Alain D D Williams wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 01:06:15AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > I hate to disagree with everybody, but ...
> > 
> > We need to get an articulare European lawyer, or at least find someone
> > who has studied the subject.  

If you or employer have money & time for that, do share results of
        - paying a lawyer to read those 88 EU pages, & answering questions
        - paying a programmer for development time for patches to Mailman.
Maybe other major users of Mailman might afford to share costs.  I won't.

It's just EU law so far, but laws & interpretations vary by time &
geography, This list is global, 191 countries in

Best action for least effort, IMO is first someone to agree to commit a big
default legal disclaimer in the Mailman source distribution, as a
seperate localy served clickable link from top of
That default Legal page would include a further clickable link to a
dummy page for site local extra legal waffle.

Once that's agreed t would be worth some of us workng on content.
My suggestion, approx:

Generic Preamble: Why Mailman Rules Are Necessary & Mandatory To All Users
        While Big [Anti-]Social Web providers, may get enough
        advertising revenue to employ people to deal with various
        legal pains ...

        Many Mailman sites have smaller lists, run Free by Unpaid
        volunteers with No free time for boring, annoyiny, risky
        legal hastles wasting their of time, (eg: logging & adjudcating
        internal or external complainers, users & authorities,
        discipling posters, editing archives, etc).

        Many Mailman sites & list admins would rather close down
        their free service rather than have their time forcibly
        wasted unpaid to provide & host free levels of "service" &
        abuse control, that users might be accustomed to have
        provided on larger commercial )often advert paid) [Anti-]Social
        web sites, (as first targeted by regulators etc).

Some issues one might then cover in the generic, or leave to local site: eg:
        Those from previous posters to this thread +
        Posting means irrevocable publishing
        No right to use lists if you waste unpaid admins time.
        Incitement to this & that
        Right to inform authorities
        Non obligation of admins to have to waste time monitoring/
        censoring etc.
        Anti hate crime/ adjitation laws V. free speach 
                (eg As considered in Germany, reported in: Economist Jan
                13-19th 2018 Page 21 "Freedom & its discontents")
        site owner doesnt necessarily agree views of archived posters etc 
        Policy if members of a by default private archived list vote to
                make their archive public ?  What if someone had
                posted, archived, then left list, sees it public,
                & now objects ? )
        How to even technicaly & legaly establish objector is same
        person (or their rep. or inheritor or purchaser of copyright
        of initial postera or litigant against poster, or recipient
        of court order against poster ?
        Local server operator & global Mailman org disclaim liability,
                & no insurance to tempt lawyesr to sue (another can of worms ;-)

Optionaly & asynchronously while some are drafting a generic legal page:
        A python programmer (or HTML editor, depending where) could
        add a switch so new users had to agree before joining
        list[s].  Whether switch should be per list or global, to be
        decided by who does the work. Switch might be a null string,
        updated to latest date when terms agreed. ?

Julian Stacey, Computer Consultant, Systems Engineer, BSD Linux Unix, Munich
 Brexit Referendum stole 3,700,000 votes, inc. 700,000 from British in EU.
 UK Govt. lied it's "democratic" in Article 50 letter to EU paragraph 3.
                Petition for votes:
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman FAQ:
Security Policy:
Searchable Archives:

Reply via email to