Comments on: Breaking News from the Registration Front

By: Jim Barrett

Jim Barrett — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:41:12 +0000

A colleague of mine recently pointed out this post to me in which you attempt to poke fun at the ITAR registration press release that my company issued last month.

As attorneys, I’m quite frankly amazed at your inability to understand the nuances of the language used in the press release. If you go back and re-read the passage more carefully, you will note that we are not claiming that the Directorate of Trade Controls has certified that we will always be compliant with ITAR, but rather simply that they have certified that we are now cleared to handle materials that fall under the ITAR regulation.

Some of our customers are defense contractors and could not subcontract certain work to us until we had obtained our ITAR registration. While perhaps “certify” was not necessarily the best word, I can assure your that I understand the compliance landscape seeing as I have been involved in IT Audit and Security since beginning my career with a Big Four Accounting firm nearly two decades ago.

As for our “most original spin”, let me try to explain it to you. As you may know, ITAR proscribes a control regime with respect to documents and other materials that are classified as munitions or other controlled articles. To maintain compliance with ITAR, we are simply noting the fact that we have enhanced our existing controls over customer IP above and beyond what we have already been doing.

Terribly sorry if our press release was too confusing. If you have any other questions, I’ll be happy to try and answer them.

By: Karen Wyman

Karen Wyman — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:50:49 +0000

While these companies do seem to be confused as to what DDTC registration confers and what it doesn’t, I applaud them for mentioning publically that they are registered. I advocate to my client companies to promote their registration with DDTC because many have used it as a selling tool to both primes in the US and defense companies/agencies overseas. While we are all eagerly awaiting changes in the export control regulations, we can’t hold our breath until it happens. We need to continue expanding our sales. Thus, marketing your ability to comply with these regulations is certainly worthwhile. My only advise is to ensure you are making accurate statements.

By: Mike Deal

Mike Deal — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 18:50:34 +0000

While making a false statement alone, without more, is not actionable, and might even have some glimmer of First Amendment protection, to the extent these false statements are made in order to solicit either sales or investment, they are violations of the mail and/or wire fraud acts, which if made more than twice could serve as predicate offenses for RICO, and which fail to survive the Central Hudson test for First Amendment protection of commercial speech.

By: Kelly Yip

Kelly Yip — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:16:43 +0000

Dear Clif:

Here’s the link to the actual 7-page Balli’s settlement agreement –>

Click here

Regards<
Kelly

By: Peter Quinter

Peter Quinter — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:38:23 +0000

Clif,

This is very informative. I look forward to reading your blog when the settlement documents are posted. Thanks again.

Peter Quinter