Email Detail

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/SYDNRMZ62NLSHNYQOBQOMHLD7YNGFG4G/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "SYDNRMZ62NLSHNYQOBQOMHLD7YNGFG4G",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/IM3IWZG6QBDZWIHFR5RDWRJCO4C72QWP/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "4x1kx (a) iarc.org",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Assi Friedman",
    "subject": "[eagle] Re: ITAR BS",
    "date": "2008-09-09T22:46:53Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/DZ35S3LN2HQSXFG4IMODRNYEAYXSAUEO/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/QXNTQKDJU4AQDZMTV3TRUN2VRQW56J6N/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Bill,\nSome corrections:\n1) ITAR always applies; you are just trying to meet its restrictions. \n2) Also need to add to your list of conditions \"participation for the US\nmade satellite launched on US launcher is limited to US persons\"\n3) The US launcher has to be owned by a US customer. If a US launcher is\npurchased by a foreign customer, then you will need to sit at the table and\ndiscuss technical launch integration details - TAA needed.\n4) In order to accept foreign payloads you will need a TAA in order to have\na technical discussion.  The only exception to that may be opening a\ncatalog, choosing a device, calling the foreign company and ordering the\ndevice per the catalog with no technical discussion what so ever.\nSo unfortunately, there is no such thing as \"ITAR doesn't apply\".\n\nITAR sucks, but fortunately for everyone, there is light at the end of the\ntunnel. When the industry advocated ITAR a few decades ago, it did so to\nprotect the US aerospace industry from foreign competition.  As a result, we\ncan attribute the huge success of foreign organizations to ITAR. We didn't\ngive them a fish, so they learned how to fish themselves.  Now that in the\npast 5 or so year, the US Govt and DoD have been purchasing hardware abroad\nand therefore circumventing the purpose of ITAR, the industry is up in arms\nand out to significantly minimize ITAR. So we have to sit back and watch it\nhappen. Hopefully, it won't take too long.\n\nAssi kk7kx\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf\n> Of Bill Ress\n> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:49 PM\n> To: Bob McGwier\n> Cc: 'EAGLE'\n> Subject: [eagle] Re: ITAR BS\n> \n> Bob, et al.\n> \n> But I can tell you this fact right now. ITAR _DOES NOT_ apply to an\n> AMSAT satellite launched by a USA company. Additionally, ITAR DOES NOT\n> apply to material, hardware or software, we receive from outside the USA\n> for inclusion into our USA company launched satellite. The big key here\n> is USA company launch. Hence the attractiveness of the Intelsat\n> rideshare. ITAR doesn't apply.\n \n\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}