The official transcript of the hearing which occured before Judge Marilyn Hall Patel on October 20, 1996, regarding the cross-motions for summary judgement.

Dan Bernstein's declaration regarding the course he plans to teach.

The brief motion for a preliminary injunction preventing the government from enforcing the export laws against Dan or his students if he teaches a crypto class. STILL MISSING are several other declarations.

Judge Patel's decision overturning parts of the Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations as unconstitutional.

Letter from Bernstein's counsel asking the government to stipulate to not enforcing the Commerce Department regulations until they have been reviewed by the court for Constitutionality.

Stipulation between Bernstein and Secretary of Commerce that he will not be harmed for teaching cryptography to his students in Spring 1997, nor for giving them software (including source code), nor for running a software distribution site restricted to access from the UIC computer network.

Proposed order accepting the supplemental complaint.

Amendment to the 970113 stipulation, to add a "UIC dorm" network number to the set of networks permitted to access Prof. Bernstein's crypto class Web site.

Brief minutes of the phone conference held among Judge Patel, Cindy Cohn, and Anthony Coppolino, regarding the government's emergency request for a stay.

Lets Prof. Bernstein post Snuffle 5.0 and updates to it, but no other programs. This is in effect until the appeal of the case is finished.

9th Cir. order granting, without explanation, govt. motion for a stay of all injunctive relief granted by the Dist. Court. Order also provides for a rapidly expedited hearing, with initial briefs due Oct. and Nov., and hearing set for Dec., 1997.

Amicus brief filed by RSA Data Security, the National Computer Security Association, former government intelligence management, and others. Argues that the export controls actually undermine the national security by restricting domestic computer security, domestic electronic commerce, and by encouraging good crypto software to be built outside the United States.

Amicus brief filed by EPIC and a number of civil liberties organizations, Internet and computer related organizations, and cryptographers.

Provides several more reasons why the crypto export controls are unconsitutional, including violation of the 5th and 14th Amendments and of the Constitutution's "penumbral" privacy guarantees. Very interesting additional arguments that examine not only the rights of the plaintiff, but of his audience, of the scientific community, and and of all potential recipients of plaintiff's encryption software.

Affirming Prof. Bernstein's right to publish encryption source code, and striking down the Export Administration Regulations as unconstitutional.

Bernstein's questions about the meaning of the new Jan. 14, 2000 changes to encryption "export" regulations.

A revealing and frustrating transcript of a discussion between Dan Bernstein and Charles Ray (of the Office of Defense Trade Controls, which enforced the export control laws at that time).

This is the governments request to have the oral arguement of the en banc request postponed to a later date.

Complaint (lawsuit) filed by Peter D. Junger challenging the constitutionality of the ITAR and AECA restrictions on encryption export, on the grounds that the definition of "export" is so vague as to infringe his right to teach about encryption to any class with foreign students enrolled.

Amicus curiae brief, by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and several other organizations, in support of ElcomSoft motions to dismiss and seeking a judicial determination that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) is unconstitutional, in US v. ElcomSoft, et al.

In re: National Security Administration Telecommunications Records Act Multi-District Lititgation (06-1791 VRW) Case Status Update