Re:The EARN IT Act: how to ban end-to-end encryption without...
by noident on Friday January 31, 2020 @05:18PM
(#22206484)
Encrypted data is more like speech than a weapon. The analogy to guns just doesn't work.
Re:The EARN IT Act: how to ban end-to-end encryption without...
by henryfjordan on Friday January 31, 2020 @05:49PM
(#22206743)
The US Govt considers encryption a form of weapons tech so that it falls under Munitions Exports Controls (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...). But the proposed law doesn't outlaw private use of encryption, only potentially outlawing corporations from offering it, so I don't know the 2nd Amendment would really apply.
Re:The EARN IT Act: how to ban end-to-end encryption without...
by dependenttypes on Friday January 31, 2020 @11:41PM
(#22208715)
The US courts seem to agree that encryption software are protected under the 1st amendment. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States
Re:The EARN IT Act: how to ban end-to-end encryption without...
by msp_yc on Friday January 31, 2020 @07:01PM
(#22207297)
If encryption is considered a form of arms, it does appear that there is case law that grants sellers of arms some constitutional protections - quick article at https://harvardlawreview.org/2014/04/does-the-second-amendme....
I think, at this point, one could successfully argue that the proposed law follows 'reasonable regulation' and so protections aren't afforded. But it would be an interesting discussion.
If you find yourself arguing that it is - what happens when you are largely, if not wholly, dependent on a third party to be able to exercise that right?
We've decided that corporations get first amendment rights independent of their members - do they also get second amendment rights?
Are these just silly arguments? It's late Friday afternoon...