Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.service.uci.edu!beckman.com!dsg4.dse.beckman.com!a_rubin Newsgroups: sci.crypt Subject: Re: Screw the people, crypto is for hard-core hackers & spooks only Message-ID: From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 21 Apr 93 22:42:20 GMT References: <19930419.155204.305@almaden.ibm.com> <1r0ausINNi01@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> <1993Apr20.145338.14804@shearson.com> <1r47l1INN8gq@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc. Nntp-Posting-Host: dsg4.dse.beckman.com Lines: 24 In <1r47l1INN8gq@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr) writes: >In most cases information you come by properly is yours to use as you wish, >but there are certainly exceptions. If you write a paper which includes >sufficiently detailed information on how to build a nuclear weapon, it is >classified. As I understand the law, nuclear weapons design is >_automatically_ classified even if you do the work yourself. I believe you >are then not allowed to read your own paper. This has now been thrown out by the courts. (The "Progressive" case.) >A less serious example: if you tell drivers about a speed trap they are >about to run into, you can be fined, even though you might argue that you >broke no law when you discovered the location of the policeman. The charge >is interfering with a police officer, which is quite similar what you would >be doing by reverse engineering the Clipper chip. This is outright illegal. It DOES violate the first amendment. If you would, give a case in which your "speed trap" example has been upheld by the courts. -- Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.