On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 6:30 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Derek J. Balling wrote: > > > On Dec 9, 2010, at 3:01 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >> the problem with this is that even though the data has been leaked, that > >> doesn't mean that it's public domain data. Hosting the data and passing > it > >> on is (or at least has the flavor of) 'trafficing in stolden > merchandise' > >> > >> What makes leaded data 'Ok' to host and pass on, but unauthorized copies > >> of commercial software, books, music, etc 'Piracy'? > > > > Legally speaking, once it's been released by an organization purporting > > to be of "journalistic intent", the SCOTUS case-law protects that > > release of data into the wild. And once it's in the wild "legally", > > it's just "data of journalistic value". > > > > The leaker can face stiff penalties, but beyond that initial leaker, the > > existing case-law is pretty clearly on the side of the public, not the > > gov't. > > there is legality and there are ethics, they don't always agree. > > In this sort of case I agree that the case law probably makes it legal > (but I am NOT a lawyer), but I seriously question the ethics of the > matter.
It's not up to the service provider to decide what's ethical or who's right/wrong in this matter. In doing so, you open up your company to possible lawsuits from customers who think you're taking a too broad view on your contract terms. We should let the judicial system rule the matter of the leaked cables and remember to always read the contracts you're signing (specially when everybody is so crazy about "cloud"). -- Giovanni Tirloni [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
