Kim DeVaughn [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 1999, Fairlight ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> |
> | But yeah...this is getting political. Sorry for raising the question...I
> | should have just let Telsa's post alone (although I'm slightly less
> | ignorant now, for having questioned it). Sorry to have troubled the rest
> | of you with the off-topic-ness of it all.
>
> Well ... just to muddy the waters a bit more ... :-) ...
>
> Noone seeems to be aware of the recent (within the past ~6 months)
> ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which overturned the
> ITAR restrictions on Constitutional grounds.
>
> Of course that ruling only applies to the 9th Circuit region (which
> includes San Francisco, etc), and the Administration has stated their
> intent to appeal the ruling (to the Supreme Court).
And even more -- the ruling only applied to source code, not binary, if I'm
not mistaken. So we could end up with it legal to export source only, but
that's at least a lot better than it is now -- and for a project like Mutt,
almost all that matters.
On another angle -- export to Canada is allowed, and Canada has very open
crypto. Has anyone ever tried combining these two facts into something
useful?
--
Jeremy Blosser | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jblosser.firinn.org/
-----------------+-------------------------+------------------------------
"If Microsoft can change and compete on quality, I've won." -- L. Torvalds
PGP signature
