Then it seems the argument you want to make to them isn't about email
addresses and their limits but rather that it doesn't make sense for
them to attempt to assert copyright on publication, as it's FOIable
information and they'd just be creating more work for themselves.
-t
On 03/01/10 18:42, Louise Ferguson wrote:
2010/1/3 Matthew Somerville <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Hi,
There's no difference from their point of view as to whether the
email address is a WhatDoTheyKnow one or a different one.
There is.
It's a private email address they are requiring.
They will very likely assert copyright if that private email addressee
subsequently tries to promulgate the content.
They do not want the content generally available any more (though it
has been previously published to Web, and it is part of their
statutory publication scheme). Copyright will be the excuse to cover
for that.
L
_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
