Starting a 501(c)(3) nonprofit | Legal issues | Forum

Rocket-To-The-Moon said:

All in all ITAR frustrates me, but I understand the intent of the law. CLLARE by itself shouldn't really pose a threat because without a suitable launch vehicle it is harmless.

Unfortunately, the letter of the law restricts not just things which are harmful, but things which could be used to build things which are harmful.  If the navigation system on the CLLARE CM was sufficiently accurate that one could install it on a missile they got elsewhere and use it to directly attack a city, then that system will be restricted.

Well, to be precise, this is how the letter of the Missile Technology Control Regime Annex law works.  ITAR itself is completely, bafflingly, frustratingly vague.  Taken literally, anybody who has put detailed photos of their model rocket that has an apogee of 200 m on the internet is an illegal international arms dealer.  Obviously nobody has ever been prosecuted for doing that, so it seems like ITAR is to some degree not enforcedby according to the letter of the law, but rather the spirit of the law, although obviously this is not always the case – apparently AMSAT got into ITAR trouble once (or rather, they were told they were violating ITAR but rather than getting the full penalties, were given a stern warning, perhaps some small punishment, and told that if they didn't fix things up in the future then the next time they would face full on prosecution), and nobody could really argue that amateur radio statellites violate the spirit of ITAR.  It seems a widely accepted fact that ITAR is so vague and internally inconsistent that it's impossible to really do anything useful and abide by the laws.

It's really hard for me to judge how at risk we are with regards to OHKLA (I think CubeSat is entirely okay and CLLARE is in large part okay, whereas OHKLA seems a definite red flag).  On the one hand, I estimate millions of technical ITAR violations related to rocketry must happen every day due to the internet without the US government noticing or caring.  For example, ITAR controls not just export but import of things on the Munitions List, so I think that viewing the website of Copenhagen Suborbitals, which has detailed photos of the construction of a large rocket, must be technically illegal for US citizens.  It might be that we can just hide in the noise of all these violations nobody cares about.  This would be especially true if CSTART incorporated outside the US, so that the only people who could legally be prosecuted would be individual US citizens using anonymous screennames.  Consistently enforcing all those ITAR violating people would be a practical impossibility so they might just not bother.  On the other hand, the AMSAT case makes me think that perhaps we should take this more seriously.  Since I think that AMSAT should have been okay even by the letter of the law (not only do their satellites not use unjammable encrypted connections, etc., but I read more of the law and it seems like communications satellites only count as Significant Military Equipment if they are being exported to a foreign nation's armed forces, not just part of its citizenry) and still got in trouble, it's probably prudent to adopt a mental model of the Department of State as an unprincipled bully who will wave the ITAR stick at people it doesn't like whether it technically can or not.  Of course, if they did try to do anything not in keeping with the letter of the law, I am sure people like the EFF and ACLU would take an interest in defending us.

It's certainly a confusing, annoying situation.  I'm probably not the best person to get really involved in decisions re: ITAR.  Since I can't possibly get in any kind of trouble, not being a US citizen, I am going to be more biased to thumbing my nose at the US government and just ignoring their ridiculous laws.  But some of us here would be taking a very real (although potentially calculated) risk in doing so, and I'm absolutely not going to ask anybody to do that if they don't seriously want to.

We definitely need to start seriously exploring this again.  It's great to have someone in the US who is willing to help again.

We wouldn't necessarily need to incorporate in Florida for you to be able to help, although I suppose it would be slightly easier so we may as well look into the situation with registering a corporation in Florida.  If it's cheaper or easier than NY I see no reason not to go with it, since the temporary majority of members we had in NY earlier on has largely dissolved now.

Earlier in this thread are some fairly clear instructions on what we wanted to happen next on this front.  Nick, if you are willing to do any of these things I would have no objections.  From memory they were just looking into PO box options, and calling the Department of Something in NY to clarify one small detail.

Sorry I've been quiet on this front for longer than intended.  I've been very busy lately planning for a month-long trip that I'm about to leave on.

All I have to add right now is that, despite the silly sounding domain name, this really is the official page for incorporating in Florida.  From there you can get direct links to the form we need to file – I think this is it.  We can fill out that form and submit it with a cheque ourselves – it is not necessary to go through an intermediary (like The Company Corporation linked to above).  Doing it ourselves will save us some money, with the downside being that we need to be careful to make sure we do everything right.

Thanks a lot for those tips, J!  It's tremendously helpful to have another 501(c)(3) corp we can ask for advice on these sorts of things.  It would be great to get all of our paperwork absolutely right the first time.