Great work you are doing. I really appreciate your tenacity. I am sure your "counter parties" are like Butch Cassidy and Sundance (paraphrasing) "Who is this guy UnDeadFOIA?"
Suggest you look into what written consulting contracts or seconding agreements exist with regard to the Ga. Tech computer guys. If those guys are not formally a part of FBI, DOJ, etc., all the information that was given to them may be presumptively public information. Similarly, if they were not a "party" or hired consultant/consulting expert, all communications to and from them may be presumptively public.
Great work you are doing. I really appreciate your tenacity. I am sure your "counter parties" are like Butch Cassidy and Sundance (paraphrasing) "Who is this guy UnDeadFOIA?"
FAFO - love it.
That appears to be extremely dated, circa 1980 computer tech. Reminds me of the days I used to trudge computer cards into the Ga Tech computer center.
In other words, "via DARPA" may not mean anything legally if those computer guys were not explicitly brought in as part the LE investigation.
If they were on the outside, then there may be additional avenues to get the information, which may be presumptively public.
Suggest you look into what written consulting contracts or seconding agreements exist with regard to the Ga. Tech computer guys. If those guys are not formally a part of FBI, DOJ, etc., all the information that was given to them may be presumptively public information. Similarly, if they were not a "party" or hired consultant/consulting expert, all communications to and from them may be presumptively public.