> but the heaviest point is that we can't seem to
> get any guarantee against effects of future changes of those same
> regulations.
Perhaps because the illegality of such "retroactive" actions is a fundamental
part of our legal framework? If it's legal now, it can be illegal later, but
you can never make a law or ruling that says "what you did before used to be
okay but now isn't."
The gentleman from Intel implied here that they have legal staff who could
help clarify and confirm this issue...
/r$
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Requests for Build changes Bill Rebey
- Re: Requests for Build changes Geoff Thorpe
- Re: Requests for Build changes Allen Smith
- RE: Requests for Build changes Bill Rebey
- Re: Requests for Build changes Jeffrey Altman
- Re: Requests for Build changes Geoff Thorpe
- Re: Requests for Build changes Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
- Re: Requests for Build chan... Rich Salz
- Re: Requests for Build... Dr Stephen Henson
- Re: Requests for Build... Ben Laurie
- Re: Requests for B... Rich Salz
- Re: Requests f... Ben Laurie
- Re: Requests for Build changes Jeffrey Altman
- Re: Requests for Build changes Dr Stephen Henson
- Re: Requests for Build changes Jeffrey Altman
- Re: Requests for Build changes Dr Stephen Henson
- Re: Requests for Build changes Ulf M�ller
- Re: Requests for Build changes Ben Laurie
