From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 5 04:40:59 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 B5F9C16A4CE for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2005 04:40:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sccmmhc91.asp.att.net (sccmmhc91.asp.att.net [204.127.203.211]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DD6A43D2D for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2005 04:40:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from m.hauber@mchsi.com) Received: from wizard.valleygate.net (12-219-204-24.client.mchsi.com[12.219.204.24]) by sccmmhc91.asp.att.net (sccmmhc91) with ESMTP id <20050205044058m9100oupfde>; Sat, 5 Feb 2005 04:40:58 +0000 From: Mike Hauber To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 23:43:38 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <4203F451.9070307@cis.strath.ac.uk> <205350680.20050205043947@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <205350680.20050205043947@wanadoo.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200502042343.39455.m.hauber@mchsi.com> Subject: Re: favor X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: m.hauber@mchsi.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 04:40:59 -0000 On Friday 04 February 2005 10:39 pm, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > > TM> If you post on a public forum, by implication you are > giving that TM> forum permission to publish your copyrighted > material. > > No, you're not. If you post to a public forum, you're giving > implicit permission for your posts to be visible _within that > forum_. You are not giving implicit permission for any other > type of publication external to the forum ... and that includes > mirroring on a Web site archive. > > The only way to get around this is to require agreement to > licensing of posts as a condition of joining the forum. > Not wanting to jump into this, because I think the whole of the argument is ridiculous... But, in a nutshell... Aren't you trying to make the same argument that SCO is trying to make? (all due respect, of course) I just don't see the validity of "I don't care if the code was legally released to the open source communities eons ago! I don't care how much time and effort has been spent building on it. It's mine and I want it back!" Don't get me wrong. I've made public posts that I look back and cringe on because I know it's still out there somewhere. Hell... Maybe there's only two of us. That's life, and we live it anyway. Fact is, the cats out of the bag, and I have yet to meet a cat that likes bags. :) Bewildered, but ducking out just the same... Mike