On 16/05/10 23:46, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
On Sun, 16 May 2010, Tony Mechelynck wrote:
On 19/03/10 05:50, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
[...]
FWIW, the Apache project complies with US law, being hosted in the
US. (So, too, w/ Vim being hosted mostly on SF, correct?)
[...]
Actually, Vim sources are hosted in the Netherlands: ftp.vim.org is an
alias for ftp.nluug.nl IIRC; see also the last paragraph of "help
encryption", immediately before ":help timestamp".
You responded to an early message in the thread. Bram pointed out the
same thing, to which I responded:
Yeah, this was a thread of more than 30 posts, and when I saw that
(according to the threading) there was no direct reply to your post
quoted above, I reacted before reading the whole thread. Then I noticed
that the matter had appeared again in a collateral subthread, and that
Bram had replied there, mentioning Amsterdam. Sorry.
Okay. I was going off of www.vim.org == sourceforge.
I also pointed out that the U.S. isn't the only country that has such
laws:
The international version is "The Wassenaar Arrangement":
http://www.wassenaar.org/
...but I also concluded with the fact that dev time is better spent on
other efforts, and that it was unlikely to ever become an issue for Vim.
(just responding here for completeness.)
Well, if Vim were hosted in the US, it would mean (IIUC) that it could
not be exported to (let's say) North Korea with strong encryption
built-in, or even in source form including strong-encryption sources. I
know that there are quite a number of Korean users of Vim, and even
though I think that most of them live in South Korea, I would not deem
it impossible that there be a sizable number of them in North Korea too.
As it is, Vim is published out of the Netherlands, not the USA; but
"Wassenaar" sounds conspicuously Dutch, and after checking your link it
is indeed the name of a suburb of the Hague. However at that site I see:
<quote>
The Lists do not control "software" which is either:
1. Generally available to the public by being:
a. Sold from stock at retail selling points without restriction, by
means of:
1. Over-the-counter transactions;
2. Mail order transactions;
3. Electronic transactions; or
4. Telephone call transactions; and
b. Designed for installation by the user without further substantial
support by the supplier; or
Note Entry 1 of the General Software Note does not release "software"
controlled by Category 5 - Part 2 ("Information Security").
2. "In the public domain".
</quote>
This looks promising; but one part has a "note" in lawyerese and the
other a "defined term" in quotes, let us see... ah, I think this
clinches it, and since there is an "or" clause, no need (I think) to
check the other:
<quote>
GTN "In the public domain"
GSN This means "technology" or "software" which has been made available
ML 22 without restrictions upon its further dissemination.
Note Copyright restrictions do not remove "technology" or "software"
from being "in the public domain".
</quote>
I believe that Vim is "in the public domain" within the definitions used
in that document (but of course, IANAL, nor do I play one on TV).
Best regards,
Tony.
--
Telephone, n.:
An invention of the devil which abrogates some of the
advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance.
-- Ambrose Bierce
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
