Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 20:25:49 -0700 From: Rob Farmer <rfarmer@predatorlabs.net> To: Michael Powell <nightrecon@hotmail.com> Cc: 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: <AANLkTi=_JG-wCuRedtSfdt9cGijJ0W4hCVbOoBsrcNXX@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <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> <i8jd3u$9v1$1@dough.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 20:04, Michael Powell <nightrecon@hotmail.com> wrote= : > I was under the impression that the most onerous of these export rules an= d > restrictions applied to crypto technology. If this is so, what I don't qu= ite > 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. =A0:-) I'm not a lawyer either, so take all this with a grain of salt. Basically, there are two reasons the US will block an export, which you can read about at: http://www.bis.doc.gov/licensing/exportingbasics.htm 1) The export is considered "dangerous" for one reason or another, and needs to be licensed so the government can keep track of who is getting it and why they want it. Examples include military equipment, nuclear equipment, controlled substances, firearms, etc. Crypto is defined as a "munition" and is restricted for this reason. There are a lot of opinions about whether this is "right", but it has held up in court. 2) The destination is "designated as supporting terrorist activities" or is embargoed for political reasons (socialist/totalitarian government - Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria). Most of the people in these countries don't have access to a computer and the rights to install whatever they want on it, so this is targeted at government officials. As such, you are correct that for the vast majority of cases, the ACPI code shouldn't have problems or need a license. The biggest legal risk I can see is if ftp.freebsd.org and such allow people in the embargoed countries to download code - I've seen a brief reference saying Sourceforge was forced to IP ban these. --=20 Rob Farmer
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTi=_JG-wCuRedtSfdt9cGijJ0W4hCVbOoBsrcNXX>