Bernstein v. United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bernstein I
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Full case name Daniel J. Bernstein et al., v. United States Department of State et al.
Date decided April 15, 1996
Citations 922 F. Supp. 1426
Judges sitting Marilyn Hall Patel
Case history
Prior actions:
Subsequent actions:
Case opinions
Bernstein II
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Full case name Daniel J. Bernstein et al., v. United States Department of State et al.
Date decided December 9, 1996
Citations 945 F. Supp. 1279
Judges sitting Marilyn Hall Patel
Case history
Prior actions:
Subsequent actions:
Case opinions
Bernstein III
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Image:9th Cir seal.jpg
Full case name Daniel J. Bernstein et al., v. United States Department of State et al.
Date decided August 25, 1997
Citations 176 F.3d 1132
Judges sitting Betty Binns Fletcher, Myron H. Bright, Thomas G. Nelson
Case history
Prior actions: Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel ruled for plaintiff in 974 F.Supp. 1288
Subsequent actions:
Case opinions
Opinion by Fletcher
Concurrence by Bright
Dissent by Nelson

Bernstein v. United States is set of court cases brought by Daniel J. Bernstein challenging restrictions on the export of encryption software outside of the United States.

The case was first brought in 1995, when Bernstein was a student at Berkeley and wanted to publish a paper and associated source code on his Snuffle encryption system. Bernstein was represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who hired outside lawyer Cindy Cohn. Four years and one regulatory change later, the court case won a landmark decision from the Ninth Circuit that software source code was speech protected by the First Amendment and that the government's regulations preventing its publication were unconstitutional. [1]

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. On October 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". [2]

  • 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)

Advanced Search
Included Web Search Engines


Safe Search

close

Top Matching Results

Occasionally Search.com will highlight specialized results that are based on the context of your query. Examples of specialized results include specific links to news, images, or video.

Top Matching Results may highlight information from other Search.com pages, content from the CNET Network of sites, or third party content. The listings are based purely on relevance. Search.com does not receive payment for listings in this section but our partners that provide this data may get paid for listing these products.

Sponsored Links

This section contains paid listings which have been purchased by companies that want to have their sites appear for specific search terms and related content. These listings are administered, sorted and maintained by a third party and are not endorsed by Search.com.

Search Results

Search.com sends your search query to several search engines at one time and integrates the results into one list which has been sorted by relevance using Search.com's proprietary algorithm. You can customize the list of search engines included in your metasearch from the preferences.

The search engines that are used in your metasearch may allow companies to pay to have their Web sites included within the results. To view the Paid Inclusion policy for a specific search engine, please visit their Web site. Search.com does not accept payment or share revenue with any search engine partner for listings in this section.