> Also, TOR was funded with illegal uses in mind. Beneficial to the US government, perhaps even legal with the US, but illegal in their intended application.
In what way is browsing the internet without someone recording your every move illegal? You may choose to use the anonymity for illegal purposes. But you may also choose to use your car or house for illegal purposes and no one says that these should be illegal.
I think you and Lawtonfogle are in agreement. For example, anonymity on the internet is illegal (or very close to it) in China, and Tor is meant to circumvent that law. Thus, it was designed for an illegal purpose as far as the Chinese government sees it.
It's the "in part" bit that is key (also the fact that this is legal in some countries). Where a tool has legitimate uses it tends to be legal (but may have restrictions placed upon its use - an example from the physical world is machetes) whereas when something has only illegitimate uses it tends to be made illegal (e.g. flick knives). Tor is the first category, some illegal use and some legal. An API for a proprietary service is tied to that services and can only be used to access it if this access is not allowed then why should the tool exist?
It has legal uses that I've already pointed out. First, it is legal to use by anyone with permission. Second, it serves as an example of code for others to learn from.
As for bans on knives and such, I consider such bans just as unjustified.
In what way is browsing the internet without someone recording your every move illegal? You may choose to use the anonymity for illegal purposes. But you may also choose to use your car or house for illegal purposes and no one says that these should be illegal.