Unfortunately, this appears to be an issue that will have to be decided by a court, after a case has been brought. I cannot find any section of the CA Civil Code that directly addresses a definition of "encryption", nor does SB1386 define it for any purpose (could it be that they didn't really understand the complexity of encryption methods, or that they ignored them and plodded on?). I'll do some quick research on case law to see if there's any precedent in CA to define "encryption", but my guess is there won't be much, if any, that would work along with SB1386. Cliff Gilley System Administrator, HolyElvis.com Attorney, WSBA #30707 Note: Nothing in this email should be considered legal advice or a binding legal opinion. This is merely a comment based on minimal research of SB1386 and the CA Civil Code. On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Steve Zenone wrote: > Hello, > > I appreciate the various replies that I've received. However, > the fundamental question of what defines encryption, so far as > SB1386 is concerned, is still unanswered. I've looked through > other California State Bills and supporting documentation, all > to no avail. > > Several "legal" folks have been asked about this. The answer > remains unclear. July 1st isn't too far off (when the State > Bill becomes operative). > > Thanks, > Steve > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Powerful Anti-Spam Management and More... > SurfControl E-mail Filter puts the brakes on spam, > viruses and malicious code. Safeguard your business > critical communications. Download a free 30-day trial: > http://www.surfcontrol.com/go/zsfihl1 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Powerful Anti-Spam Management and More... SurfControl E-mail Filter puts the brakes on spam, viruses and malicious code. Safeguard your business critical communications. Download a free 30-day trial: http://www.surfcontrol.com/go/zsfihl1
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Mar 26 2003 - 15:46:42 PST