Slashdot Mirror
Can the US Stop the Illegal Export of Its Technology?
coondoggie writes "Maybe people are more desperate or maybe there's just too much opportunity to make a quick buck but whatever the excuse, attempts to illegally export technology from the US has gone through the roof.
The Department of Justice this week said it has placed criminal charges or convictions against more than 255 defendants in the past two fiscal years — 145 in 2008 and 110 in 2007. That 255 number represents more than a six-fold increase from fiscal year 2005, when the DOJ said about 40 individuals or companies were convicted of over 100 criminal violations of export control laws."
Information wants to be free, my friend, no matter what you and your fascist DoJAA think.
Isn't it more than a bit arrogant and unrealistic to think the US is the only country with these technologies?
I mean, I know many Americans like to believe the US invented absolutely everything and are ahead of everyone else technologically, but in fact they really didn't and aren't.
Yes.
Of course, by legalizing it.
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
Keep adding additional rules, regulations and laws and people tend to start breaking more laws since more of them exist to break.
If I can not smoke in heaven, then I shall not go. -- Mark Twain
Is this spike for real, or is it the result of increased enforcement efforts?
...laura
Where, oh where is the DoC and DoJ when it comes to forbidding the export of this abomination called DRM?
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
The cost of educating a person is very high.
What of the net import in technical expertise ?
Often some of the very best students go to US, and end up staying and doing high end re-search.
The US didn't have to pay to feed and bring up this person. If this person is 1 in 100,
the US didn't have to pay and feed and educate 100 people and selectively keep only the best one without having to bother
with the rest.
I would say that the US is getting the good end of the deal
G
The Department of Justice this week said it has placed criminal charges or convictions against more than 255 defendants in the past two fiscal years â" 145 in 2008 and 110 in 2007. That 255 number represents more than a six-fold increase from fiscal year 2005, when the DOJ said about 40 individuals or companies were convicted of over 100 criminal violations of export control laws
So how many were charged and then aquitted in 2005?
We import bright people from around the world to do it for us. At least we used to. Many of them have gone back home to compete on fair terms. Others work at research centers funded by US multinationals like GE, Microsoft and IBM. Why the US seeks to restrict what foreign people make in foreign countries is as much a mystery as the IP Empire that claims ownership to the fundamental ideas involved. Less and less of this stuff is home grown and made.
I mean, I know many Americans like to believe the US invented absolutely everything and are ahead of everyone else technologically, but in fact they really didn't and aren't.
But this is surely a US invented technology... and IMHO nothing to be proud of, as it already caused famines in Africa and, worst of all, was actually designed to lead to just that consequence.
Maybe a few export bans of some US technology like this one wouldn't be so wrong, after all?
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
Most of the stuff the US is still export-controlling either has commercial uses or non-US sources. If you look at the indictments, the big one was about someone exporting carbon fibre materials to the China Space Agency. Why is the US trying to stop that? There's some noise about how carbon fibre might be somehow used to enrich uranium. China already has its own enrichment plants, nuclear weapons, and nuclear reactors. They don't need a centrifuge enrichment plant, except maybe for cost reduction. The US tries, for some reason, to slow down China's space program by refusing to export certain space-related items. Not that it makes much difference; the Chinese space program seems to be doing just fine.
It's hard to think of anything in computing that you can't get outside the US. Nor is there any military computing application that really requires more compute power that you couldn't put together from stuff you could mail order from Taiwan or China.
Arms control and technology export control are different issues. Arms control is intended to make it harder for people we don't like to get firepower in bulk. It's not about the underlying technology; it's about production. Most of the cases mentioned are pure arms control issues.
Just as soon as they stop all the cocaine from coming in.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
Which was the last US government that didn't illegally export arms?
such as aluminum cylinders for refining uranium hexafluoride, or computer chips hardened against cosmic rays for ICBMs, are thing you don't pick up at newegg and reship to iran. simple as that
if it is something the average american joe can buy, it is something the average iranian jamal can buy. nothing to be done about it except accept. nonissue, nonstory
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
There is technology in the US not available elsewhere? News to me. In fact most interesting stuff is imported into the US today....
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Recently I was forced to sit through an online training with regards to US export controls. The regulations are insane. I came away wondering why any high tech company would want to incorporate in the US with these kind of laws on the book. For instance you could be in violation if you show foreign visitors around your company and they get a fleeting look at a white-board that discusses a strong encryption algorithm. Same thing if you discuss such a "sensitive" technology on the phone with a foreigner. Absolutely and totally nuts.
Nothing much has changed. Smaller stuff like special electronics can be easily hidden inside perfectly legal consumer electronic devices and the $8/hr TSA guy working at the airport will never know the difference. Unless you completely seal borders (??how??) and cut off all tourism etc, you're just doing it for show.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
The Department of Justice this week said it has placed criminal charges or convictions against more than 255 defendants in the past two fiscal years -- 145 in 2008 and 110 in 2007. That 255 number represents more than a six-fold increase from fiscal year 2005, when the DOJ said about 40 individuals or companies were convicted of over 100 criminal violations of export control laws.
Apparently they went to the "baffle them with bullshit" school of math - if the above is an accurate depiction.
In 2005, 40 individuals were convicted.
In 2007 and 2008 combined, 255 were indicted.
In 2005, enforcement effort was ???
In 2005, indictment count was ???
In 2007 and 2008 combined, conviction count was ???
In 2007 and 2008, enforcement effort was ???
From the above, we can conclude: very little. The only thing we can say for sure about those numbers is that "six-fold increase" is bullshit. If every single one of those 255 individuals indicted is convicted on at least one count (extremely unlikely), the annual rate is only 127.5, which is only 3x. Even that would only speak of conviction rates, not attempt rates. Enforcement has almost certainly increased given the general increase in federal participation in intellectual property and trade secret law.
I'm not saying it has not grown, nor whether it should be a greater or lesser focus at the federal level. But the above statement, if accurately portrayed, is disingenuous at best, and deceitful at worst.
The first step in having a serious discourse about federal policy is to present the issue honestly.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Sorry, that's completely unnecessary. Fascism works perfectly well with an armed populace.. They simply have to be stupid enough to be led around by emotive arguments. For example, the argument "OMG, the other guy wants to take away all your money and guns!!1!" would work perfectly well on you.