[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Exporting software doesn't mean exporting (was: Re: lp ?)

"Perry E. Metzger" writes:

: "Peter D. Junger" writes:
: > If a Frenchman on vacation in the Riviera shows a copy of PGP sourcecode
: > to a German businessman there, that is literally a violation of the
: > ITAR.
: Where the hell did you get that idea?  

>From Section 120.17 of the ITAR which provides:

 _Export_ means:

 . . . .

 (4) Disclosing (including oral or visual disclosure) or transfering
 technical data to a foreign person, whether in the United States or
 abroad . . . .

(And technical data is (baroquely) defined in Section 120.10 as
including certain software, including crytographic software.)

: The ITAR clearly does not apply
: to foreigners disclosing things to each other outside the United
: States. 

Where the hell did you get that idea?  

: I've read it and I can't see how it could possibly be so
: interpreted. I'm not a lawyer, but this interpretation is so bizarre
: as to be almost untenable. I can clearly see that a U.S. person
: talking about DES to a foreign person can be a violation under the
: language in the regulations, but there is no way on earth to interpret
: the regulations as applying to foreigners abroad talking to other
: foreigners outside the U.S.

Go read the section that I quoted again.  Where is there an exception
for foreign persons who happen to be abroad?  

: > Don't expect the ITAR to make any sense.  And don't think that you can
: > apply logic to the ITAR and get logical results.  It doesn't work that
: > way.

: I was under the impression, though, that the words meant what they
: said.

When did you change your mind?

Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
Internet:  [email protected]    [email protected]