From: edgar@spectrx.saigon.com (Edgar W. Swank)
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 94 09:14:19 PST
To: Cypherpunks          <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: SecureDrive Distribution Controversy
Message-ID: <LT4agc4w165w@spectrx.saigon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

W. Kinney posted:

    Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com> writes:

    >Mike wants to protect himself against a PGP-style investigation
    >into export of software.  But if 1.2 is put up for FTP, it could
    >conceivably lead to such an investigation.  And Mike would
    >presumably be a potential target.
    >
    >This is a confusing situation.  What rights does Mike have to
    >control a derivative product like 1.2, given that he is releasing
    >it under the Gnu Public License?

    Legal questions aside, one might hope that within the Cypherpunks
    at least there might be more of an ethic of respecting the wishes
    of an author.  Edgar seems awfully casual about exposing other
    people to legal difficulties without their consent, and justifying
    that by some bullshit technicality doesn't change the reality of
    it one bit.

    I for one am most unimpressed.

And I would have hoped for more backbone from a group calling itself
the Cypherpunks, perhaps we should rename it the Cypherwimps.
          ~~~~~                                        ~~~~~

I respected Mike's wishes (once they were clearly expressed) in
respect to SecureDrive version 1.0, which was wholly his creation.
I will continue to respect his wishes re version 1.1.

But (to answer Hal's question) Mike has no control at all of
derivitave products like version 1.2 and (to be announced shortly)
version 1.3.

I have done my best to make clear that Mike is not responsible for my
distribution policies re versions 1.2/1.3.  But I am not going to
allow Mike or anyone else to intimidate me from the exercise of my
constitutional right to publish my own code anywhere I damn well
please, at least within the USA/Canada.

I have not and will not export SecureDrive. I have warned anyone
contemplating doing so that they may be violating US law. If someone
does so anyway, it's not my fault; and if NSA or DOJ thinks it is,
they can try to sell that idea to a judge & jury.

If this ridiculous and unconstitutional law (especially an
interpretion that publishing domestically constitutes export) needs to
be tested, perhaps I'm the best one to do it.  I'm retired, & my
pension will continue even if I'm in jail.  Should I be charged, I
hope EFF will be there for me the way they were for Steve Jackson.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLTqvN94nNf3ah8DHAQE1/AP5AetHZReujCW6JZg+x5gG9FQzwuejln++
6LyPUzHd0bt4mVecq88cHzr40V0lPu2zWEp26sP39+EqTJz05j3rA7a4B3Du7PZ/
u9e7xheXE02sRB9Y+VOjbCyA53T9GXaow6qkHZ+cb4DLx1pp+xHNhlFMOeoDmqg9
rqgPTdKUAE8=
=ZcSW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
edgar@spectrx.saigon.com (Edgar W. Swank)
SPECTROX SYSTEMS +1.408.252.1005  Cupertino, Ca