From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 09:29:44 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Crypto Exports, Europe, and Conspiracy Theories
Message-ID: <v02120d05ad2da4bc4982@[192.0.2.1]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 13:41 1/25/96, Weld Pond wrote:

>But if all traffic is required to be encrypted which is going through the
>remailer or ISP, how can they be liable for what they cannot possibly
>know?  This will be the state of the net in a few years.
>
>Can a courier be held liable for delivering encrypted documents that
>contained illegal information or were used in a crime?  I don't think so.
>Only if he knew there was something illegal going on.  How are remailers
>any different?

But it will be assumed that the remailer operator knew that his site was to
be used for illegal purposes.

>What about a car rental agency that rented a car to a criminal with bogus
>ID that is used to commit a crime.  Was Ryder held liable for the Oklahoma
>bombing? No.

In the view of the authorities, the benefits to society provided by rental
car agencies outweigh their dangers. The opinon on remailers will be just
the opposite. That's why rental car agencies will remain legal, while
remailers will be outlawed.


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com>
   PGP encrypted mail preferred.