I just saw this in alt.security.pgp, PGP's freeware license does NOT allow f
or use with remailers because that does not qualify as "personal use".


In <StZIf.6309$Zl1.2252@twister.nyroc.rr.com>, news1@DELETE_THISmccune.cc wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote in
>news:H8VX1WPO38764.5164467593@reece.net.au:
> 
>
>Since the ckt builds are unauthorized builds, the NAI (previous owner of
>PGP)
>license that covers use of their Freeware does not apply.  It is ownly
>their Freeware that their license applies to.

///////////////////BEGIN EMPHASIS////////////////////////////////
 
>
>I'm not a lawyer either, but even with official Freeware, I don't think the
>license would permit this.

///////////////////END EMPHASIS/////////////////////////////////


NOW perhaps, People who don't want to be in license violation any more than 
they absolutely have to be will finally be willing to invent ways to use Gnu
PG with Reliable, JBN and Quicksiver.



-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown.  Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

"Bearer of Bad News" <Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header> wrote in
message news:VCJWU4HL38765.0530671296@anonymous.poster...
>I just saw this in alt.security.pgp, PGP's freeware license does NOT allow
>for use with remailers because that does not qualify as "personal use".

Blow me.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In article <VCJWU4HL38765.0530671296@anonymous.poster>
Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Bearer of Bad News) wrote:
>
> I just saw this in alt.security.pgp, PGP's freeware license does NOT allow
 for use with remailers because that does not qualify as "personal use".
>
>
> In <StZIf.6309$Zl1.2252@twister.nyroc.rr.com>, news1@DELETE_THISmccune.cc 
wrote: 
>
> ///////////////////BEGIN EMPHASIS////////////////////////////////
> 
>
> ///////////////////END EMPHASIS/////////////////////////////////
>
>
> NOW perhaps, People who don't want to be in license violation any more tha
n
> they absolutely have to be will finally be willing to invent ways to use
> GnuPG with Reliable, JBN and Quicksiver.

Looks to me like question asks if a _remailer_ can use PGP freeware--
not remailer users.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

>I just saw this in alt.security.pgp, PGP's freeware license does NOT
>allow for use with remailers because that does not qualify as
>"personal use".


LMMP (ie Lawyers Make Me Puke) but here's some legal info on using pgp 2.6

( http://axion.physics.ubc.ca/pgp-commercial.html )

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On 17 Feb 2006, Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Bearer of Bad News)
wrote:
>I just saw this in alt.security.pgp, PGP's freeware license does NOT allow
>for use with remailers because that does not qualify as "personal use".
>
>///////////////////BEGIN EMPHASIS////////////////////////////////
> 
>
>///////////////////END EMPHASIS/////////////////////////////////
>
>
>NOW perhaps, People who don't want to be in license violation any more
>than they absolutely have to be will finally be willing to invent ways to
>use GnuPG with Reliable, JBN and Quicksiver.

XXXX off, zealot.

It's people like YOU who keep people like me from even looking at GnuPG as
an option, because we don't want to be associated with GnuPG proselyte
nutcases. Like YOU.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In < 38af162b37abc39b705bec6a36b30c0e@remaile
r.metacolo.com>, anonymous@remailer.metacolo.com
 wrote:
>"Bearer of Bad News" <Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header> wrote in
>message news:VCJWU4HL38765.0530671296@anonymous.poster... 
>
>Blow me.

"Thank You"

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In <2b1d44b51ab5a2ad2b54bc205e362962@dizum.com>, nobody@dizum.com wrote:
>In article <VCJWU4HL38765.0530671296@anonymous.poster>
>Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Bearer of Bad News) wrote: 
>
>Looks to me like question asks if a _remailer_ can use PGP freeware--
>not remailer users.

yeah, but if you're gonna convert, why stop with the server?  why not fix up
 the client as well?  these things offer choice of version don't they?  give
 us another choice.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In <dcc1f293c8d92c45340cf2b0b8ec3412@pseudo.borked.net>, nobody@pseudo.borked.net wrote:[vbc
ol=seagreen]
>On 17 Feb 2006, Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Bearer of Bad News)
>wrote: 
>
>XXXX off, zealot.
>
>It's people like YOU who keep people like me from even looking at GnuPG as
>an option, because we don't want to be associated with GnuPG proselyte
>nutcases. Like YOU.[/vbcol]

hmpth.. i'm not a zelot, nor do i play one on t.v.

i just want the option of using my preferred version.. you're free to use wh
at you want, i want that same freedom.

in order to have that freedom somebody has to be willing to make the changes
 to make it available.

i don't care if support for 2.6.x and 6.5.8 is left in, i just want the opti
on to not be forced to use them.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

[vbcol=seagreen] 

A way can be to compile a windows version of pgpgpg debian package.
A long testing phase will be necessary, but the porting task seems
trivial .....

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

> I just saw this in alt.security.pgp, PGP's freeware license does NOT allow
 for use with remailers because that does not qualify as "personal use".

Mixmaster does not use PGP. It uses its own OpenPGP implementation.
PGP's license does not matter.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]