On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 06:35:56PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > > That's not how I read the law. I think you're making assumptions that > law works like software or that law is well designed. Both of these > assumptions are false. > > If you'll present rational and explicit arguments as to why you think > multi-step export is illegal, with explicit references to appropriate > paragraphs in the regulations or enabling legislation then I'll be > happy to respond as a matter of intellectual stemulation. "Please keep in mind that persons in the US who may post to sites outside the US are governed by US law, even if they do so in their individual capacity. Therefore, you may want to warn persons in the US that their posting to the current crypto server outside the US are still subject to US regulations." Ok - This is basically the same as posting to a server in the US which has the automation of pushing its content outside the US. Its just a technical helper. > breaking a law then you should seek legal advice yourself. If you > believe that Debian may be breaking a law, and wish to donate the time > of some US lawyer who supports your position, Debian would be foolish > to ignore your donation. I am not saying that Debian as a whole is breaking the law. I am just saying that i am unhappy with the regulations as a mirror maintainer. There are multiple issues which dont fit in my picture of Debian. I feel that i (although i dont live within the US) will be held responsible under US laws (Or if they can not get hold of me the knowingly exporter using my infrastructure). My assumption is that the mirrors are a big part of debian and if one sees a mirror in the T7 countries the upload to incoming can be interpreted as knowingly exporting to emborgoed contries. "We recommend that you perform IP checking and deny downloads to known embargoed countries." This is against any free picture of the world. It means we are shutting down service to people because the US govt. thinks they are criminals e.g. because they live on a island just before their coast. I dont accept the US govt. as the only source of wisdom. And the other point is that we (As debian) accepting rules on usage our exported software which we wouldnt if it were in a license. I feel that the freedom of the DFSG only applys to civil usage but not once someone uses debian to produce chemical missiles. We just accept the usage restrictions as most people think that THIS restriction is ok. I thought that free in the DFSG did not mean "Free as long as it fits the majoritys moral opinion". Flo -- Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-5201-669912 Nine nineth on september the 9th Welcome to the new billenium
Attachment:
pgpaiM9d0aVUN.pgp
Description: PGP signature