Bill:
There is a lot overlooked here. Let me give you an example to illustrate for you the mine field.
Suppose I were as a US AMSAT loving ham, to ask my favorite UK ham experimenter, to work on the digital signal processing apparatus and code for the software defined transponder. Suppose I help this volunteer in a number of ways, consulting if you will, answering questions, etc.
This is, in my opinion, a deemed export. It does not matter that I intend it to be used on a US satellite taken up on a US launcher. I violated the deemed export rules by transferring information about a device intended to be used in a satellite to a non-US national.
This fairy tale is not intended to resemble any individuals that may or may not be associated with any of our projects.
;-)
Bob
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 5:49 PM, Bill Ress bill@hsmicrowave.com wrote:
Bob, et al.
I have been looking into ITAR issues, as you know, and one of the things I found (through asking questions - but admittedly not the one who had the problem) was that the individual who it seems was actually "guilty" of violating ITAR (while consulting with a foreign satellite maker - not AMSAT related) started to spread fear throughout our ranks. Was this appropriate on his part? Was it sour grapes? Should he have known better?
Let's put this ITAR stuff on hold for bit. I have volunteered to off load from Rick his efforts to resolve ITAR. Rick has briefed me on the recent AMSAT activities, offered to assist my efforts, and has agreed on a plan which will start by getting a reading from State, using their "commodity jurisdiction determination" procedure on the IHU-3, which is the long pole in the tent right now. I'm certain that effort will flush out a lot of information from State and hopefully start some meaningful dialog. We won't know until we try.
Then I'll be preparing series of articles about ITAR and its implications or lack thereof, using all the resources I can gather to provide guidance, counsel and editing, for what could become the basis for our formal ITAR guideline.
But I can tell you this fact right now. ITAR _DOES NOT_ apply to an AMSAT satellite launched by a USA company. Additionally, ITAR DOES NOT apply to material, hardware or software, we receive from outside the USA for inclusion into our USA company launched satellite. The big key here is USA company launch. Hence the attractiveness of the Intelsat rideshare. ITAR doesn't apply.
So until AMSAT plans for a launch by a foreign government - forget ITAR. And if we must consider a foreign country launch in the future, I'm hoping we'll have a better understanding of our ITAR do's and don'ts.
Just remember - 4 years ago we launched AO-51 from Russia and I didn't see any of the AMSAT team get hauled off to jail. With all its publicity you'd have thought it would have caught the eye of someone at State if they really felt we were "bad guys." I actually take that as a tacit approval by them (by using the concept of precedents - viewing our over thirty year satellite building and launching history) that we're the "good guys" but they don't want to go to Congress to have us formally excluded from a their confusing ITAR document...............But then I'm a glass half full guy!!
So Matt, yes - I see ITAR as just _one_ reason, of which there are several, for our lack of progress and concerns by some key volunteers.
Regards...Bill - N6GHz
Bob McGwier wrote:
I think this misses the point of these discussions. Some of our most valuable, long term, productive volunteers, people who have been producing real results for a long time, have been sitting on the sideline because of the fear of ITAR and its implications. Shortly after our first major meeting where ACP was really introduced, they almost completely pulled back from us. They have a specific example they can point to, in a person we all know who was caught up in it, pursued by the authorities, and ate a real cost that pushed them to the edge financially. It just isn't worth taking the risk to them and thus it is very costly to us.
I don't think anyone blames ITAR for all that happened here since June.
Bob
ARRL SDR Working Group Chair Member: ARRL, AMSAT, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. "Trample the slow .... Hurdle the dead"
-----Original Message----- From: eagle-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:eagle-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Matt Ettus Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 3:59 PM To: 'EAGLE' Subject: [eagle] ITAR BS
Saying that the reason there is no progress on Eagle is because of ITAR is like saying that the reason my dog hasn't read "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" is because he can't reach it on the top bookshelf.
The real reasons why there is no progress: Nobody knows what "Eagle" is anymore Everyone who was actually doing any work was summarily "fired". Multiple times in some cases.
Matt
Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA Eagle@amsat.org http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/eagle
Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA Eagle@amsat.org http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/eagle