Hi Ben, * Am 18.06.11 21:37, schrieb BRM: >> AIUI it would be a good idea for the TDF to consult it's US legal team >> about whether this is really the case... >> > > Very much so, especially since from what Export Control training I have had, > even a patch from a developer in the US would be considered an export to > TDF/LO > and thereby require an export license. IANAL, and that may fly under the > radar > easily; but it is something to have the legal team consider.
Citing [1]: "Firms exporting products that are subject to EAR must apply for an export license, unless the transaction qualifies for a license exception or “No License Required” (NLR) treatment. When a Shippers Export Declaration (SED) is required for the export transaction (for shipments over $2,500 value, those requiring an export license, or those going to countries that have been designated as terrorist supporting countries), the ECCN must be provided." Obviously, LO is not a Firm nor does the value of the "exported product" exceed 2.500$. So we need no SED and maybe that qualifies for an NLR teatment ;-) [1] http://www.export.gov/logistics/eg_main_018803.asp -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Uwe Altmann -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
