From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
To: Will Rodger <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 50421fa89b6d0c850dca1da0da6e13719b349c63edefa013dc2312bbfeac76c2
Message ID: <199607121939.MAA03832@mail.pacifier.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-13 04:48:36 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 12:48:36 +0800
From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 12:48:36 +0800
To: Will Rodger <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: I@Week on crypto export loophole 6/24/96
Message-ID: <199607121939.MAA03832@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 03:05 PM 7/12/96 -0400, Will Rodger wrote:
>>As I see it, the most important issue is not the legal status of the one
>>actually doing the export/mailing, but in fact the organization which is the
>>recipient and thus, the beneficiary of this act. _THAT_ organization will
>>be well-identified, yet will not have done anything obviously illegal. Is
>>there any indication that Baker was trying to distinguish between the one
>>physically mailing it, and those receiving it?
>
>Yup. He was speaking only of the US company.
Any indication about what the USG might be able to do, SPECIFICALLY, legally
or in retaliation?
Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com
Return to July 1996
Return to “jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>”
1996-07-13 (Sat, 13 Jul 1996 12:48:36 +0800) - Re: I@Week on crypto export loophole 6/24/96 - jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>