[tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations

[Joe Btfsplk]

On 6/14/2014 10:40 PM, Andrew Lewman wrote:
> On 06/14/2014 03:21 AM, Sebastian G. <bastik.tor> wrote:
>> That has to be a violation of your rights.
> It's the law in the USA. Regardless of how one feels about it, it's
> currently against the law.
>
> The citizen resided in a country as listed as a State Sponsor of
> Terrorism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism
>
> According to the advice we received, "financial transaction" is defined
> broadly to encompass many things, possibly including
> bitcoins/dogecoins/and other coins.
>
> There are many battles Tor can fight, this is not one of them.
>
I wouldn't expect any one or small group to just jump in & defy the 
current interpretation of embargo laws - without serious research & 
consideration.
I haven't read the statutes covering any sort of transaction between a 
US non-profit & a private citizen in an embargoed country & I may not - 
depending.

Where such a transaction would not benefit the country,  or even the 
private donor, in any financial, military, political manner, etc.; only 
promoting access to free speech & information, which in all likely hood, 
could lead to citizens *forcing change* on the very policies / actions, 
that lead to the country being embargoed in the first place.

Forbiding this specific transaction, given the specific circumstances, 
would seem to be the definition of cutting off one's nose to spite their 
face.

In the world & US history, there are 1000's of cases where something was 
once entrenched as being illegal, but became legal, often because 
someone stood up & fought to change it.

If Torproject ending it's close ties w/ U.S. military funding (by some 
means) isn't important for it's reputation & appearance to the broader 
internet community, I'm not sure what is.