From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!crdgw1!jupiter!kassover
From: kassover@jupiter.crd.ge.com (David Kassover)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: I never suggested anything that I thought was illegal . . .
Message-ID: <7463@crdgw1.crd.ge.com>
Date: 8 May 90 19:37:39 GMT
References: <9B05573732FF4013B5@icdc.llnl.gov>
Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com
Organization: Aule-Tek, Inc.
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <9B05573732FF4013B5@icdc.llnl.gov> KETTERING@SPIKE.llnl.gov (Brett 'Volleyball is my game' Kettering) writes:
>>From the article <7390@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> (David Kassover)
>
>>In article <9E10893F111F400A5B@icdc.llnl.gov> KETTERING@SPIKE.llnl.gov (Brett 'Volleyball is my game' Kettering) writes:
>>|About this mess of buying software and such at outrageously inflated prices
>>|overseas.  Have the prospective foreign buyers thought of getting ahold of
>>|someone they know and trust in the U.S., having them buy it cheaply here and
>>|ship it to them?  If they are trusted friends it seems that some sort of
>>|payment method, acceptable to both, could be worked out here.
>
>>There's a word for that kind of activity.  "Smuggling" comes to
>>mind.  This is not to say that it doesn't happen, or should or
>>shouldn't happen.
....
>>There are also classes of goods for which the US shipper accepts
>>responsibility for non-transferance to prohibited countries.
>
>If the item listed on the contents invoice is prohibited to the destined
>country then it is the responsibility of the postal officials to make this
>known to the sender and not allow it to be sent.

First of all, postal clerks, in the US, in general, are not intimately
familiar with the entire "contraband list"  (disclaimer:  neither
am I)  Just because something is commonly done doesn't make it
legal (or illegal) (or a good idea or a bad idea)


Secondly, if I ship something from USA to country X, that it is
perfectly legal to ship to X, and then the recipient in
X ships it to some other place Y, which may be perfectly legal
to ship to from X, but not from USA to Y, the shipper from USA to
X *may* have some liability.

Intent has little to do with it.


Sanity Check:

Someone said "why not do blotz?"  I provided a (possibly too
casually stated) reason why not.

THIS IS ALL SPECULATION, not demand for performance.  Do with it
what you will.


In my E-mail to the poster of the complainant about 100% markup + VAT,
I discussed my views on this and possible courses of action.  Has
little to do with Ada programming or Software Engineering.
--
David Kassover             "Proper technique helps protect you against
kassover@ra.crd.ge.com	    sharp weapons and dull judges."
kassover@crd.ge.com			F. Collins