From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 7 20:59:39 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 AEEAA16A4DD for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 20:59:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F22843D9A for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 20:59:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j47Kxob76511; Sat, 7 May 2005 13:59:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: , Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 13:59:18 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <427D0CEE.9080002@makeworld.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 Importance: Normal Subject: RE: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE! X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 20:59:39 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Chris > Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:46 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE! > > > Anthony Atkielski wrote: > > Chris writes: > > > > > >>If thats what it comes down to - then sending emails, lists, > bloggs, etc > >>are all willfull violations of copyright - Oh nooooo - where do you > >>draw the line!!! > > > > > > Some are, some aren't. > > > > This whole thing is silly (the isues at hand, meaning - > copyright/FBSD-list/Google). > > You see - if you post on the FBSD list, even if it does not get access > at all by anyone (meaning Google) its still public No, it's not. But, neither is it private. Electronic mailing lists, website blogs, and such, are all lumped into that wonderfully grey area of "there ain't no caselaw on this yet" The world's legal community doesen't really know exactly what to do with them at this point. These medium wern't addressed during the last Berne convention. The closest they got was: "The expression "literary and artistic works" shall include every production in the literary, scientific and artistic domain, whatever may be the mode or form of its expression, such as books, pamphlets and other writings; lectures, addresses, sermons and other works of the same nature...... ...It shall, however, be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to prescribe that works in general or any specified categories of works shall not be protected unless they have been fixed in some material form....The protection of this Convention shall not apply to news of the day or to miscellaneous facts having the character of mere items of press information" So, you see, going strictly by Berne you can punch holes in it as such: 1) a mailing list posting particularly a response to a question, isn't a "work" 2) "other writings" the act of e-mail isn't "writing" at least under the United States, because if it was, then the DMCA would be invalidated under First Amendment 3) Few countries have passed any kinds of laws specifying that e-mail is or isn't a protected work 4) Posts on a mailing list, particularly as they normally have little applicability to the long term, are much more in the area of "news of the day" or "miscellaneous facts" And of course, a countries national laws override Berne at all times. And as the countries of the world have a tremendous mismatch of laws regarding the Internet at this time, what is legal one place isn't elsewhere, and one countries laws aren't enforceable on another country. And this isn't even addressing the legal doctorine of Fair Use which already applies in most of these cases and would override any of the rediculous speculation on this that has been posted already. Ted