[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jeffrey Altman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ,in message <CMM.0.90.4.8909387
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>, wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Thank you for derailing my original question with a legal discussion.
Your question, as phrased, and the situation you suggest IS a legal question, and a
profound one at that. What you are trying to do is violate US law in spirit, but
not in letter. The fact that it is a stupid law is beside the point.
> Excuse me if I sound pissy, but,
> !fucking DUH!
Excuse me for being offended, BUT I AM! Mailing lists like these thrive on ideas
being stimulated by specific questions, and quite often get "de-reailed",
generating other ideas which are quite useful. You have touched a nerve that runs
all the way around the world where encryption is concerned, and many of us are very
interested in the issues involved.
You DO sound pissy! Give us a break.
> In my original email of this morning, which has clearly been forgotten, I
> specified that I wanted a distributer who could perform the export-preventing
> checks.
I repeat, you are trying to violate the spirit of the law - If that bothers you,
don't do it!
> I don't want to break the law.
Yes you do.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Administrative requests should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| List service provided by Open Software Associates, http://www.osa.com/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
