I'm not a lawyer, the following is not legal advice, and I may be mixing apples (ITAR) with oranges (EAR). In my understanding, the only export concerns we _might_ have is dual-use cryptography, for which we rely on bouncy castle.
If you go to bouncycastle's wiki ( http://bouncycastle.org/wiki/display/JA1/Frequently+Asked+Questions) and scroll to #11, the ECCN is now 5D992.c. In short, in my non-legal opinion, you should be good, but check with your lawyers. On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 5:37 PM Tom Barber <[email protected]> wrote: > Just musing, could anything open source be non ITAR compliant? > > Either way, I don’t believe the ASF would ever host a project that wasn’t > ITAR compliant, that would strike me as weird. > > On 9 December 2019 at 13:05:02, Mississippi Brennan ( > [email protected]) > wrote: > > Hello, > > > I was developing a bit with Tika and wondered if you could tell me if it is > compliant with International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR?). > > > Thank you, > > > Mississippi > > -- > > > Spicule Limited is registered in England & Wales. Company Number: > 09954122. Registered office: First Floor, Telecom House, 125-135 Preston > Road, Brighton, England, BN1 6AF. VAT No. 251478891. > > > > > All engagements > are subject to Spicule Terms and Conditions of Business. This email and > its > contents are intended solely for the individual to whom it is addressed > and > may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise > protected from disclosure, distributing or copying. Any views or opinions > presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not > necessarily represent those of Spicule Limited. The company accepts no > liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. If > you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by > reply email before deleting it from your system. Service of legal notice > cannot be effected on Spicule Limited by email. >
