[I figured I'd let people get out a message or two more but I don't
think I'm going to let the Bidzos slamming run much longer. It isn't
that I love him -- it is that I don't think the discussion is really
what the readers of Cryptography want to be viewing in their
mailboxes. --Perry]
Darren Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is this aquisition and employment change of Eric Young and Tim Hudson by
> RSA a sneaky way to stop the development of products such as SSL and
> Cryptozilla which are not commercial in nature and hence widely available
> and not as easily "controlled" by anyone ? But maybe that's just the
> conspiracy theorist in me as I've no information about the truth of that
> suggestion.
>
> Darren
Only insofar as RSA sees a hugely popular free crypto library, with
it's own top revenue earning patents about to expire, a recipie for
financial disaster. The motivations around Bidzos/RSA's recent public
pro-export-control stance are quite clear. For every country that
introduces introduces or tightens its export controls, other than the
US, RSA has that much less competition. This is the `level playing
field' that Bidzos is talking about. Evidentially Bidzos/RSA believes
that lobbying for stronger export controls in other countries isn't
going to encourage tightening of US controls to any significant
degree. It's a high risk, Machiavellian strategy. It's morality, Jim,
but not as we know it.
Cheers,
Julian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
