Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:47:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Glen Foster <gfoster@gfoster.com> To: gpalmer@freebsd.org Cc: sysop@mixcom.com, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Binaries in Usenet (was: News...) Message-ID: <199704191447.KAA08481@tbd.gfoster.com> In-Reply-To: <15920.861419057@orion.webspan.net> (gpalmer@freebsd.org)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
One issue that I haven't seen raised in this overlong discussion are the legal consequences of standard netnews administration. Of course it is illegal to destroy any evidence that a crime has been committed, whether or not you know about the crime (it is called obstruction of justice). Does this make it OK to expire any groups except the groups that are likely to contain "kiddie porn" or other illegal material? Only half a ":-)" here! (I guess this would be ".-,"). It would be enlightening to see a lawyer's considered opinion about the defensibility of standard ISP practices in dealing with questionable material. I suspect much would hinge on intent, if you think porn is OK then you can expire it, if you think it is illegal or potentially illegal then you can't. If someone believes that criminal acts are occurring then it is their responsibility to report them to the authorities. Please don't read this as me trying to be alarmist. I doubt that there is any real threat unless "the authorities" have some other reason to target a particular ISP. However, it is not unknown for them to use every weapon at their disposal for the purpose of coercion or prosecution. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer nor am I likely to be offerred a TV role as one. Glen Foster <gfoster@gfoster.com> >From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@freebsd.org> >Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 23:04:17 -0400 > >Lucky we have this thing called `expire' *grin*
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704191447.KAA08481>