🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <20607@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes:
>In article <JGJ.92Apr6150320@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com> jgj@ssd.csd.harris.com (Jeff Jackson) writes:
>>Is someone trying to get USENET blasted out of existance?  Export of
>>encryption software is forbidden in this country.  If any site is
>>feeding comp.sources.misc to a site outside the country (USA), then
>>they are now in more violation of more federal laws than you can shake
>>a stick at.
>
>I'll point out what is wrong with your line of thinking -
>| Sender: aem@aber.ac.uk (Alec David Muffett)
>| Organization: University College of Wales, Aberystwyth
>
>Wales is NOT in the United States, nor is the sender's machine.  This
>is =imported= software and as such, doesn't apply to =export= restrictions.

Mr. Jackson was mostly right.  Mr. Haugh is half-right but only on the
irrelevant half.  There is no problem with feeding the postings from Wales
to the U.S.  There is a problem with feeding the same postings back out
from the U.S. to other countries, including to the originator.

Although my personal understanding of the issue is not reliable enough
for anyone else to base their decisions on, the problem seems to be more
along the lines of threats from U.S. policy administrators rather than the
law as written and legislated.  However, the threat is real.

For example, I could possibly write some code and copy it to the U.S.,
but would then be prohibited from copying it back to my desktop machine.
I could give a tape to a friend, but could not send it to him by e-mail,
because my employer's e-mail gateway is in the U.S.  (I haven't done any
of this, but this is my understanding of what U.S. policy administrators
assert to be allowed and prohibited.)

However, I don't think this kind of action would lead to the death of
Usenet.  It would lead to two separate Usenets, one for the U.S. and
one for most of the rest of the world, where most of the rest of the
world would communicate freely.  Rebirth of Usenet predicted, film at 11.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@jit081.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
"Yeah -- bad wiring.  That was probably it.  Very bad."