From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 6 18:48:16 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 E888216A4D4 for ; Fri, 6 May 2005 18:48:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp10.wanadoo.fr (smtp10.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A72B043D93 for ; Fri, 6 May 2005 18:48:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf1001.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id DE6D6180009E for ; Fri, 6 May 2005 20:48:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pix.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-111-2-1-3.w81-50.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.50.80.3]) by mwinf1001.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id B0401180008B for ; Fri, 6 May 2005 20:48:15 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20050506184815722.B0401180008B@mwinf1001.wanadoo.fr Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 20:48:14 +0200 From: Anthony Atkielski X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1946109313.20050506204814@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <0AC758EB7E2462CBCDB89994@utd49554.utdallas.edu> References: <20050506105722.099954BEAD@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <1997311903.20050506130845@wanadoo.fr> <0AC758EB7E2462CBCDB89994@utd49554.utdallas.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 18:48:17 -0000 Paul Schmehl writes: > So, if I *respond* to one of his posts (including his email address and at > least a portion of what he wrote) and therefore have *some* of his > "copyrighted" material in my post then he can request that *my* post be > removed *without* my permission? Not if your backquoting falls within the scope of "fair use," if you are in the U.S. In some other countries, he can require that you remove the backquotes from your post (but you don't need to remove your entire post). And if you backquote too much, it's infringement, not fair use, even in the U.S. > Do you now see anything wrong with this? No. It actually happens. > Before you start spouting legal advice on a public list, I would suggest > that you point to chapter and verse that *specifically* addresses posts > made to a public forum that *explicitly* states that such posts will be > archived and *explicitly* states that you have the right to request their > removal *and* the right to sue if the archiving party refuses to remove > them. Furthermore, you must first prove that post made to a public forum > are protected by copyright laws. Any creative work fixed in a tangible medium is protected by copyright by default. Any form of reproduction of a copyrighted work requires the permission of its creator, _except_ as otherwise provided by law. That's the way the law is written. No exceptions are made for archival of mailing lists in publicly accessible archives (nor for any other use of messages to mailing lists, AFAIK). -- Anthony