richmond@arc.CDN (charlie richmond) (10/23/87)
Joseph S. D. Yao <hadron!jsdy@uunet.uu.net>, writes: >Interesting point. Many people write "freeware" or "shareware" these >days that is given away freely. Since it's not commerce to not-sell >something, commercial export bans really can't apply. (Can they? I'm >not a lawyer, but this seems to fit into a legal nicety.) What will >the government do when some 7-year-old hacker writes a DES system and >puts it on a free BBS? Yes, indeed, those export controls can apply. Our province (Alberta) has a scientific exchange agreement with a counterpart in China, and our corporation sometimes allows Chinese engineers to return with some of the technology (gratis) they developed during their one year tenure with us (seems fair and is a nice "diplomatic" gesture). We discovered after a few calls to Ottawa exactly how scrupulous we need be in such matters [paraphrase of regulations follows]: Under the Export and Import Permits Act, export permits are required for a wide range of strategic goods and technologies as identified on the Export Control List (ECL). Additionally, permits are required for shipment of most goods to countries in the Area Control List (ACL). Failure to obtain an export permit when required may result in prosecution and penalties under the Act. [and these can be heavy] These controls are based on national security considerations and are actually determined on an international basis. Canada along with its NATO partners [so you guys south of the border are included in identical regulations] AND Japan [obviously!] participates in an a Coordinating Committee (COCOM) whose purpose is to maintain multilateral controls on the shipment of military and strategic goods and technologies to proscribed destinations. The issue is clearly strategic, NOT economic (certainly the average vendor wouldn't mind access to that extra one-third of the world); the fact that we wish to export technology as a GIFT is not pertinent under the Act. I rather suspect a defense based on "freeware" would not mitigate penalties greatly! Charlie Richmond richmond@ARC.CDN Alberta Research Council P.O. BOX 8330, Stn F Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA T6H 5X2 Note: I am not a member of the Bar of Alberta and the opinions expressed are personal only based on lay reading of the Act and regulations pursuant; nor do these opinions necessarily represent those of my employer.
imprint@orchid.waterloo.edu (U of Waterloo Student Newspaper) (10/25/87)
In article <154*richmond@arc.cdn> richmond@arc.CDN (charlie richmond) writes: > >Joseph S. D. Yao <hadron!jsdy@uunet.uu.net>, writes: > >>Interesting point. Many people write "freeware" or "shareware" these >>days that is given away freely. Since it's not commerce to not-sell >>something, commercial export bans really can't apply. (Can they? I'm >>not a lawyer, but this seems to fit into a legal nicety.) What will >>the government do when some 7-year-old hacker writes a DES system and >>puts it on a free BBS? > > determined on an international basis. Canada along with its NATO partners > [so you guys south of the border are included in identical regulations] AND > Japan [obviously!] participates in an a Coordinating Committee (COCOM) > whose purpose is to maintain multilateral controls on the shipment of > military and strategic goods and technologies to proscribed destinations. > >The issue is clearly strategic, NOT economic (certainly the average vendor >wouldn't mind access to that extra one-third of the world); the fact that >we wish to export technology as a GIFT is not pertinent under the Act. >I rather suspect a defense based on "freeware" would not mitigate penalties >greatly! > >Charlie Richmond > > > Note: I am not a member of the Bar of Alberta and the opinions > expressed are personal only based on lay reading of the Act and > regulations pursuant; nor do these opinions necessarily represent > those of my employer. Well, I'm not a member of the bar either, but it seems to be that software that can be downloaded by anyone with a modem by direct phone call from anywhere in the world from public access BBSs is not, reagrdless of what the regulations say, "controllable". Rule one of rule making: never pass a law you cannot enforce. Secondly, I hardly think that uucp/fidonet/etc communication protocols are of any strategic interest to anyone! I mean there are Fido nodes in Poland, I've logged on to BBSs in that country. And I hear from Tim Pozar that there are such nodes in the USSR too. We are simply talking about an electronic version of the post-office, and in case you didn't know, you can send letters to the USSR. You can drop in the Soviet Embassy and disclose any strategic secrets you happen to know. But if you're like me, you don't know any. If someone is going to violate strategic security, I hardly think a uucp connection would be the channel of first choice! If anything, it only makes it easier for "them" to monitor the information flow. It is interesting that the idea of open communication with the USSR strikes fear into so many hearts. I thought it was supposed to be the USSR that was "closed" to free flow of information. I rather think the barriers on both sides are comparable. It is exciting to contemplate the beneficial effect on both sides of the iron curtain when a few more holes are punched in it! Doug Thompson