From: mark@unicorn.com
To: tcmay@got.net
Message Hash: a06402c0e411574cb14c86cc4adba26894e7a5e5d458d28c2c3eb3d1071875d3
Message ID: <877715904.15749.193.133.230.33@unicorn.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-24 18:56:22 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:56:22 +0800
From: mark@unicorn.com
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:56:22 +0800
To: tcmay@got.net
Subject: Re: GMR in the talked-about form here would be unconstitutional
Message-ID: <877715904.15749.193.133.230.33@unicorn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
tcmay@got.net wrote:
> I agree that draconian crypto laws are afoot, but I don't discount the
> power of constitutional challenges.
That's probably true: that it's unconstitutional is almost certainly true,
that it would be overturned seems less certain.
The question is, is that grounds for complacency? I'd rather see people use
technology which can't be used against them than hope that such laws would
be overturned.
Mark
Return to October 1997
Return to “mark@unicorn.com”
1997-10-24 (Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:56:22 +0800) - Re: GMR in the talked-about form here would be unconstitutional - mark@unicorn.com