US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation

Could someone explain why this wouldn't fall under freedom of speech? Sounds like there were not government secrets nor did the expert have a security clearance that would have held him to a higher standard.

If Tor researchers gave a presentation at a security conference on how to install Tor, knowing full well that some would use it to engage in the proliferation of CSAM, would that also not fall under free speech?

Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation

#5

Post by spacemanmatt » Wed, Apr 13, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

i wonder if he thought he had a 1st amendment defense

Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation

#6

Post by flerchin » Wed, Apr 13, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

I would love to hear from Mr Griffith's perspective on this. 5 years in prison is a BFD. I wonder how the arrest went down, why he took a plea, what the details of his presentation were, so many things.

Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation

#7

Post by spacemanmatt » Wed, Apr 13, 2022, 3:53 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #4

Could someone explain why this wouldn't fall under freedom of speech? Sounds like there were not government secrets nor did the expert have a security clearance that would have held him to a higher standard. If Tor researchers gave a presentation at a security conference on how to install Tor, knowing full well that some would use it to engage in the proliferation of CSAM, would that also not fall under free speech?

freedom of speech is not absolute. it's as simple as that. the guy violated a federal sanction.

Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation

#8

Post by CamperBob2 » Wed, Apr 13, 2022, 3:54 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #4

Could someone explain why this wouldn't fall under freedom of speech? Sounds like there were not government secrets nor did the expert have a security clearance that would have held him to a higher standard. If Tor researchers gave a presentation at a security conference on how to install Tor, knowing full well that some would use it to engage in the proliferation of CSAM, would that also not fall under free speech?

The problem isn't so much the presentation or the content, as it is the transaction. Doing business with North Korea is highly restricted, as it should be, in order to maintain the integrity of US and international trade sanctions against the Kims.

Russia now finds itself in much the same position thanks to Putin, so it's probably a good idea for everyone doing business there to familiarize themselves with economic actions being taken against that regime. Few people in the West ever attempted to do business with Pyongyang, but that's not true of Moscow. There's a lot more legal exposure, much of which will come as a surprise to those affected by it.

Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation

#9

Post by meheleventyone » Wed, Apr 13, 2022, 3:56 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #4

Could someone explain why this wouldn't fall under freedom of speech? Sounds like there were not government secrets nor did the expert have a security clearance that would have held him to a higher standard. If Tor researchers gave a presentation at a security conference on how to install Tor, knowing full well that some would use it to engage in the proliferation of CSAM, would that also not fall under free speech?

> Could someone explain why this wouldn't fall under freedom of speech?

North Korea is under international sanctions and part of that means you can't aid them. Explaining how to launder money and evade sanctions to a general audience is probably fine. Explaining how to launder money and evade sanctions to North Korea is against the law.

Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation

#10

Post by vmception » Wed, Apr 13, 2022, 3:56 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #4

Could someone explain why this wouldn't fall under freedom of speech? Sounds like there were not government secrets nor did the expert have a security clearance that would have held him to a higher standard. If Tor researchers gave a presentation at a security conference on how to install Tor, knowing full well that some would use it to engage in the proliferation of CSAM, would that also not fall under free speech?

If the security conference was in a place sanctioned under the US International Emergency Economic Powers Act, then yes.

He applied for a travel exemption, and was denied. He went anyway. He was charged with that, not the speech. That's how its enforced, for this specific reason. Regulate the intermediary to control the desired behavior. Don't regulate the individual with first amendment rights.