Dubois' email followup to Zimmermann's reaction to the investigations end

  Locations of visitors to this page
be notified of website changes? subscribe
Crypto Freedom!

 

Privacy

Zimmermann Legal Defense

Who Are We?

Rogues Gallery

We Win!

Original Appeal

Yellow Ribbon

Funding USA

Funding Europe

Correspondence

Liason Editorial

CypherPunks

Pretty Good Privacy

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Dubois' email followup to Zimmermann's reaction to the investigations end

From: Philip L. Dubois 

I'd like to add a few words to those of my client.

First, I thank Mr. Keane for his professionalism in notifying us of the government's decision. It has become common practice for federal prosecutors to refuse to tell targets of investigations that the government has decided not to prosecute. I appreciate Mr. Keane's courtesy.

Let me add my thanks to the other members of the defense team -- Ken Bass in Washington D.C. (kbass@venable.com), Curt Karnow in San Francisco (karnow@cup.portal.com), Eben Moglen in New York (em21@columbia.edu), and Tom Nolan in Palo Alto (74242.2723@compuserve.com). Bob Corn-Revere in D.C. (rcr@dc1.hhlaw.com) was a great help on First Amendment issues. These lawyers are heroes. They donated hundreds of hours of time to this cause. Each is outstanding in his field and made a contribution that nobody else could have made. It has been an honor and a privilege to work with these gentlemen.

Mr. Zimmermann mentioned a lawyer named Joe Burton (joebur@aol.com) of San Francisco. Mr. Burton deserves special mention. He represented another person who was under investigation. To have made this other person publicly known would have been an invasion of privacy, so we didn't. We still won't, but we can finally acknowledge Mr. Burton's enormous contribution. Whether we were getting paid or not, the rest of us at least received some public attention for representing Phil Zimmermann. Mr. Burton labored quietly on behalf of his client. He took the case pro bono and did an extraordinary job. He is a lawyer who exemplifies the finest traditions of the Bar and the highest standard of integrity. I am proud to know Joe Burton.

The warriors at the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) -- Marc Rotenberg, David Sobel, and David Banisar -- and at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) provided financial, legal, and moral support and kept the public informed. They continue to do so, and we all owe them thanks for it.

Those members of the press who recognized the importance of this story and told the world about it should be commended. Undeterred by the absence of sex and violence, these reporters discussed the real issues and in so doing served the public well.

Many other people, lawyers and humans alike, made invaluable contributions. My assistants Alicia Alpenfels, Suzanne Turnbull Paulman, and Denise Douglas and my investigator Eli Nixon kept us organized. Rich Mintz, Tom Feegel, and Nathaniel Borenstein of First Virtual put up a Web site and aggressively supported the Zimmermann Legal Defense Fund. Another site was built by Michael 'Mickey' Sattler of San Francisco, and he and Dave Del Torto (also of S.F.) let me stay in their homes. Thanks also to MIT and The MIT Press: Hal Abelson, Jeff Schiller, Brian LaMacchia, Derek Atkins, Jim Bruce, David Litster, Bob Prior, and Terry Ehling. And there were many others.

Finally, I offer my thanks to everyone who contributed to the Zimmermann Legal Defense Fund. People all over the world gave their hard-earned money to support not only Phil Zimmermann's defense but also the cause of privacy. It is impossible to be too pessimistic about our future when there are so many of you.

Now, some words about the case and the future. Nobody should conclude that it is now legal to export cryptographic software. It isn't. The law may change, but for now, you'll probably be prosecuted if you break it. People wonder why the government declined prosecution, especially since the government isn't saying. One perfectly good reason might be that Mr. Zimmermann did not break the law. (This is not always a deterrent to indictment. Sometimes the government isn't sure whether someone's conduct is illegal and so prosecutes that person to find out.) Another might be that the government did not want to risk a judicial finding that posting cryptographic software on a site in the U.S., even if it's an Internet site, is not an "export". There was also the risk that the export-control law would be declared unconstitutional. Perhaps the government did not want to get into a public argument about some important policy issues: should it be illegal to export cryptographic software? Should U.S. citizens have access to technology that permits private communication? And ultimately, do U.S. citizens have the right to communicate in absolute privacy?

There are forces at work that will, if unresisted, take from us our liberties. There always will be. But at least in the United States, our rights are not so much stolen from us as they are simply lost by us. The price of freedom is not only vigilance but also participation. Those folks I mention in this message have participated and no doubt will continue. My thanks, and the thanks of Philip Zimmermann, to each of you.

Have you found errors nontrivial or marginal, factual, analytical and illogical, arithmetical, temporal, or even typographical? Please let me know; drop me email. Thanks!
 

What's New?  •  Search this Site  •  Website Map
Travel  •  Burning Man  •  San Francisco
Kilts! Kilts! Kilts!  •  Macintosh  •  Technology  •  CU-SeeMe
This page is copyrighted 1993-2008 by Lila, Isaac, Rose, and Mickey Sattler. All rights reserved.