Comments on: Intrigue in the Blogosphere: Export Law Blog Gets an Anonymous Call http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504 Latest News on DDTC, BIS, OFAC, and other export law matters Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:06:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Joey http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504/comment-page-1#comment-22612 Joey Fri, 15 May 2009 18:22:04 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=504#comment-22612 Alas, Clif, idiocy is one thing that continues to be manufactured in abundance no matter what the economy is doing. Glad you rooted out the offender. Alas, Clif, idiocy is one thing that continues to be manufactured in abundance no matter what the economy is doing. Glad you rooted out the offender.

]]> By: Hillbilly http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504/comment-page-1#comment-22610 Hillbilly Fri, 15 May 2009 16:53:56 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=504#comment-22610 There is not a direct qui tam, and in 1995 the DC District court held there is no private right of action under ITAR and that a competitor did not have standing under the APA to challenge a classification determination made by the government. That said, given Section 790 of the Defense Authorization Act of 2007 and the subsequent amendment of the DFARS to include a export compliance clause in DoD contracts, a hungry trial lawyer could probably cobble togther an action against a defense contractor if the subject matter of the undocumented export was related to a post-2007 DoD contract. I also note that there was a fraud count in the Roth/Atmospheric Glow indictment, so it is conceivable to build a qui tam action under the False Claims Act when the potential defendant is a defense contractor. In fact, the government has on occasion indicted for fraud only in order to get extradition when an extradition treaty limits the scope of crimes for which extradition may be sought. There is not a direct qui tam, and in 1995 the DC District court held there is no private right of action under ITAR and that a competitor did not have standing under the APA to challenge a classification determination made by the government. That said, given Section 790 of the Defense Authorization Act of 2007 and the subsequent amendment of the DFARS to include a export compliance clause in DoD contracts, a hungry trial lawyer could probably cobble togther an action against a defense contractor if the subject matter of the undocumented export was related to a post-2007 DoD contract. I also note that there was a fraud count in the Roth/Atmospheric Glow indictment, so it is conceivable to build a qui tam action under the False Claims Act when the potential defendant is a defense contractor. In fact, the government has on occasion indicted for fraud only in order to get extradition when an extradition treaty limits the scope of crimes for which extradition may be sought.

]]> By: Bob http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504/comment-page-1#comment-22609 Bob Fri, 15 May 2009 15:50:20 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=504#comment-22609 This would make for a good short story. I hope you make contact with the CEO of the company. Either they truly are the victims of a rogue employee, in which case they need to terminate their relationship with him, or they were an involved party, in which case they need to know they have been caught. This would make for a good short story.
I hope you make contact with the CEO of the company. Either they truly are the victims of a rogue employee, in which case they need to terminate their relationship with him, or they were an involved party, in which case they need to know they have been caught.

]]> By: Denny Andrews http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504/comment-page-1#comment-22566 Denny Andrews Thu, 14 May 2009 22:47:49 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=504#comment-22566 The incorrect information may not be something covered on the person's errors and omissions, depending on the contract language. It is certainly a potential claim. Also, I would think that this behavior is sanctionable under the RPCs. Separate topic: Is it me or are there a huge number of illegal exports going on on a routine basis? I know of several cases which appear to be out right ITAR violations. Is there a qui tam type proceeding within federal law which can be used to bring these type of violations to the attention of the US Attorney? Denny Andrews The incorrect information may not be something covered on the person’s errors and omissions, depending on the contract language. It is certainly a potential claim. Also, I would think that this behavior is sanctionable under the RPCs.

Separate topic: Is it me or are there a huge number of illegal exports going on on a routine basis? I know of several cases which appear to be out right ITAR violations. Is there a qui tam type proceeding within federal law which can be used to bring these type of violations to the attention of the US Attorney?
Denny Andrews

]]> By: Chris W. http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504/comment-page-1#comment-22548 Chris W. Thu, 14 May 2009 19:00:33 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=504#comment-22548 Whatever happened to payphones? Whatever happened to payphones?

]]> By: Alfred Furrs http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504/comment-page-1#comment-22545 Alfred Furrs Thu, 14 May 2009 18:06:44 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=504#comment-22545 Good for you! I was somewhat captivated by your previous comments surrounding this incident. When used correctly, technology is a very potent tool in flushing out those who employ shyster tactics. Thanks for sharing. Good for you! I was somewhat captivated by your previous comments surrounding this incident. When used correctly, technology is a very potent tool in flushing out those who employ shyster tactics. Thanks for sharing.

]]> By: ldm http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/504/comment-page-1#comment-22543 ldm Thu, 14 May 2009 17:51:32 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=504#comment-22543 Clif: I can certainly understand why you won't say what company this is and wholeheartedly agree with your reasons but... Their actions are so unprofessional, unethical and immoral I wish I knew so I'd never do business with them. Not to mention how lame is it to not realize that you'd have caller ID and be able to trace back the call. This whole thing shows an amazing lack of reasoning on their part. Clif: I can certainly understand why you won’t say what company this is and wholeheartedly agree with your reasons but… Their actions are so unprofessional, unethical and immoral I wish I knew so I’d never do business with them. Not to mention how lame is it to not realize that you’d have caller ID and be able to trace back the call. This whole thing shows an amazing lack of reasoning on their part.

]]>