Fri, 14 Jan 2000 08:29:10 -0800
>X-Authentication-Warning: toad.com: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use
>To: "Perry E. Metzger" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
>Subject: Re: FAQ?
>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 15:53:45 -0800
>From: John Gilmore <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Perry said, in private mail:
>> There are a lot of open source projects out there which are confused
>> about how they have to behave with respect to current practices. Do we
>> have to alert the BXA just about our whole anon cvs repository once?
>> Can we export binaries of our open source stuff without review? (It
>> appears we can export imported binaries without review.) etc.,
>> etc. When do the regs come into effect?
>> If EFF could produce a good legal FAQ for open source projects on
>> crypto issues in the new BXA world, it would be a wonderful thing. I
>> know that several projects I'm involved in (such as NetBSD) are
>> currently wondering what we can and can't do, and when.
>The regs come into effect immediately, once published in the Federal
>Register (they've been submitted, and will probably pop out on Friday).
>It turns out that a month ago I wrote a draft FAQ and submitted it to
>the Commerce Dept to help them clear their thinking about how open
>source would be affected by their (then draft) regulations. I urged
>them to put such a FAQ into the regulations, like the official Q&A
>section in "Supplement No. 1 to Part 734--Questions and
>Answers--Technology Subject to the EAR". That old supplement clarified
>a bunch of issues about public domain, published information, etc --
>but not about software.
>I never heard anything back from them about my FAQ, but I heard today
>that they are working on their own FAQ about the new regulations,
>which they hope to release within a few days.
>My FAQ is not definitive (the answers it gives won't help you if you
>ever have to go to court) and may be actually incorrect in spots,
>while a judge will take notice of theirs. And mine applied to draft
>regulations, while theirs will be for the real ones (which have
>changed somewhat). I am waiting to see what they come out with before
>trying to re-work my old ones into something matching the new regs.
>If theirs is sufficiently uninformative or confusing, I may try it --
>but let's hope for the best from our government. They *did* try to
>move things pretty far for open source, despite nobody there knowing
>exactly how open source development really works. I'm hopeful that
>they will be able to explain how it works in words of two sylla bles
Bill Frantz | Internet Explorer, the | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506 | hacker's path to your | 16345 Englewood Ave.
email@example.com | hard disk. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA