1993-08-27 - Re: Source Code NOT available for ViaCrypt PGP

Header Data

From: “George A. Gleason” <gg@well.sf.ca.us>
To: gg@well.sf.ca.us
Message Hash: 1b51c403a16cf1bbf042106024728f3f2b7e2e83c1340eb48311de37bb3f3945
Message ID: <93Aug27.015856pdt.14453-4@well.sf.ca.us>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-08-27 09:02:42 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 02:02:42 PDT

Raw message

From: "George A. Gleason" <gg@well.sf.ca.us>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 02:02:42 PDT
To: gg@well.sf.ca.us
Subject: Re: Source Code NOT available for ViaCrypt PGP
Message-ID: <93Aug27.015856pdt.14453-4@well.sf.ca.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


"(the problem is) convincing ViaCrypt to trust (some Cypherpunk)."  There   
are cypherpunks who have sufficient assets that they would reasonably be    
considered to want to protect themselves from losing same in a lawsuit over 
violating the terms of the non-disclosure agreement.  Hey, if you have      
equity in a house, you begin to qualify for this one.  Better if you own a  
company or have other significant assets.

If someone here stands up and says, "Hey ViaCrypt, I'll put my
(house/company/stock portfolio/etc.) on the block to back up my NDA, now
let's play ball," ViaCrypt will have a very very hard time saying no.  And
if they do say no, they come out looking very bad indeed.  If ViaCrypt are
reasonable people, let's give them the reassurance that any reasonable
person needs against the possibility of getting burned.  Then the ball's in
their court, and they've got to respond.  

-gg





Thread