Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: Realpolitics -- re: IP: Stop the Big Brother Amendment,
From: David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 10:24:29 -0400
PLEASE read both these djf [btw I believe ral politics is called for and that means fighting on the house floor to kill the whole mess] From: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com> To: David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu> Dave, You forwarded a joint crypto-alert that read in part:
Other amendments may be proposed. Please urge the Congressman to pass SAFE "as is" and oppose any amendments.
It's interesting that the alert says to "oppose any amendments" to the SAFE encryption bill. The "as is" version of SAFE includes the first-ever domestic restrictions on encryption! Specifically, it includes very severe criminal penalties for the use of encryption in a crime. But when encryption is in everything from light switches to door knobs, any crime will include crypto. I've heard some say it would be like criminalizing "breathing air in the commission of a crime..." Groups like the ACLU, EPIC, and the Cato Institute -- not to mention the cypherpunks! -- have long opposed such a measure. AND From: Stanton McCandlish <mech () eff org> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 01:50:28 -0700 (PDT) The short version of why the alert says "pass SAFE 'as-is'" is that the Commerce Cmte. will pass *something*. They'd laugh in our faces if we said "don't pass SAFE at all". The bill has over 250 co-sponsors. Ergo we can ask them to do two things, reasonably: pass SAFE as-is, or pass the FBI wish-list version. Killing SAFE completely is something that will have to be tried on the House floor, not in the Commerce Cmte. -- Stanton McCandlish mech () eff org Electronic Frontier Foundation Program Director
Current thread:
- IP: Realpolitics -- re: IP: Stop the Big Brother Amendment, David Farber (Sep 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- IP: Realpolitics -- re: IP: Stop the Big Brother Amendment, David Farber (Sep 19)