In my (somewhat limited) experience, I'd be surprised is Boston Dynamics robots are, wholesale, on the list of export control. ITAR classification isn't usually

In my (somewhat limited) experience, I'd be surprised is Boston Dynamics robots are, wholesale, on the list of export control. ITAR classification isn't usually an arbitrary designation, there's typically some aspect in particular that falls under the designation. For example, non-binary source code in the robots could have the potential for export control, but almost certainly not the physical robot itself. As an example of this, many autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) are subject to export control laws. This isn't just because they can be used in an explicitly military manner (one of the most common uses is minesweeping), but because the Inertial Navigation System they use while submerged has enough sensitivity to be export controlled, since that tech can be adapted to be used in missiles. So it's not the robot that's export controlled, but the INS system inside the robot. If you took that out, most of them could be sold wherever. I believe the same thing goes for a lot of satellite technology that's export controlled. The robots Boston Dynamics build seem to be solving a different problem, the (very hard) one of physical adaptive control in real-world environments, but imho what I've seen doesn't line up with what often seems to the reasoning for assigning an export control label, whether ITAR, EAR, or even CUI, to most of the technology.