FedEx is considering appealing a Sept. 10 federal court decision (see 2009110038) that dismissed the shipping company’s lawsuit against the Bureau of Industry and Security, a FedEx spokesperson said. The company, which told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that BIS was acting outside the authority of the Export Administration Regulations and was applying overly burdensome liability standards on carriers, said it still believes its arguments are valid. “FedEx respectfully disagrees with the court’s decision and is disappointed by this ruling,” the spokesperson said in a Sept. 11 statement, adding that the company is “considering our legal options, including appeal.”
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Sept. 10 dismissed FedEx’s lawsuit against the Bureau of Industry and Security (see 1906250030), saying the shipping company failed to show that BIS was acting outside the authority of the Export Administration Regulations. The court also disagreed with FedEx’s claims that the agency was using the EAR to apply overly burdensome liability standards on carriers and impose penalties even when carriers do not have knowledge of violations.
The Bureau of Industry and Security should impose targeted export controls on specific facial recognition software but take care not to restrict the entire technology category, some of which can be used for benign purposes, IBM said. While some technologies are “clear use-cases that must be off limits” for export, such as artificial intelligence-powered software used for mass surveillance and human rights abuses, other technologies are safe for everyday uses, the company said.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Sept. 10 dismissed FedEx’s June 24 lawsuit against the Bureau of Industry and Security, saying the company failed to show that BIS was acting outside the authority of the Export Administration Regulations. The court also disagreed with FedEx’s claims that the agency was using the EAR to apply overly burdensome liability standards on carriers and impose penalties even when carriers do not have knowledge of violations.
The Bureau of Industry and Security added, revised and made technical changes to export controls in the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to implement changes under the 2018 Wassenaar Arrangement (see 2007220015). Per a final rule released Sept. 10, BIS revised 28 Export Control Classification Numbers, altered license exceptions for four ECCNs, made technical changes to eight ECCNs and created one new ECCN for certain masks and reticles used for sensors. The rule follows a May 2019 rule that added controls to five technologies under the 2018 Wassenaar (see 1905220051).
The Bureau of Industry and Security fined a U.S. company $55,000 for illegally exporting rifle scopes to Canada, a Sept. 3 order said. The company, New York-based Carl Zeiss SBE, LLC, shipped the scopes on 10 separate occasions despite knowing that the exports were subject to the Export Administration Regulations, BIS said. The company did not seek a license from BIS for the shipments, valued at nearly $890,000 combined. Carl Zeiss must pay the fine by Oct. 1 or risk having its export privileges revoked.
Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with the top stories for Aug. 31-Sept. 4 in case you missed them. You can find any article by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Trump administration is considering placing export controls on China’s top chipmaker, the latest move in a campaign of restrictions aimed at Chinese technology companies. The controls would target the Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation by placing it on the Commerce Department’s Entity List, Reuters said in a Sept. 4 report. The effort is being spearheaded by the Defense Department, the report said, which petitioned Commerce’s End User Committee last week to add SMIC to the Entity List.
The Bureau of Industry and Security ought to make available information that is more specific to university export compliance, the Association of University Export Control Officers said in a recent letter to BIS. The letter was prompted by a May Government Accountability Office report that similarly said more guidance for universities would be helpful (see 2005120053). “While it is possible for universities to glean some needed information from outreach materials and training geared toward industry, it can be difficult at times to interpret industry-focused guidance to the university environment,” the association said.
A long-awaited rewrite of routed export regulations by the Bureau of Industry and Security and the Census Bureau will introduce a new “Export Responsibility Transfer Agreement” (ERTA) to replace the “writing” currently used to transfer filing responsibilities, with the new agreement specifically transferring filing and licensing responsibilities to the forwarder or agent of the foreign party, said Sharron Cook, a BIS senior export policy analyst, during a webcast of the American Association of Exporters and Importers Annual Conference Sept. 3.