Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:04:48 -0400 From: Michael Powell <nightrecon@hotmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core Message-ID: <i8jd3u$9v1$1@dough.gmane.org> References: <86fwwjyurd.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <20101006215345.1a57c45c@gumby.homeunix.com> <86pqvnxbre.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <20101006174309.407e4216@scorpio> <86d3rnxadh.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <AANLkTikMoCn_JY9u%2B2QTFqcWY9N1s4zNwPw_owtEV%2BSD@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rob Farmer wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 14:46, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn@stonehenge.com> > wrote: >> I understand that entirely. Which is why it would be reasonable (and >> downright ethical) to ensure that every FreeBSD integrator be made well >> aware of this restriction. >> >> It hadn't occurred to *me* for example to think that FreeBSD might be >> restricted. And I hadn't seen any prominent disclaimers. Why rely on a >> very very buried notice? > > If your business model involves importing/exporting large collections > of material which you did not create, and further more do not outright > own, but are licensed to use under certain conditions, then you need > to have both a lawyer and an accountant review your setup for any > potential issues. There are entire college degrees in international > business and it is folly to think that all the ins and outs of a > particular scenario will be readily apparent. > > A competent review would turn up this license clause and would give > you advice on what to do about it. I don't think complaining that you > weren't aware of the license terms before exporting is valid. > Furthermore, this isn't really a license issue, but more of a issue of > federal law. If you are in the US, these laws regarding what may be > exported to where always apply, regardless of what the license says. > > Making the license more visible may be a good idea, but doesn't > materially change the situation any. > Please forgive my somewhat ignorant idea(s) on this subject, as I am definitely not a lawyer. I was under the impression that the most onerous of these export rules and restrictions applied to crypto technology. If this is so, what I don't quite grasp is what do crypto export restrictions have to do with acpi? Is acpi a copyrighted, patented, or trademark otherwise owned by some entity? Quite possibly so as it is in contrib. I just have no idea who might "own" it. Or how it would fall afoul of crypto export restrictions. Looking forward to enlightenment. :-) -Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?i8jd3u$9v1$1>