From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 7 18:13:45 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 1C54916A4DB for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 18:13:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from skipjack.no-such-agency.net (skipjack.no-such-agency.net [64.142.114.146]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9474C43D1F for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 18:13:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jpp@cloudview.com) Received: from skipjack.no-such-agency.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by skipjack.no-such-agency.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5454634DA11; Sat, 7 May 2005 11:13:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.120] (blackhole.no-such-agency.net [64.142.103.196]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by skipjack.no-such-agency.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB1B834D435; Sat, 7 May 2005 11:13:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <427D0557.7010006@cloudview.com> Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 11:13:43 -0700 From: John Pettitt User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: racerx@makeworld.com References: <20050506105722.099954BEAD@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <1997311903.20050506130845@wanadoo.fr> <0AC758EB7E2462CBCDB89994@utd49554.utdallas.edu> <1946109313.20050506204814@wanadoo.fr> <332ca468819dcb4bdaf5a1e9a8fb283e@chrononomicon.com> <798745799.20050507195306@wanadoo.fr> <427D024A.9040601@makeworld.com> In-Reply-To: <427D024A.9040601@makeworld.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.1.1 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AV-Checked: by skipjack 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 List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 18:13:45 -0000 Chris wrote: >Nobody can reply to, reproduce, referance, show, etc. this email without >written consent be my. > > The courts, wisely, have declined to say quoting a set amount is ok or define any other bright line test. Since there is no "bright line" test for fair use it comes down to is is reasonable to quote for one of the reasons supported by the fair use doctrine. In this case criticism. There are plenty of decisions supporting taking a small part of a work and quoting it for critical purposes - in trying to negate that right you are fighting an uphill battle that has little probability of prevailing in court. Further in asking that your post not be referenced you are trying to impose private censorship - there is no provision of copyright law (or any other law) that prohibits referencing another work (as my satirical post yesterday pointed out). Lastly by trying to prohibit people from showing your post you are trying to invoke a trade secret relationship where no contractual basis exists. In other words your post is basically BS and wouldn't stand up to a first year law student on a bad day. John