Re: lp ?

[Scott Brickner <sjb@universe.digex.net>]

"Peter D. Junger" writes:
>"Perry E. Metzger" writes:
>
>: 
>: Thaddeus J. Beier writes:
>: > So, if this person was sending cryptographics codes from Switzerland
>: > to Israel, the code would have been imported to the US, then exported
>: > by UUNET.  They can't do that, can they?  Probably nobody would prosecute,
>: > but it might be something to threaten UUNET with if one of their Northern
>: > Virginia neighbors ever wanted something the couldn't get otherwise.
>: 
>: It isn't clear that telecoms treaties don't implicitly make this legal
>: in spite of the export regulations.
>
>Once again, what the ITAR forbid is the disclosure of cryptographic
>software to a foreign person within or without the United States, so
>it does not make any difference whether the message containing the
>code passes through the United States or not.

OTOH, the ITAR explicitly permits "temporarily imported" munitions to
be re-exported.  Those clauses should entirely eliminate the issue of
whether UUNET could be held liable under ITAR.  ITAR says otherwise --
see section 120.18.