"Are you involved in, or do you plan to be involved in any activity where you have agreed, or plan to agree, to any restriction regarding the publication; disclosure; shipment; distribution or release of a particular item or goods, technology, or information? This includes written, electronic, digital, or verbal information."

This above question was part of an automated training that I took part in recently on export controls. The answer in my mind was, "Well, yes, maybe."

Between the Y or the N, I thought I might as well go for the Y and the automated training. This consisted of a slideshow set up on a password protected LMS that discussed federal laws on export controls.

The Gist

In a nutshell, people are forbidden from exporting or transferring certain types of knowledge, technologies, know-how, and items that may be weaponized (agents, toxins, equipment, and others) or have dual-use (for practical use and weapons use)...or which may compromise the advantages that come from the huge investments in R&D; (research and development) that go into private companies and higher education / academia.

The US Department of Commerce's Export Administration Regulations (EAR) are applied for the control of trade, and the State Department's International Traffic in Arms Control (ITAR) are applied for national security. Non-compliance, as the voiceover warns, may result in criminal sanctions that include potential fines and imprisonment. Especially after 9/11, these issues are of even greater concern, and regulatory efforts have been stepped up. Essentially, the University Research Compliance Office was encouraging due diligence.

Defining "Export"

The presentation defined a rich range of "export." These may be verbal disclosures during conversation. It may be giving tours or visual inspections of particular high-security labs to any foreign national whether they're graduate students or not. It could be the "use or application of covered technology on behalf of or for the benefit of any foreign entity or person anywhere." Disclosures during academic meetings are covered by these laws as well. Anything mailed, faxed or emailed is covered. With the speed of information today, it's easy to imagine how global publication can occur with one thoughtless click of the mouse.

Export licensures are required for many types of exports, and the idea is to err on the side of extreme caution.

People traveling abroad have to use due caution with "tools of the trade" such as computers loaded with certain types of technologies or software while overseas - particularly in "embargoed countries," which require additional permissions to even travel to.

Signing on to Privacy Agreements

The training admonishes not to take on onerous privacy agreements if they're not necessary, but if agreed to, then these should be followed to the letter. It seems to be common sensical to be close-mouthed about most things except for various need-to-know situations.

It seems that this is all about consciously managing resources and information, without accidental or incidental leavings. It's about being aware and purposively cautious.

It doesn't take long thought to realize how much private information people seem to come across on a regular basis anyway and how people seem to generally "leak" like sieves.

I know several people who have high security clearances, and it's true that I never hear a peep out of any of them except for common everyday information. And those I know who work in government seem to always have some extra antennae up to listen for untoward questions or curiosity.

Working in the Sunlight

While I'm glad to know about these laws in more detail, I'm surprised that such laws aren't more publicized. It would be hard to work on projects that require silence or "black box rules". It seems like that would add a layer of stress. It would mean a greater openness in one's personal life with regular background checks. It would mean surveillance.

These all seem to be steep prices to pay to do relevant work. And yet, the necessity, too, of such cautions is absolutely clear.