Return-Path: <push>
Return-Path: owner-openssl-dev@openssl.org
Received: from opensource.ee.ethz.ch (opensource-01.ee.ethz.ch [129.132.7.153])
	by brev.stacken.kth.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA02320
	for <levitte@stacken.kth.se>; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 19:32:15 +0100 (MET)
Received: by en5.engelschall.com (Sendmail 8.9.2) for openssl-dev-L
	id TAA09956; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 19:14:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by en5.engelschall.com (Sendmail 8.9.2) via ESMTP for <openssl-dev@openssl.org>
	from certplus.com id TAA09904; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 19:14:37 +0100 (MET)
Received: from certplus.com (testbox.certplus.com [195.101.88.80])
	by certplus.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA07720
	for <openssl-dev@openssl.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:52:41 +0100
Message-ID: <38D12499.99A3BA88@certplus.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 19:14:49 +0100
From: Jean-Marc Desperrier <jean-marc.desperrier@certplus.com>
Organization: Certplus
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: [Eben Moglen <moglen@columbia.edu>] Re: US crypto export 
 restrictionsand GNU (fwd)
References: <Pine.WNT.4.21.0003090021290.-31249-110000@vaio.php.net>
			<38CDFEEC.9C9159BD@algroup.co.uk>
			<200003150456.VAA29971@aztec.santafe.edu>
			<E12V7R4-0002c0-00@old.law.columbia.edu>
			<38CFC136.8B8873FE@algroup.co.uk>
			<E12VIgR-00030m-00@old.law.columbia.edu>
			<20000316014140.A604@rho> <E12VUq1-000371-00@old.law.columbia.edu> <38D112C4.D3CD6897@algroup.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-openssl-dev@openssl.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
X-Sender: Jean-Marc Desperrier <jean-marc.desperrier@certplus.com>
X-List-Manager: OpenSSL Majordomo [version 1.94.4]
X-List-Name: openssl-dev

Ben Laurie wrote:
> 
> Eben Moglen wrote:
> > In the worst case analysis, components exported
> > now might subsequently become non-exportable in the event that

> Perhaps I'm failing to understand here ... you say "No code not
> originally developed in the US would be subject to..." but sure we're
> talking about code that _was_ developed inside the US.

Indeed. 
If some code in open source project has been developed in the USA, then
we must keep a trace of where it is to be able to remove it later in
case the regulation in the US become more restrictive.

So it does not propagate in the meaning that the european code never
becomes unexportable, but in order to take advantage of that, we need to
be able to "clean" it and remove all the american code in it at the
moment we need to.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager                           majordomo@openssl.org