- Bernstein v. United States
Infobox Court Case
name = Bernstein I
court =United States District Court for the Northern District of California
date_decided =April 15 ,1996
full_name =Daniel J. Bernstein et al., v.United States Department of State et al.
citations = 922 F. Supp. 1426
judges =Marilyn Hall Patel
prior_actions =
subsequent_actions =
opinions = Infobox Court Case
name = Bernstein II
court =United States District Court for the Northern District of California
date_decided =December 9 ,1996
full_name =Daniel J. Bernstein et al., v.United States Department of State et al.
| citations = 945 F. Supp. 1279
judges =Marilyn Hall Patel
prior_actions =
subsequent_actions =
opinions = Infobox Court Case
name = Bernstein III
imagesize = 120
court =United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
date_decided =August 25 ,1997
full_name =Daniel J. Bernstein et al., v.United States Department of State et al.
citations =176 F.3d 1132
judges =Betty Binns Fletcher , Myron H. Bright, Thomas G. Nelson
prior_actions = Hon.Marilyn Hall Patel ruled for plaintiff in 974 F.Supp. 1288
subsequent_actions =
opinions = Opinion by Fletcher
Concurrence by Bright
Dissent by Nelson"Bernstein v. United States" is a set of court cases brought by
Daniel J. Bernstein challenging restrictions on theexport ofencryption software outside theUnited States .The case was first brought in
1995 , when Bernstein was a student atUniversity of California, Berkeley , and wanted to publish a paper and associated source code on hisSnuffle encryption system. Bernstein was represented by theElectronic Frontier Foundation , who hired outside lawyerCindy Cohn . After four years and one regulatory change, the court case won a landmark decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, that softwaresource code was speech protected by the First Amendment and that the government's regulations preventing its publication were unconstitutional. [http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/bernstein_decision_9_cir.html]The government modified the regulations again, substantially loosening them, and Bernstein, now a professor at the
University of Illinois at Chicago , challenged them again. This time, he chose to represent himself, although he has no formal legal training. OnOctober 15 ,2003 , almost nine years since Bernstein first brought the case, the judge dismissed it and asked Bernstein to come back when the government made a "concrete threat". [http://cr.yp.to/export/status.html]References
* "Bernstein v. United States Dept. of Justice", 192 F.3d 1308 (9th Cir. 1999) (order that case be reheard en banc)
* "Bernstein v. DOC", 2004 U.S. Dist. 6672 (N.D. Cal. April 19, 2004)ee also
*
Export of cryptography
* "Junger v. Daley "External links
* [http://cr.yp.to/export.html Bernstein's website on the case]
* [http://www.netlitigation.com/netlitigation/cases/bernstein.htm Netlitigation Summary: Bernstein v. U.S. Dept. of State]
* [http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/bernstein_decision_9_cir.html EPIC Archive of 9th Circuit Decision]
* [http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto_export/Bernstein_case/ EFF Archive of the Cases]
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.