>From: Joe Shaw <joeshaw@joeshaw.bevc.blacksburg.va.us>
>The way I see it, Drago's soc.culture.bulgaria archive is in effect nothing
>but a news server that ignores cancel requests and has an infinite expires
>time.
For a techy point of view, perhaps. But from a pratical point of
view, the archive is saving posts and distributing them to anyone
who asks. News Servers and Archives have different functions (or
else why would anyone start an archive?)
As is usually the case in this situations, the analogies to the print
world don't work too well. It's not clear what the latest take on
copyright on postings really means. If I download/copy a post, have
I just violated copyright law? That's pretty goofy, and certainly
unenforcable. This probably won't clear up until somebody winds up
in court, and maybe not even then.
> ... ETHICALLY ... if
>non-abusive occassional poster politely asked to have his posts removed
>from your archive, without any threat of legal recourse but for no reason
>other than that's what they want, would you remove them, Drago? If so,
>then ethically I think you should remove the abuser's posts ....
>... what would you do if the decision didn't involve helping an abuser
>'get away with it'?
I disagree. Ethically, you have to take the entire situation into
consideration. I mean, assuming for a moment that the abuser should
be punished, and assuming that Drago has the means to assist, isn't
he ethically bound to do so?
Duke Robillard, duke@iscp.bellcore.com
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved