4 ms·

If i manufacture a truck and sell it abroad, and eventually it ends up with a weapons mount in the Syrian desert, am i to blame?

weatherlight 3y ago
but he can remotely turn them off and has done so in the past..... so...
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  [flagged]
RNAlfons 3y ago
This is not a truck. If your truck would have an extension cord going back to your factory so it can run and running the truck would be sanctioned, you could be blamed if you don't cut the cord.
willsmith72 3y ago
it's not that simple export and re-export laws, especially from the US, are extremely complicated
- bigfudge 3y ago
  This comment states the obvious, but it isn't adding anything. Must has expensive lawyers for this kind of stuff, but in the worst case (there is no legal route to stop Russia using starlink in this way) I would want to make it very clear that that was a problem and use my substantial voice to have something done about it.
  - willsmith72 3y ago
    exactly comment i replied to was acting like you would not be legally at fault in reality, it's way too complicated to say. at best it's ethically shady, at worst it's a mega fine and jail time
wslh 3y ago
Here we are talking about regulations even if we agree or not. Answering your question: if your truck is specially considered under those regulations the answer is yes. For example, we had a customer from Malaysia who was in jail in US because he sold normal hardware devices bought in USA to Iran and that is banned.
timeon 3y ago
Analogies are not arguments.
- mistermann 3y ago
  Well, there's this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy
serf 3y ago
the truck company can't suddenly decide to stop providing the truck. that's one of the primary reasons a service isn't necessarily a good.
doktrin 3y ago
This really brought me back to those 90s era anti-piracy ads.
yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
> “There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol,” Musk wrote on X, the platform previously known as Twitter. > “The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor. If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation,” Musk wrote. Musk himself has used the ostensible fear of becoming complicit as a justification to disable Starlink access for the Ukrainian military. So yes, he's already taken the position that he would be to blame. You can't then turn it around and say he wouldn't be to blame for russian military success through the use of the same technology.
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  [flagged]
itishappy 3y ago
Yeah, you very well might be. If your truck gets traced back to you, expect a government audit. If you sold it to a denied party due to lack of due diligence, you will be held liable. (A truck is probably an extreme example. I'm not sure we're spending time tracing vehicles, but you better believe we are for our state-of-the-art radio tech.) Source: I with export controls for the semiconductor industry.

weatherlight 3y ago

but he can remotely turn them off and has done so in the past..... so...

inemesitaffia 3y ago
[flagged]

RNAlfons 3y ago

This is not a truck. If your truck would have an extension cord going back to your factory so it can run and running the truck would be sanctioned, you could be blamed if you don't cut the cord.

willsmith72 3y ago

it's not that simple export and re-export laws, especially from the US, are extremely complicated

bigfudge 3y ago
This comment states the obvious, but it isn't adding anything. Must has expensive lawyers for this kind of stuff, but in the worst case (there is no legal route to stop Russia using starlink in this way) I would want to make it very clear that that was a problem and use my substantial voice to have something done about it.
- willsmith72 3y ago
  exactly comment i replied to was acting like you would not be legally at fault in reality, it's way too complicated to say. at best it's ethically shady, at worst it's a mega fine and jail time

wslh 3y ago

Here we are talking about regulations even if we agree or not. Answering your question: if your truck is specially considered under those regulations the answer is yes. For example, we had a customer from Malaysia who was in jail in US because he sold normal hardware devices bought in USA to Iran and that is banned.

timeon 3y ago

Analogies are not arguments.

mistermann 3y ago
Well, there's this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy

serf 3y ago

the truck company can't suddenly decide to stop providing the truck. that's one of the primary reasons a service isn't necessarily a good.

doktrin 3y ago

This really brought me back to those 90s era anti-piracy ads.

yakshaving_jgt 3y ago

> “There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol,” Musk wrote on X, the platform previously known as Twitter. > “The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor. If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation,” Musk wrote. Musk himself has used the ostensible fear of becoming complicit as a justification to disable Starlink access for the Ukrainian military. So yes, he's already taken the position that he would be to blame. You can't then turn it around and say he wouldn't be to blame for russian military success through the use of the same technology.

inemesitaffia 3y ago
[flagged]

itishappy 3y ago

Yeah, you very well might be. If your truck gets traced back to you, expect a government audit. If you sold it to a denied party due to lack of due diligence, you will be held liable. (A truck is probably an extreme example. I'm not sure we're spending time tracing vehicles, but you better believe we are for our state-of-the-art radio tech.) Source: I with export controls for the semiconductor industry.