The challenges of discussing thermal imaging technology on a public forum :(

[Bashstreet]

I had some cursory look at the regulations mentioned and soon found it would take professionally trained person to decipher the meanings of the particular regulations their real life applications and possible enforcement.

...

On side note if your research is such that it has military applications and you are planning to publish comprehensive designs notes including and or excluding design itself to public domain i really think you should reconsider.

Just my feeling of course i might know nothing at all about this.

Do you not think that a university department, faculty staff, legal advisers and government representatives count as "professionally trained persons"?

On your second note, keep in mind that research students do not publish on their own account. Their work is done for and on behalf of the university, and is owned by the university. Just as in a business situation it is generally the employer that is on the hook, not the employee.

One would hope that would be true sadly it is not the case here.

The person who is doing the research knows the exact rules he is going against as do his "white" professor.

When I started my PhD dissertation project, which is a 10kV, 200A, 50ns switching power module, I knew it is ITAR controlled. My white American professor gave me this advice: do it, publish it, and when the world knows how to do it, US government will be forced to upgrade their outdated ITAR database.

Rules quoted by him he is actively breaking

My research breaks EAR 3A.001h, 3A.201a and 3A.228c.
Just for the fun, go to check out 3A.201a2, you will see how stupid US government legislators are.

He acknowledges he is breaking the law.

The traditional way to do 10kV+ switching is by using either vacuum switch or by using monolithic semiconductor switch, where 10kV+ semicon switches are really hard to make and hence being controlled by ITAR.

He admits he is working against U.S interests (while being funded by U.S working in U.S with visa)

It's a glorified mosfet, how can it do any harm? The only harm to US is that it breaks its advantage on advanced HV semiconductor, but that's more into commercial section than military section.

He shows his political feelings.. While accepting money from U.S and being funded by U.S tax payer and still wants to work there .. hmmm

How about the reduction of loss of life starts from the West stop policing the world?

We might not care of such things but there might be people who do in U.S 

[coppice]

Interesting point referenced on Wikipedia, possibly pertinent to the discussion at hand.

"The ITAR specifies that the products of "fundamental research" are not considered controlled "technical data," so long as they are published freely. Fundamental research is defined as university-based "basic and applied research in science and engineering where the resulting information is ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from research the results of which are restricted for proprietary reasons or specific U.S. Government access and dissemination controls."

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120

I think the reasoning behind this is that the results of fundamental research rarely have military value on their own, and there are strong reasons why basic knowledge about the universe should be open. There is a huge chunk of engineering between the pure science and the things that kill people, and that's what ITAR tries to keep out of their opponent's hands.

This is irrelevant to the present discussion about university work like blueskull's, as that is purely engineering research.

[CatalinaWOW]

Blueskull you have your reasons and beliefs.  No amount of argument from any of us is going to change your mind.  I will ask one further question.

Do you and your professor realize that you are not the only ones at risk from your action.  If someone decides that it is important your entire university could lose the ability to receive those funds you so proudly describe.  The grants, the equipment, everything. 

You perhaps do not place much value on this.  I suspect your professor, if he thought it through and discussed it with his department might not be so cavalier.

I don’t think you quite understand Blueskull’s point.

Basically, the United States Department of Energy gave him a grant to research this high speed, high voltage switching technology. Part of that grant involves publishing the information obtained through his research.

In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.

I did understand his comment.  But he has also personally stated that he is violating ITAR.  So he has a personal responsibility to clarify the position, as does his professor.  They may feel that it is a cause worth fighting for.  Just as protesters on many subjects allow themselves to be arrested to force a court review of the subjects.  That is a personal decision on their part that may or may not be supported by the university.

I do not find it surprising that a bureaucracy as large as the US government has internal conflicts.  But when the elephants dance it pays the mice to take cover.  Unless of course they feel strongly about changing the dance steps of one or more of the elephants. 

When the dust all settles, Blueskull may be vindicated and the ITAR rules in this area will change.  Or maybe this will all just fade away as a non-issue.  Whether it will have been worth it to him and his professor is something only they can evaluate.  My latest comment was only to assist him in evaluating some of the downside risks.  It is only prudent for someone entering any activity to know both costs and benefits (from their own point of view) and presumably only enter those activities whose benefits outweigh the costs.

In this particular case Blueskull already has a large sunk investment in his PhD project.  It would be very difficult for him to change course no matter what his current evaluation of the downside risk.

[hendorog]

Interesting point referenced on Wikipedia, possibly pertinent to the discussion at hand.

"The ITAR specifies that the products of "fundamental research" are not considered controlled "technical data," so long as they are published freely. Fundamental research is defined as university-based "basic and applied research in science and engineering where the resulting information is ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from research the results of which are restricted for proprietary reasons or specific U.S. Government access and dissemination controls."

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120

I think the reasoning behind this is that the results of fundamental research rarely have military value on their own, and there are strong reasons why basic knowledge about the universe should be open. There is a huge chunk of engineering between the pure science and the things that kill people, and that's what ITAR tries to keep out of their opponent's hands.

This is irrelevant to the present discussion about university work like blueskull's, as that is purely engineering research.

Yes I see your point - when I read it I saw it like this:

"Fundamental research is defined as university based basic and applied research in science and engineering..."

[mtdoc]

Interesting point referenced on Wikipedia, possibly pertinent to the discussion at hand.

"The ITAR specifies that the products of "fundamental research" are not considered controlled "technical data," so long as they are published freely. Fundamental research is defined as university-based "basic and applied research in science and engineering where the resulting information is ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from research the results of which are restricted for proprietary reasons or specific U.S. Government access and dissemination controls."

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120

I think the reasoning behind this is that the results of fundamental research rarely have military value on their own, and there are strong reasons why basic knowledge about the universe should be open. There is a huge chunk of engineering between the pure science and the things that kill people, and that's what ITAR tries to keep out of their opponent's hands.

This is irrelevant to the present discussion about university work like blueskull's, as that is purely engineering research.

Yes - I think some are not getting that University research (and its publication) that violates ITAR is probably very common and in fact often encouraged by the US government. 

Blueskull specifically stated that his research was in part funded by the DoE and other research in his department was funded by the DoD (and demonstrated to military contractors).    I saw this as well when, as a PhD student in neuroscience in the 1980s, one of my departments most prominent PIs had a large lab that recieived large amounts of funding from the DoD.  (They were working with a glutamate receptor antagonist that had the ability to prevent short term memory formation - you can guess why the military might want to have such an agent for battlefield use....).

The military relies heavily on University based research which is invariably published and publically available.

[Ben321]

In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.

At that point, is it even a violation anymore? If it's okayed by the government, doesn't that mean that anything he does pursuant to the government's wishes does is in effect a lawful action? While the actions may be actions that normally would constitute an ITAR violation, if the government has granted his university's research lab a waver for the research, then it's no longer a violation. Either that, or the government bureaucracy is so big, that not every part of the government is aware of everything else going on in the government, such that those funding the research aren't even aware that the research violates ITAR.

[timb]

In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.

At that point, is it even a violation anymore? If it's okayed by the government, doesn't that mean that anything he does pursuant to the government's wishes does is in effect a lawful action? While the actions may be actions that normally would constitute an ITAR violation, if the government has granted his university's research lab a waver for the research, then it's no longer a violation. Either that, or the government bureaucracy is so big, that not every part of the government is aware of everything else going on in the government, such that those funding the research aren't even aware that the research violates ITAR.

I’d argue the former point in court, if I were a lawyer. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if the latter were the actual case.

[mtdoc]

There are countless laws and regulations that are selectively enforced - at every level of government. ITAR is one of those.

[CatalinaWOW]

Here in the US it is extremely common for various agencies to be at odds over regulations.  Think of highway departments and environmental management agencies.  In some cases it is literally impossible to comply with the various regulations.

[Bill W]

I do not think this is actually that inconsistent.
ITAR is a list of things that are controlled as having primarily military uses, and control by the US State Department.  It is not a list of things that must never be published / exported, just things where you get permission FIRST for the intended use.

In having a 'public' body that is bound to publish, and foreign nationals working on this, DoE are likely to have the permissions (generally or specifically) from State.
As Hendorog said, research disclosure is permitted.

Bill

[Ultrapurple]

There are countless laws and regulations that are selectively enforced - at every level of government. ITAR is one of those.

I have always thought that if 'they' want to get you, 'they' will find some convenient, long-forgotten (but not repealed) law to catch you out - even if only on a holding charge so 'they' can conduct various otherwise-illegal 'fishing-trip' searches whilst simultaneously trying to get you to incriminate yourself whilst under the stress of arrest.

Leaving aside famous cases like Al Capone (jailed for tax evasion, rather than racketeering, murder or whatever), my favourites are 'loitering with intent to use a pedestrian crossing', 'wearing a loud shirt in a built-up area during the hours of darkness', 'coughing without due care and attention' and 'having an offensive wife'. (Actually, all of these were adapted from the 1980-ish British satirical programme Not The Nine O'Clock News but there are some historical precedents).

In less-civilised countries some rather more unsubtle methods may be employed instead.

[IwuzBornanerd]

 What may be the most frequently repeated line in the "export controls training" I received was something like "...ask your location's export compliance officer" (officer/team/department/staff, whatever the term was).  All of the defense contractors, and probably every college that does affected research, have somewhere between a handful & a marching army of people who's job it is to prevent fines from being imposed on the organization.  It is their job to determine if a license is needed and to apply for such licenses, BUT they do not typically go around asking people what they are doing or planning on doing in order to determine if they need a license.  Everyone working on such stuff is supposed to be "trained" enough to seek guidance from the marching army when needed.

So anyone in @blueskull's position is supposed to know to ask the export compliance team to find the correct answer, not some professor who does not give a rip if the US has any advantages over its enemies.  It is far better to be chided by a co-worker than to wait for the bureaucrats to discover that a violation occurred.  Taking longer to get down to your level is not much consolation & from what I've seen in the corporate world they tend to start at the bottom anyway; the little guy gets punished first.  Hopefully the prof. would get caught in the dragnet too, but he might get off with mere removal from the project and extra "training".

We had an instance at work one time where a guy took some stuff to the shipping department to have it sent across the border.  The lowly shipping dept. person started asking appropriate questions & was able to recognize that a license was likely needed.  The guy who brought the package AND the guy who gave it to him got such a swift lesson in export compliance that it scared the feces out of them, but they kept their jobs & did not go to jail or lose all their assets--because a violation was prevented.

[Ultrapurple]

Give that packing clerk a bonus and a raise.