On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Rich Salz wrote:
> www.aus.ras.com, I think.
er, www.aus.rsa.com
> Curious. Two years ago OSF's outside counsel, bright folks at
> Hale&Dorr, advised us that a wholly-owned subsidiary of a US
> company was subject to the US regulations.
The US seems to think that everyone, more or less, is subject to their
regulations - but the US regs don't prohibit offshore development, as long
as US persons don't participate or provide technical assistance or
technical data. RSA's strategy is (apparently) the same as that previously
adopted by C2Net, Sun, etc - offshore development by non-US persons. It's
nice to see that BXA/DOC has finally blessed this strategy - but it
doesn't seem especially remarkable that US crypto regs shouldn't apply to
the activities of non-citizens operating outside of the US working with/on
foreign-developed software.
It'll be interesting to see whether the Australian government chooses to
view RSA's investment as an opportunity or as a threat.
--
Greg Broiles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
