[2864] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: A plausible argument why the ITAR are not valid.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School )
Thu Jun 25 16:43:36 1998
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:26:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
cc: cryptography@c2.net
In-Reply-To: <199806252021.QAA00520@jekyll.piermont.com>
Maybe. I am told no plans are afoot to do this, perhaps because it would
admit the violation and thus trash any prosecutions in progress based on
acts committed from 1996 to date. Of course, as soon as someone raises
this in the context of license and wins or even looks like winning, the
government's calculation will change. It is certainly very easy for them
to fix in an expedited way if they choose to.
On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>
> "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" writes:
> > I have just read an amazing article which argues rather persuasively that
> > the ITAR are invalid because they fail to conform with the Paperwork
> > Reduction Act.
>
> Were this true, would not the administration simply fix the problem
> very quickly, thus restoring the regulations and rendering this of
> interest only to those facing prosecution for acts performed in the
> past?
>
> Perry
>
A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Professor of Law |
U. Miami School of Law | froomkin@law.tm http://www.law.tm
P.O. Box 248087 |
Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | Record heat. Usual humidity.
