The software was classed as munitions and one needed an arms dealer's license to publish it, including online. The creator of PGP published the full source code as a book, as these are covered under first amendment rights.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 14 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    You'll love to hear that Blu-ray's format protection creators tried making illegal publishing the hexagesimal number "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number#Background.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    that came to prominence in May 2007 is an example of a number claimed to be a secret, and whose publication or inappropriate possession is claimed to be illegal in the United States

    The article doesn't even assert it's illegal. Just asserts someone has said so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    AACS did push with DMCA complains to remove any referente of the number back in the day. However, another article claims "No one has been arrested or charged for finding or publishing the original key".

    You are right, thanks for the correction, will edit my comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 17 points 1 year ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    That's not new, often you can look at events boomers claim to have witnessed and find actual accounts completely different, like soldiers returning home from Vietnam and getting spit on and called baby killer, feminists burning bras.

    You look back further and there's so much discrepancy between accounts of the civil war and then reconstruction, and then second rise of the kkk during these events and just 2 decades later.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)