Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 03:02:58 +0100 From: Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: favor Message-ID: <1412682.20050207030258@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <200502061420.24415.krinklyfig@spymac.com> References: <1574286459.20050205120828@wanadoo.fr> <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNIEEHFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> <200502061420.24415.krinklyfig@spymac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joshua Tinnin writes: JT> What contract is implied here? When a person subscribes to a list in exchange for receiving mail from the list. JT> Is this what has happened here? Has the OP's ability to pay rent JT> been damaged by her archived post? I don't know. It's easy to conceive of plausible scenarios in which it would be. JT> If the OP's copyright to her post is infringed by archiving that JT> post, then what, exactly, are the damages? See above. JT> No, Fair Use is more of an aspect of copyright law. No "quirk" is JT> going to affect the nature of copyright to that extent. It's an idiosyncrasy of U.S. copyright law, although it has some parallels in some other countries. It provides for only a handful of exceptions to a general rule. JT> How do you suggest this list and all others like it deal with this JT> matter, in practical terms? Require members of the list to explicitly agree to archiving terms as a condition of their subscription, or delete the archives. JT> Don't suggest hiring lawyers, as that's hardly practical. If a list owner gets sued, there may be no choice. JT> What are the practical effects of a lawsuit? Bankruptcy, in many cases, for the losing party. That may be the result even before it goes to trial. JT> What damages would be sought, and under what pretense? Statutory, compensatory, and punitive damages, IIRC, depending on circumstances. Injunctive relief also. -- Anthony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1412682.20050207030258>