How deep does the export restrictions rabbit hole go? It makes sense that they can restrict specific proprietary designs from being licensed to Chinese companie

How deep does the export restrictions rabbit hole go? It makes sense that they can restrict specific proprietary designs from being licensed to Chinese companies. If you want to keep your technology a secret so you can demand a licensing fee, then obviously the government can step in and just cancel those specific licensing deals. But open standards and designs seem a bit more iffy to restrict, at least practically. I imagine the US government can at least notionally say, "sure, you granted a blanket irrevocable license under GPL/CC/whatever, but we're just going to retroactively tack on 'except China' to the license text", as weirdly unconstitutional[0] as that feels. But what does that actually do? The specifications are public. There's open implementations. Anyone can download and rehost them. Are we going to declare ISAs and chip designs 'born secrets[1]' and just ban open hardware? Or do we do something sillier and, say, compel RISC-V to prosecute a legal case against (insert Chinese entities here) for infringing patents and IC design rights[2] that they had already freely licensed? [0] Look, if bribery is legal because money is speech, then I don't see why code shouldn't be speech either. And if code is speech then I should be able to shout it to Huawei's face. [1] Ala thermonuclear weapon designs. If you really want a pit in your stomach about the legal foundations of the US, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_.... [2] In the US, you cannot copyright a chip design, there's instead a separate rights regime for IC designs. TBH they should have done the same thing with software a decade earlier.