From: Gary Howland <gary@kampai.euronet.nl>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 2c4142c93f1b46a21f40e126ea952329caafc548b4b7d6e1d13647c1a58a91aa
Message ID: <199603101630.RAA08311@kampai.euronet.nl>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-10 16:42:03 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 00:42:03 +0800
From: Gary Howland <gary@kampai.euronet.nl>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 00:42:03 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Leahy's guillotine
Message-ID: <199603101630.RAA08311@kampai.euronet.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Bill Stewart wrote:
> Let's look at the word "willfully". Among other things, it implies
> knowledge; under US law, to be guilty you have to know you did something
> that you at least reasonably believe is an activity that you're not supposed
> to do.
Agreed, but it's precisely the sort of thing that is misinterpreted
by prosecutors and has to be resolved by a judge after a potentially
long stay in prison whilst awaiting trial. (All depending on
circumstances of course). Too close for comfort I'm afraid.
Jim Bell wrote:
> 2804. Unlawful use of encryption to obstruct justice
> Whoever willfully endeavors (by means of encryption) to (obstruct,
> impede, or prevent) the communication of (information in furtherance
> to a felony) (which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States),
> to an investigative or law enforcement officer shall...
I think the following is a tad better:
Whoever willfully endeavors (by means of encryption) to (obstruct,
impede, or prevent) the communication of information (in furtherance
to a felony (which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States)),
to an investigative (or law enforcement) officer shall...
Gary
--
pub 1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22 Gary Howland <gary@kampai.euronet.nl>
Key fingerprint = 0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D 1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06
Return to March 1996
Return to “Gary Howland <gary@kampai.euronet.nl>”
1996-03-10 (Mon, 11 Mar 1996 00:42:03 +0800) - Re: Leahy’s guillotine - Gary Howland <gary@kampai.euronet.nl>