From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 7 00:27:22 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 45EEA16A4D4 for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 00:27:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpq1.home.nl (smtpq1.home.nl [213.51.128.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453DF43D31 for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 00:27:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from danny@ricin.com) Received: from [213.51.128.136] (port=43972 helo=smtp5.home.nl) by smtpq1.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1DUDA8-00011e-Fs for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sat, 07 May 2005 02:27:20 +0200 Received: from cp464173-a.dbsch1.nb.home.nl ([84.27.215.228]:60867 helo=desktop.homenet) by smtp5.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1DUDA7-0006rx-0h for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sat, 07 May 2005 02:27:19 +0200 From: Danny Pansters To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 02:26:36 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <20050506103934.10FA34BEAD@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <9e46c99e0505061454572a1bba@mail.gmail.com> <1647772623.20050507004959@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <1647772623.20050507004959@wanadoo.fr> X-Face: "0Qv=,p:+]LvuqrtS4U\z3k"qN=.1]@=?utf-8?q?=258=3F=3BPoab=23v=27F=7E=0A=09!Wm=5Fe-=24=7EL=5D=3B?=>[c*L^Qoladj)x@mH}Bqz"vLO?Zdl}[@V@=?utf-8?q?U=3Fx3=23lI=3A=0A=09=24DN=7E!Hr?=@K`-mNv"zXm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200505070226.37132.danny@ricin.com> X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Please contact support@home.nl for more information X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean 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 00:27:22 -0000 On Saturday 07 May 2005 00:49, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Tomas Quintero writes: > > Theres just one more big problem with this, and all the DMCA stuff. > > > > I don't think Fafa is in America. I don't think he'd be a US Citizen > > either. Fafa, can you claim otherwise? I mean all indications in his > > sig hint towards him being a citizen of another country. > > It's possible to submit DMCA notifications from outside the U.S., if the > potential infringement is inside the U.S. Which shows how bad cratic souvereign counties are gettingthey're accepting US corp law as their own. Anyway, stuff your DMCA.. until we have a valid precedent for it I'd say stuff it. What if it's the US DMCA against a big French software house (assuming you have one). How would you think your gov would react? Now go back to someone complaining about their want-on sent messages being archived... yeah sure they would cave in. Dream on. And besides as other people have pointed out in the realm of cyberspace once you post something willingly, it's impossible to retain it and any perceived profit that would have been generated by it (yes, the court will ask about this loss of profit). It's a loosing shipwreck trying to go to court for that. It may just end up as what most people would expect: considered "fair use", and if it doesn't it's going to loose over technicalities alone, like when you answer back quoting the original message. Were you breaking copyrights? Not if the poster could have expected to be quoted and besides that if there's no (perceived) profit involved its moot anyhow. No judge is going to do that dance, not even in the crazy paranoid corporate stronghold culture we live in these days. Forget it. Still... would the OP please try to sue so that we get a nice jurisdiction about this. Rather now than later. Dan