From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 7 00:14:22 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B5B616A4D4 for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 00:14:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from makeworld.com (makeworld.com [216.201.118.142]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8920943D94 for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 00:14:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from racerx@makeworld.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.com [127.0.0.1]) by makeworld.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4D4160E2; Fri, 6 May 2005 19:14:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from makeworld.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (makeworld.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 58922-10; Fri, 6 May 2005 19:14:06 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [216.201.118.138] (racerx.makeworld.com [216.201.118.138]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by makeworld.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F334560D4; Fri, 6 May 2005 19:14:02 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <427C0876.4080506@makeworld.com> Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 19:14:46 -0500 From: Chris User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050414) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cpghost@cordula.ws References: <20050506103934.10FA34BEAD@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <20050506140118.GB77760@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <342912884.20050506204440@wanadoo.fr> <427BC142.2030702@cloudview.com> <20050507000645.GA10731@epia2.farid-hajji.net> In-Reply-To: <20050507000645.GA10731@epia2.farid-hajji.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by ClamAV 0.75.1/amavisd-new-2.2.1 (20041222) at makeworld.com - Isn't it ironic cc: John Pettitt cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE! X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: racerx@makeworld.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 00:14:22 -0000 cpghost@cordula.ws wrote: > On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 12:10:58PM -0700, John Pettitt wrote: > >>This news just in: >> >>Fafa Hafiz Krantz a research designer at Barbershop in Norway ( >>http://www.home.no/barbershop ) has asked that his posts be removed for >>all the archives of several public email lists. The request sparked a >>heated debate over the issue of copyright on email lists and raised >>interesting questions about specifically opting in to having posts >>archived. As is typical in such debates few of the participants cited >>any real evidence backing up their views and almost no attention was >>paid to the jurisdictional issues created by international lists. >> >>There was speculation that the request for deletion was prompted by the >>posters political views as referenced in his email signature which >>points to an article about middle east politics >>http://www.home.no/barbershop/smart/sharon.pdf >> >>With the debate he started Mr Krantz seems to have had ensured that his >>name will live in archives for the foreseeable future, referenced in >>articles such as this one which he has no copyright to and no control >>over. In the end the best strategy seems to be: if you don't want to >>be quoted don't say anything. >> >>--END-- > > > ROTFL! > > Now post this on Slashdot and have it picked up by Google News and > major news agencies. I guess, Fafa's bandwidth costs will go through > the roof in the blink of an eye. So will his page rank, incidentally. > Not that I'm suggesting doing this, of course! > > >>This news item may be archived and reposted in any medium without >>limitation including on search engines. > > > Absolutely! Copyright doesn't protect anyone from making a fool out > of themselves. > > Cheers, > -cpgost. > Hahaha - good stuff! Yanno, last I knew (and that was some time ago) You had to submit writings for review to the copyright folks here in the U.S. Then, if they deem it so, you then had to pay a fee to have it copyrighted. As I said - this may or may not be the case any longer, I didn't know that just by writing something, you were grandted all the nifty perks of it being copywritten. Then again - I'm not a lawyer. And to be frank, I couldn't care less either. -- Best regards, Chris Never play leapfrog with a photo enlarger.