From: Declan McCullagh <declan@pathfinder.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 06:14:50 -0800 (PST)
To: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: INFO: Pro-CODE testimony available now online at  democracy.net!
In-Reply-To: <199703250554.VAA22477@mail.pacifier.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970325091136.16036A-100000@cp.pathfinder.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


If you want to do a side-by-side comparison, nobody's stopping you. 

The ACLU did one, didn't like what they saw all that much, but decided to
hold their noses and endorse the bill anyway. Check out their press
release from a couple weeks ago. 

-Declan


On Mon, 24 Mar 1997, jim bell wrote:

> At 02:22 PM 3/24/97 -0500, Shabbir Safdar wrote:
> 
> >The hearing was held by the Senate Commerce Committe to consider S. 377,
> >the Promotion of Commerce online in the Digital Era (Pro-CODE) Act and this
> >issue of US encryption policy -- a critical issue to the Internet user
> >community.
> 
> I, and maybe a lot of other people, are still waiting for somebody to do a 
> side-by-side comparison of "Pro-Code 1997" with last year's version, the 
> original.
> 
> What has changed?  For the worse?  Why?  Who wanted it changed?  Who changed 
> it?  Are they embarrassed?
> 
> 
> Jim Bell
> jimbell@pacifier.com
>