This and anything else I find out will be archived at: ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands/ gopher.eff.org, 1/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands gopher://gopher.eff.org/11/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands/ From: W.H.Sonnemans@kub.nl To: Stanton McCandlish Date: 28 Mar 94 15:30:21 MET Subject: Dutch Goverment wants to ban Encryption! A News Flash from Holland: The Dutch Department of Justice has pressed for legislation on encryption. A parlemantary commitee is currently working on a proposal that would effectively outlaw possesion, use, trade of encryption devices. The commitee is constructing a proposal which would tie a license to use of goverment approved encryption devices. The proposal is prepared in secrecy but some details have already leaked. Supposedly anyone who is caught using encryption on a telephone line is fined and loses his telephone connection for three ? days. Your worst nightmare is becoming our reality. And what makes it worse; the work of on the proposal has kept a low profile to avoid public discussions on the matter. A member of the press interviewed some members of parliament on the pre-proposal, one didn't know what it was about, the other one knew something but stated that it did not interest him! Here in Holland the public awareness concerning encryption is very low. Unlike in the United States the use of computers in the home is not that common. We will have a hard time convincing our parliament to thoroughly evaluate any proposal concerning encryption that might be introduced. Assisting the parliament with the technical expertise to get them to truly understand encryption and the implications of legislation wiil be our main goal. I hope that this information is of use, With Regards, Wim Sonnemans W.H.Sonnemans@kub.nl From: W.H.Sonnemans@kub.nl To: Stanton McCandlish Date: 11 Apr 94 13:56:13 MET Subject: Re: Dutch Goverment wants to ban Encryption! > From: Stanton McCandlish > Subject: Re: Dutch Goverment wants to ban Encryption! > To: W.H.Sonnemans@kub.nl > Date: Mon, 4 Apr 1994 12:45:27 -0400 (EDT) > Do I have your permission to redistribute your note about this matter? > Also, if you have any more material on this, please pass it on, I will be > happy to forward it around on the net, and/or archive it on our gopher, > ftp, and www servers. Yes, you may redistribute it. I am trying to write an article about the Dutch proposal. But because the proposal is being prepared in secret, as to this date there is no official information about it avaible. When i receive new info i will send it to you asap. > -- From: W.H.Sonnemans@kub.nl Date: 20 Apr 94 17:34:19 MET Subject: Dutch Crypto Ban Proposal At last i have got the Dutch proposal plus commentary online. I have not had the time to translate it. The essence of the Proposal is a ban on the use, ownership and sale of encryption methods. Not all methods are banned though. Encryption methods that are not suited to encrypt messages are excempted, so are systems that are suited to encrypt messages are excempted, so are systems that are are weak. Everyone who wants to use encryption has to apply for a license, one of the conditions of this licensing scheme is revealing all information on the system (algorithm, key) to one special agency which should work as a trusted third party. Anyone applying must have a " justifiable reason " for wanting to use it. They want to fight the use of encryption mainly by banning the trade in banned systems. One remark in commentaries really blew my mind (loosely translated): Whenever anyone posts an encryption method on for example the Internet that is banned in Holland. And somebody in Holland downloads the method, the poster or system operator of the system on which the method is posted can be prosecuted under Dutch Law. Can you imagine a system operator from New York on holiday in Holland being arrested for the posting of a encryption method freely avaible everywhere ? This "extension" of Dutch jurisdiction is absurd, but this example is typical of the lack of foresight and expertise of it's creators. They do realise that you must deal with the problem internationally and express the hope that within the EEC an agreement will arise which would make the "extension" a Dutch Jurisdiction not neccesary. As i have not had the time to study the proposal in detail this article should be treated as a first comment. As i said it's just a pre proposal and it is rumoured that they are revising it as we speak. [...] With Regards, Wim Sonnemans Tilbury University ____ end fwd _____ The full text of the proposal and commentary as scanned by Wim is available *in Dutch* as: ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands/ nl_crypto.proposal gopher.eff.org, 1/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands, nl_crypto.proposal gopher://gopher.eff.org/11/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands, nl_crypto.proposal file://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Legislation/Foreign_and_local/Netherlands/ nl_crypto.proposal The English translation if/when available will be in the same .../Netherlands directory.