www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Schmidt <cliffschm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Request for Export Code for Spam Assassin (fwd)
Date Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:52:20 GMT
On 8/22/05, Justin Mason <jm@jmason.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> The thread continues.   If they go for SpamAssassin 3.0.0 instead of 2.64,
> that's ASF software, in which case the advice I'm getting here -- namely
> Lawrence Rosen's last mail -- would apply.
> 
> So should I reply with:
> 
>     We are informed that Apache SpamAssassin is eligible for "EAR99 (NLR)"
>     status.
> 
> Does that look/seem suitable?   Do we need more sign-off on that opinion,
> first?

There are other projects that have questions around this.  I have
agreed to present the issue and resolution to the board by the Sep
21st.  Please let me know if this timeframe is going to be a problem
(we have some projects that have been asking about this question for
years).

> (PS: thanks for your help on this, Lawrence!)

yes - thanks!  I'll follow-up on this info.


Cliff

> 
> (PPS: is legal-discuss supposed to be open and googleable?
> http://www.mail-archive.com/legal-discuss@apache.org/ .  stopped around
> May, though.)
> 
> - --j.
> 
> - ------- Forwarded Message
> > Date:    Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:44:32 -0500
> > From:    [ELIDED]
> > To:      <jm@jmason.org>
> > Subject: RE: Request for Export Code for Spam Assassin
> >
> > Justin,
> > Thanks for your note.  If we choose to upgrade our solution and use the
> > SpamAssassin 3.0.0, is there export control classification number
> > associated with that??
> >
> > [ELIDED]
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jm@jmason.org [mailto:jm@jmason.org]
> > Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 2:51 PM
> > To: [ELIDED]
> > Cc: jm@jmason.org; pmc@SpamAssassin.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Request for Export Code for Spam Assassin
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi [ELIDED] --
> >
> > SpamAssassin 2.64 is a pre-Apache release.   Pre-Apache, SpamAssassin
> > was
> > developed and offered for download from a variety of web servers, some
> > outside the US, some inside.
> >
> > SpamAssassin 3.0.0 and onwards are released under the Apache Software
> > Foundation's aegis.  But the ASF are not in a position to comment on the
> > exportability of SpamAssassin 2.64.
> >
> > - --j.
> >
> > [ELIDED] writes:
> >  Justin,
> >
> >  Do you ship Spam Assassin internationally?  If so, what export
> >  classification does your distribution group use to export?
> >
> >  [ELIDED] has global clients and if we use your software as part of our
> >  solutions, we will be exporting them.
> >
> >  Do you have an export compliance office or officer at Apache??
> >
> >  [ELIDED]
> >
> >  -----Original Message-----
> >  From: jm@jmason.org [mailto:jm@jmason.org]
> >  Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:04 PM
> >  To: [ELIDED]
> >  Cc: pmc@SpamAssassin.apache.org
> >  Subject: Re: Request for Export Code for Spam Assassin
> >
> >  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >  Hash: SHA1
> >
> >  Hi [ELIDED] --
> >
> >  I'm not a lawyer, and my opinion should not be taken to hold legal
> >  weight. However, here's what I think applies....
> >
> >  We do not implement or perform encryption in SpamAssassin, as defined
> >  by this checklist --
> >  http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/checklistinstr.htm . We rely on
> >  external, separate packages to perform this, where necessary.
> >
> >  That means we do not need an Export Control Classification Number (as
> >  far as I know) -- as such, we don't currently have one.
> >
> >  Hope that helps,
> >
> >  - --j.
> >
> >  [ELIDED] writes:
> >  > Justin,
> >  > Please provide the Export Control Classification Number for the
> >  > following product:
> >  >
> >  > Spam Assassin 2.64
> >  >
> >  > If this is not the correct place to make this request, please
> >  > forward
> >  > this to your export compliance office.
> >  >
> >  > Thank you!
> >  >
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  >
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  > [ELIDED]
> >  > [ELIDED]
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: Exmh CVS
> >
> > iD8DBQFDCiynMJF5cimLx9ARAlxZAJ4rvk5aZGixNCZ/9PUZMCPXehKo9QCeN6A6
> > C28+udrpkjlsWXCpOqEOApc=sxtY
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > ------- End of Forwarded Message
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Exmh CVS
> 
> iD8DBQFDCj16MJF5cimLx9ARAouoAJ9Hi87wrA+1Obk4jyJKNEzIYBiHUQCgoIC4
> 7ts6kk/iL5nukhw+MYPHDTU=
> =ze9v
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message