1998-12-07 - Re: What was the quid pro quo for Wassenaar countries?

Header Data

From: Ian BROWN <I.Brown@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
Message Hash: e492d15c89e3a9173f4534af4e016ca11bcfefa71f200eb4d6f612beaadfd381
Message ID: <24416.913050208@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Reply To: <000e01be200d$d7be9e10$8007a8c0@russell.internal>
UTC Datetime: 1998-12-07 17:59:22 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 01:59:22 +0800

Raw message

From: Ian BROWN <I.Brown@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 01:59:22 +0800
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: What was the quid pro quo for Wassenaar countries?
In-Reply-To: <000e01be200d$d7be9e10$8007a8c0@russell.internal>
Message-ID: <24416.913050208@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>In addition under the single European act the entire country of Europe is
>one export zone for crypto control purposes.

Unfortunately, not yet. The European Commission has proposed amending the 
Dual-Use regulations to allow the free circulation of crypto products among 
member states, while extending controls to 'intangible' goods (i.e. Internet 
downloads). Until then an export license is required. Licenses are granted 
more readily and with fewer conditions (e.g. permitted end uses) for exports 
to other EU nations and Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, 
Switzerland and the US.

Amazing the minutiae you have to trawl when co-authoring a paper on crypto 
export controls ;)