Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version VT1.00C 11/1/84; site vortex.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!vortex!lauren
From: lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein)
Newsgroups: net.crypt
Subject: Re: encrypted mail
Message-ID: <685@vortex.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 9-Jun-85 23:34:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: vortex.685
Posted: Sun Jun  9 23:34:50 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Jun-85 07:58:29 EDT
References: <398@mtxinu.UUCP>
Organization: Vortex Technology, Los Angeles
Lines: 35

I agree with Ed that (regarding encryption in general) new laws
and new interpretations are bound to occur.  My primary concern
is that these evolve slowly, with various forward and backward
movements in the process.  Anyone who gets themselves caught in
the "intermediate" stage of such a process could find themselves
with more liability than they really might want to take on, both
financially and otherwise.  To put it another way, very few 
people would want (or have the financial ability) to become
one of the test cases in such a situation, especially given the
high probability of appeals (on either side) which could
drag out the process for years.

As for the "You didn't know what was in it because it was encrypted"
argument... you might be able to get away with an argument
like that once (especially if you could prove that you really
didn't know encrypted mail was flowing) but you'd probably be expected
to take steps to make sure that the situation did not occur again.
That is, if it was obvious that people were making a habit of
posting illicit encrypted mail through your (non-common-carrier)
system, you'd presumably have to take some steps so that you
would not be continuing to contribute to the transport of that
illicit message traffic.  In a non-encrypted environment, such
messages could be found and dealt with individually.  Where 
encrytion was in use, the only alternative might be to completely
cut off mail service, since the encryption prevents any finer
grain of control.

The complex legal issues surrounding this area haven't even 
BEGUN to be explored.  And I wouldn't expect all the new laws that are
written to encourage such use of encryption -- individual property,
intellectual property, and privacy could be both enhanced *and* damaged
by "anonymous" encrypted materials, and I would expect to see
laws that took both the positive and negative factors into account.

--Lauren--