Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Tome vote results

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Remko van der Vossen <wich AT yuugen.jp>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Tome vote results
  • Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:43:28 +0200

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 09:21:44AM -0500, David Kowis wrote:
> None of that text existed in 2006. So that's a new thing, since I've
> looked at it. It was always a public network, and thus anyone could
> record whatever they wanted. I consider it akin to talking in a large
> room where anyone could walk in or out. I think scry's recording of the
> channel stuff, as well as page_six's recording now fall into this
> category. So we are logging the channels, and they are published. So I
> guess we now have to "comply" with this nonsense.

Recording however is not the same as publishing, I'd be free to walk
around town with a tape recorder, notepad and photo camera, I would
however not be free to publish any captured material which identifies
people in them and/or their views/statements/whatever without their
permission.

And yeah, I know the world is crooked. If I go about town and snap some
pic of a good looking girl and published it in a magazine without a
signed model release she'd be entitled to a big settlement at the least,
and I'm not talking about anything indecent, just a candid shot. While
when some paparazzi dude snaps a pic of some celebrity and plasters it
all over the world stage nobody thinks twice about it... It's a crazy
world, but that doesn't make publishing material without it's "owner's"
consent legal.

In fact one could argue the legality of the mailing list archives, are
subscribers notified of the publishings? Anyway, this is a big black
hole one could be drawn into. In the end I think we should just be
rational and pragmatic. IRC is a volatile medium and many people would
not expect their conversations to be published, combined with the legal
maze around it we just shouldn't do it. Whether !menti would constitute
publishing is perhaps a bit more difficult. As it's query based and not
browsable I'd be inclined to say no, but that's just my opinion.

That's my two €.02, oh and remember IANAL.

Regards, Remko van der Vossen.

Attachment: pgpGyeMKoESH9.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page