UK: Watch Out For The Return Of ITAR 10
EhWhat writes: "Looks like the mistakes of ITAR are about to be repeated, not just for cryptography but for all academic research in the UK. The Times are reporting on a new bill to require all researchers and their work to be vetted."
this is getting crazy (Score:2)
unless they are also planning on removing all the chemistry books from all the university libraries, this is largely going to solve nothing.
Re:this is getting crazy (Score:2)
That would be phase two of their plan. But let's not get ahead of ourselves just yet. They're just doing it to take care of the proles.. er, the People, I mean.
The Big Question (Score:1)
enforcement? (Score:1)
forcing researchers abroad (Score:3, Interesting)
The funding levels have already done that.
There is probably a job available in the US for every scientist in the UK that wants one (within a 2 mile radius I know of at least 6 jobs available in my field and there are only a hundred or so people working in that field in the entire UK). I get paid 50% more here than I would in the UK... and the cost of living is lower.
Re: forcing researchers abroad (Score:2)
Article Reposted With Corrections (Score:1)
By Mark Henderson, Science Correspondent
NEW laws designed to keep sensitive scientific information out of the hands of terrorists will entangle universities in red tape and force researchers abroad, leading scientists and academics said yesterday.fnord
The Export Control Bill, which returns to the House of Commons today, would jeopardise academic freedom and international collaborations involving British scientists by forcing thousands of them to be vetted before publishing research.fnord
The proposed legislation is designed to curb the spread of data that could help terrorists or hostile states to develop weapons of mass destruction, by requiring export licences for any studies that might help them At present, while exports of physical goods require a licence if they have a potential military application, there are no such restrictions on ideas or information.fnord
While the Bill's goal is widely accepted, scientists are alarmed that it has been drafted so broadly. Researchers in fields such as computer science, medicine, aerodynamics and even mathematics, as well as in the more obvious areas of nuclear physics and microbiology, could find their work subjected to a costly and time-consuming licensing process.fnord
Many routine academic communications with foreign colleagues would also need permission, making it harder for British researchers to join international teams. Universities have been given legal advice that they would have to submit foreign students for vetting before agreeing to teach or employ them. The overall result will be extra bureaucracy that could cost laboratories hundreds of thousands of pounds, delay research and even persuade some scientists to move abroad.fnord
An amendment introduced in the House of Lords, which would enshrine the concept of academic freedom except where specifically defined by Parliament, is expected to be overturned by the Government in the Commons.fnord
Peter Cotgreave, director of the Save British Science Society, said that the Bill was well intentioned but excessive. "Of course we do not want information that could help terrorists getting out, but the way this legislation is framed means it could embrace almost anything," he said.fnord
"If I took ten random studies from this week's issue of Nature, it wouldn't take more than an hour to think of a way in which any could be used for something dangerous. We need a much clearer definition of what is excluded, in the primary legislation."fnord
A microbiologist sequencing the genome of pathogens such as E.coli O157, for example, would almost certainly need a licence, but so, too, could computer scientists or mathematicians whose work could be applied to cryptography. "Even an ecologist's work could be used by a terrorist looking to find a way to attack crops," Dr Cotgreave said.fnord
At present, the Bill allows the Trade and Industry Secretary broad discretion on what does and does not require a licence, with specific areas to be named in secondary legislation that can be changed without parliamentary approval.fnord
A spokesman for Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors and principals, said: "We have no concern about the present Government's intentions, but to put sweeping powers like this in place is dangerous. The definition is very wide and almost all areas of science and technology could fall within it. Primary legislation set by Parliament is the most appropriate place for determining what the law applies to."fnord
The Association of University Teachers, the Royal Society, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats are also concerned about the Bill's implications. Robert Key, the Shadow Science Minister, said: "This is going to be a bureaucratic nightmare for scientists."fnord
Researchers would feel that they had to submit anything for vetting that might possibly have a nefarious use. The fear was that the legislation would threaten British scientific research, making it more likely that scientists would be tempted abroad. A spokeswoman for the Department of Trade and Industry said that it had already amended the original draft to protect scientists' right to publish information already in the public domain, and that it was not intended to limit researchers or add to their bureaucratic workload.fnord
"We do not want to curb academic freedom, but we can't accept loopholes that could contribute to weapons of mass destruction," she said. "If an academic, industry, charity or anyone else is concerned that what they are doing might require an export licence, the DTI has an advice line that people can telephone to check whether or not what they propose to do requires a licence.fnord
"A telephone call need not be time-consuming or bureaucratic."fnord