Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

[Gonzalo Nemmi]

El 06/10/2010 11:18 p.m., Rob Farmer escribió:
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 14:46, Randal L. Schwartz<merlyn at stonehenge.com>  wrote:
>> I understand that entirely.  Which is why it would be reasonable (and
>> downright ethical) to ensure that every FreeBSD integrator be made well
>> aware of this restriction.
>>
>> It hadn't occurred to *me* for example to think that FreeBSD might be
>> restricted.  And I hadn't seen any prominent disclaimers.  Why rely on a
>> very very buried notice?
>
> If your business model involves importing/exporting large collections
> of material which you did not create, and further more do not outright
> own, but are licensed to use under certain conditions, then you need
> to have both a lawyer and an accountant review your setup for any
> potential issues.  There are entire college degrees in international

As a lawyer, no matter how much I review your set up, it´s a _fact_ that 
a license place in a place like 
/usr/src/sys/contrib/dev/acpica/hardware/hwsleep.c, that is to say, lost 
amongs a gazillion files: _will_ scape any review.

Furthermore, you can count on legal advise about the thing you tell you 
lawyer to review, but if you ignore _what_ you want to get reviewed: you 
can´t count on anyone knowing it for you.

> business and it is folly to think that all the ins and outs of a
> particular scenario will be readily apparent.
>
> A competent review would turn up this license clause and would give
> you advice on what to do about it. I don't think complaining that you
> weren't aware of the license terms before exporting is valid.

No ... and you are dead wrong about that .. a competent review will only 
answer the questions asked ... if you ignore the existence of such 
license and it´s terms, then there´s no way you would ask for advice 
about it, and _that_ I think is the point Randal is trying to make.

> Furthermore, this isn't really a license issue, but more of a issue of
> federal law. If you are in the US, these laws regarding what may be
> exported to where always apply, regardless of what the license says.
>
> Making the license more visible may be a good idea, but doesn't
> materially change the situation any.

It does by making it visible and thus telling potential 
exporters/re-exporters "watch out for this one. Ask your lawyer about 
it´s terms and conditions".

Best Regards
Gonzalo Nemmi