to get to and through the Court of Appeals,
> >and then, if the U.S. Supreme Court decides to hear the matter at all
> >(it would have no obligation to do so), much more time there.
> 
> Do, however, expect injunctive relief prior to any definitive ruling.
>

Quite possibly.  But only as applied to the individual case, or more
broadly enjoining the government from enforcing the law (if there will
be a law)?  The latter would be better, but many judges would not be
willing to go that far.

> >
> >2.  Do not expect that a case will involve a broad coalition of
> >plaintiffs, as was the case with the CDA.  Expect that the courts will
> >only entertain an action by a plaintiff with traditional standing:  one
> >who goes through all of the bureaucratic hoops trying to get a license,
> >and then is turned down.
> 
> Do expect one or more crypto-libertatians to publicize the shipment of
> software in violation of the new rules in order to force a judicial
> show-down.

I'm not nearly enough of a sucker to bet against that.
> 
> --Steve

-Jim

Thread