🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan7.095453.29864@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>In article <1993Jan07.075317.15435@convex.com> hamrick@convex.com (Ed Hamrick) writes:
>>
>>The attached information clearly states that publicly available software
>>is freely exportable.  There aren't ANY weasel words about types of software.
>
>My reading of the English language seems to be somewhat different
>from Ed Hamrick's. His quoted material is shot through with what he
>calls "weasel words" and restrictions of all sorts, and is not as
>open and shut as he would like to make it seem. Apologies for not
>editing more than I've done--I'm only trying to show various
>kinds of restrictions in the language. Not all apply to the current
>case:

I wouldn't say it's written in English <smile>.

I agree with you that the text is full of weasel words, that's why I was
careful to include all of it instead of excerping parts.  However, I
must apologize for not being more clear about what I meant.  I really
meant to say that publicly available information, including software,
is exportable under this license.  The paragraphs you've excerpted focus
on preventing some types of information from becoming publicly available.
The government's strategy appears to be to attempt to control the information
that becomes public by contractual pre-publication review.  This is a
pragmatic approach, because of the impracticality of controlling access to
information in bookstores, libraries, and anonymous ftp.

The sections you excerpted describe types of non-publicly available information
(such as research results subject to pre-publication review) that are not
automatically exportable.

The focus of my premise is that IF it's already publicly available information,
it is freely exportable.  I find nothing in what you've quoted that makes me
believe otherwise, but I would readily concede that there may be something
subtle buried in this mess that may say otherwise.  If you can find it, I'd
appreciate your pointing it out.

I can't find any weasel words which talk about _types_ of publicly available
information, such as public information about cryptographic techniques
and algorithms.  Once the cat's out of the bag, it's fundamentally
uninteresting for NSA, the State Department, and the Commerce department
to try to limit the spread of the information.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick