<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
<title>The Wassenaar Arrangement
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)</title> Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/wassenaar.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
<h2>The Wassenaar Arrangement</h2>

Our first information about the new Wassenaar Arrangement came in the
form of a newspaper article, which said that export of encryption
software would be prohibited—and this seemed to include free
software.  So we posted an announcement seeking people in
non-Wassenaar countries to participate in distribution and development
of free software for encryption.</p>

Subsequently the actual text of the new version of Wassenaar Arrangement was
published.  Then we saw that it continues to have an exception that
seems to cover free software.  (They use the term “public
domain”, but they seem to mean something like free software by
that.)  So the problem seems to have been a false alarm.</p>

However, the US continues to seek such restrictions, and therefore it
makes sense to continue our preparations, as a precaution in case a
future version of the Wassenaar Arrangement places further restrictions
on exportation of free software.</p>

Here is our interpretation of the text of the latest Wassenaar
Arrangement, as we have seen it.  This has not been checked by a

According to the General Software Notes, entry 2, the agreement does
not cover software which is in “the public domain”. This
is defined in the definitions as technology or software which has been
made available without restrictions upon its further dissemination.
There is also a statement that copyright by itself does not deny a
program this “public domain” status.</p>

There are currently discussions about the agreement and it would seem
logical that the definition of “public domain” is
something that will be clarified at future meetings.</p>

Finnish officials have stated that <cite>“nothing will change as
far as the “public domain” software and the Dec 3
Wassenaar Arrangement are concerned.”</cite></p>

In Denmark, we are told, there has been an incident where the Ministry
of Commerce informed an administrator to stop offering the program PGP
for download.</p>

Recent news indicate that the Australian government has prohibited the
export of free software for encryption by modifying the Wassenaar list
that related to the definition of software “in the public


</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer">

<div class="unprintable">

<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><em>gnu@gnu.org</em></a>. href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>.
There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
the FSF.
<br />
Please send broken  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><em>webmasters@gnu.org</em></a>.

<p> href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p>

<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
        replace it with the translation of these two:

        We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
        translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
        Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
        to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">

        <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
        our web pages, see <a
        README</a>. -->
Please see the <a
README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
of this article.

Copyright article.</p>

<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
     files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
     be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US.  Please do NOT change or remove this
     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
     document was modified, or published.
     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->

<p>Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1998, 2008 2008, 2014 Free Software Foundation,
<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>

<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.
</p> License</a>.</p>

<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->


<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
$Date: 2014/04/12 13:59:58 $
<!-- timestamp end -->