"Peter D. Junger" writes:
"Perry E. Metzger" writes:
: : Thaddeus J. Beier writes: : > So, if this person was sending cryptographics codes from Switzerland : > to Israel, the code would have been imported to the US, then exported : > by UUNET. They can't do that, can they? Probably nobody would prosecute, : > but it might be something to threaten UUNET with if one of their Northern : > Virginia neighbors ever wanted something the couldn't get otherwise. : : It isn't clear that telecoms treaties don't implicitly make this legal : in spite of the export regulations.
Once again, what the ITAR forbid is the disclosure of cryptographic software to a foreign person within or without the United States, so it does not make any difference whether the message containing the code passes through the United States or not.
OTOH, the ITAR explicitly permits "temporarily imported" munitions to be re-exported. Those clauses should entirely eliminate the issue of whether UUNET could be held liable under ITAR. ITAR says otherwise -- see section 120.18.