Man I was hoping you'd deny this one.
July 19, 2019 @bruceperens "Or, Mark, would you like to discuss this issue before a fair legal expert? Courts have judges whose job it is to enforce by-laws of corporations. I think you should back down and admit fault before you are in a lot more hot water".
I can post screenshots if you'd like, but the thread doesn't get much better from there.
-Dave, KG5CCI
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 4:32 PM Bruce Perens bruce@perens.com wrote:
I made "numerous legal threats"? I don't think so.
Given what a tremendous whopper that one is, I can't attach any credibility to the rest of your statement, except for one thing:
It is true that Michelle and Patrick, and for that matter I, feel that AMSAT's NDAs prevent it from being able to achieve a workable ITAR strategy.
You simply can't use the ITAR 120.11 and EAR 734.7 carve-outs AND have secret or proprietary portions of any technology listed under the United States Munitions List. Once there is secret or proprietary technology, all of the nasty restrictions of ITAR are unavoidable.
It is possible to deal with secrets outside of the technology, such as launch schedules, and it is possible to compartmentalize some ITAR-protected information, for example technology specific to the launch which is not necessary for broader cooperations such as designing and constructing a satellite.
Thus it is necessary for AMSAT to examine all existing NDAs, separate itself from ones that are no longer necessary, and carefully compartmentalize any which need to stand for the moment. Michelle and Patrick attempted to initiate this process, but have been blocked.
Thanks
Bruce