Anthony Atkielski wrote:
It _is_ the fault of the mailing list manager that posts are being
archived without the permission of mailing-list members. Members must
be required to explicitly grant permission when they subscribe.
Even if they did, there is no way for the mailing list software or
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alex
de Kruijff
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 4:08 PM
To: Chris Hodgins
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 04:05:09PM
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Marc Fonvieille writes:
All, and I said All, mailing list subscribing forms mention their
archives (To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit
the freebsd-blahblah Archives.). It is impossible to miss it.
Then why do so many forms require that you
Joshua Tinnin writes:
You live life your way. Let others do the same.
They can do whatever they want, as long as they don't infringe upon my
own rights.
I do not live my life in fear, but nor do I live it in an uninformed manner.
Fear has nothing to do with it. It's a question of
Alex de Kruijff writes:
They can claim all they like, but that doesn't mean this hold up in
cord.
It does sometimes, which is why smart sysadmins protect against it (it's
trivially easy to do).
In the Netherlands one who enters a protected system deliberate
and unlawful can get half a year
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Nope, because that assumes I have permission to quote ahead of time and
I'd have an archive in my sent mail (and trash items) for a period of
time that you didn't explicitly allow.
No, it does not. It does not extend the publication of your message
beyond the circle
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
No, Chris, we don't want to do that. If you put any kind of message
like that on the website you are then implying that the users have
copyrights in the first place on postings that they put on the mailing
list.
It's better than being successfully sued or prosecuted
Timothy Smith writes:
but you DO have to consent to the terms and conditions in to
confirmation email that is sent to you ...
There are no terms and conditions in the confirmation e-mail that
mention copyright, archives, or publication outside the mailing list.
--
Anthony
I'm sorry but doesn't this discussion belong on another list? Maybe
-chat? I dunno, surely it seems like it isn't related to any FreeBSD
technical related content. This is worse than Theo spouting off about
his next spam campaign.
Top Posting for a Reason.
On 5/8/05, Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL
I see Vogons coming on the sub-Etha:
People of this thread, your attention please: This thread has been
scheduled for demolition!
The fact that most public list are public not only by name and hence are
open for not only you, but also your boss and your enemies, and further
that many mailing
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Joshua Tinnin writes:
You live life your way. Let others do the same.
They can do whatever they want, as long as they don't infringe upon my
own rights.
I do not live my life in fear, but nor do I live it in an uninformed manner.
Fear has nothing to do
On Sat, 07 May 2005 16:05:17 -0500
Chris (and lots of others) wrote:
A comment in some way or another on this topic MY NAME ALL OVER
GOOGLE!
At the very beginning I asked Anthony to stop, bacause all this has been
written before.
He didn't (was to be expected).
I would urge ALL of you who keep
]
Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Fafa Hafiz
Krantz
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 3:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Laurent
Debacker
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 10:26 AM
To: Fafa Hafiz Krantz
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
You're really funny. At any web page related to lists of FreeBSD
(http
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 1:58 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
No, Chris, we don't want
On 5/9/05, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Laurent, let me spell it out - that last message was from me, Ted, not
from Fafa. I forged Fafa's name on it to show how easy it is to
forge mail and how it is not legally viable or possible for the real
Fafa to prove that the messages
; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
On 5/9/05, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Laurent, let me spell it out - that last message was from me, Ted, not
from Fafa. I forged Fafa's name on it to show how easy
On Sun 8 May 05 02:00, Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Timothy Smith writes:
but you DO have to consent to the terms and conditions in to
confirmation email that is sent to you ...
There are no terms and conditions in the confirmation e-mail that
mention copyright, archives, or
Joshua Tinnin wrote:
On Sun 8 May 05 02:00, Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Timothy Smith writes:
but you DO have to consent to the terms and conditions in to
confirmation email that is sent to you ...
There are no terms and conditions in the confirmation e-mail that
mention
Danny Pansters writes:
Now you lump me into some self defined geek community.
I didn't say anything about you.
Apparently I don't respect the rule of law now. Isn't that slander?
FYI, slander is verbal defamation; written defamation would be libel.
If you truly don't respect the rule of
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 02:49:23AM +0200, Alex de Kruijff wrote:
Well, the Mailing lists link on http://www.FreeBSD.org/ homepage
points on
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/eresources.html#ERESOURCES-MAIL
That true and this would be a fine argument if this
Marc Fonvieille writes:
All, and I said All, mailing list subscribing forms mention their
archives (To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit
the freebsd-blahblah Archives.). It is impossible to miss it.
Then why do so many forms require that you tick a checkbox to assert
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marc Fonvieille writes:
All, and I said All, mailing list subscribing forms mention their
archives (To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit
the freebsd-blahblah Archives.). It is impossible to miss it.
Then why do so many
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 04:44:16AM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Alex de Kruijff writes:
Where these persons prosecuted lately?
No. The first I heard of these problems was probably a good 20 years
ago or so, and they probably predated that. Nevertheless, it is
standard practice to
If only I was all of them. Point being, you're gonna make it, you'll
survive. Enjoy the publicity, I'm sure you'll have the tabloids
calling to ask who The GREAT FAFA is.
Hehe :)
I go under many names.
I'm kinda forced to laugh about people suggesting the use of DMCA and
other copyright
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 11:45:35AM +0200, X3K6A2 wrote:
Marc Fonvieille writes:
All, and I said All, mailing list subscribing forms mention their
archives (To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit
the freebsd-blahblah Archives.). It is impossible to miss it.
Then
Alex de Kruijff writes:
So? As long as your system is protected by a password nobody has a legal
defence.
Unfortunately they do. For example, if they guess a user name and
password and it works, they can enter your system and claim that they
believed it was okay because nothing told them
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Marc Fonvieille writes:
All, and I said All, mailing list subscribing forms mention their
archives (To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit
the freebsd-blahblah Archives.). It is impossible to miss it.
Then why do so many forms require that
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 06:10:00AM -0500, Fafa Hafiz Krantz wrote:
Fafa has already been threatened with his doom.
Some members on this list, it seems, ain't got no heart.
It always strikes me as odd when people refer to them self in 3d person.
Anyhow, as many have said before me, I think that
On May 6, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
A) You sent messages to unknown hundreds or thousands of people on the
mailing list, all of which could have a cached copy of your messages,
and now wonder about privacy?
I've explained the differences before; perhaps I
This keeps coming up time and time again. Why don't we simply put up
a message on the subscription page that says if you subscribe you
agree that your messages will be archived for public viewing. End of
story. No more bitchy emails on this subject, no more heated debates
and much more time
On May 6, 2005, at 2:42 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Yeah, cuz, we wouldn't want the archives to be referenced for people
who are looking for help on topics, after all.
Do you think that subscribers would refuse to grant permission to have
their posts archived? If so,
On May 6, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Roland Smith writes:
On the page where you subscribe to a mailing list there is a link to
the
list archives. The existance to this link implies a public accessible
archive of the list. If you don't like that, don't subscribe.
You cannot be sure
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 04:05:09PM +0100, Chris Hodgins wrote:
This keeps coming up time and time again. Why don't we simply put up
a message on the subscription page that says if you subscribe you
agree that your messages will be archived for public viewing.
Maybe it should be in the
On May 6, 2005, at 2:48 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Paul Schmehl writes:
Before you start spouting legal advice on a public list, I would
suggest
that you point to chapter and verse that *specifically* addresses
posts
made to a public forum that *explicitly* states that such posts will
be
On May 6, 2005, at 2:50 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Al Johnsonn writes:
This advice is more ridiculous than telling him to put aerosol spray
back
into a can.
Where's the flaw in it? That's what the DMCA is for.
Betwen this and the claim about stopping traffic in third party non-US
sites
On May 6, 2005, at 3:53 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I doubt seriously your *extremely* strict interpretation of copyright
would hold up in any court of law in the US or anywhere else for that
matter. I have no doubt that you could find a judge somewhere to rule
in your favor. After all, judges
On May 6, 2005, at 8:14 PM, Chris wrote:
Hahaha - good stuff! Yanno, last I knew (and that was some time ago)
You
had to submit writings for review to the copyright folks here in the
U.S.
Then, if they deem it so, you then had to pay a fee to have it
copyrighted. As I said - this may or may
On May 6, 2005, at 8:17 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Absolutely! Copyright doesn't protect anyone from making a fool out
of themselves.
So I see. But that is not the purpose of copyright.
Proven time and time again :-)
___
On May 7, 2005, at 7:15 AM, Alex de Kruijff wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 11:45:35AM +0200, X3K6A2 wrote:
Marc Fonvieille writes:
All, and I said All, mailing list subscribing forms mention their
archives (To see the collection of prior postings to the list,
visit
the freebsd-blahblah
Chris writes:
... in order for someone to claim a violation of copyright, it MUST
be registered with the copyright office (at least here in the States).
For civil procedures involving works of U.S. origin, yes. But you don't
have to register way in advance, you only have to register before the
Chris Hodgins writes:
This keeps coming up time and time again. Why don't we simply put up
a message on the subscription page that says if you subscribe you
agree that your messages will be archived for public viewing. End of
story. No more bitchy emails on this subject, no more heated
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
... in order for someone to claim a violation of copyright, it MUST
be registered with the copyright office (at least here in the States).
For civil procedures involving works of U.S. origin, yes. But you don't
have to register way in advance, you
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Dilemma...how do I get permission to quote you to reply to you?
You can e-mail me and ask. However, backquoting of portions of a
message generally falls within the scope of fair use, IMO (IANAL).
--
Anthony
___
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Dilemma...how do I get permission to quote you to reply to you?
You can e-mail me and ask. However, backquoting of portions of a
message generally falls within the scope of fair use, IMO (IANAL).
If thats what it comes down to - then
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Dilemma...how do I get permission to quote you to reply to you?
You can e-mail me and ask. However, backquoting of portions of a
message generally falls within the scope of fair use, IMO (IANAL).
Here - let's do this.
Nobody can
Chris wrote:
Nobody can reply to, reproduce, referance, show, etc. this email without
written consent be my.
The courts, wisely, have declined to say quoting a set amount is ok or
define any other bright line test.
Since there is no bright line test for fair use it comes down to is is
Chris writes:
If thats what it comes down to - then sending emails, lists, bloggs, etc
are all willfull violations of copyright - Oh no - where do you
draw the line!!!
Some are, some aren't.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
If thats what it comes down to - then sending emails, lists, bloggs, etc
are all willfull violations of copyright - Oh no - where do you
draw the line!!!
Some are, some aren't.
This whole thing is silly (the isues at hand, meaning -
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:46 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
If thats what
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Fafa Hafiz
Krantz
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 3:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
Hello.
I have a big
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Fafa Hafiz
Krantz
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 3:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
Hello.
I have
PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 2:05 PM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Fafa Hafiz Krantz; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE!
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto
On 5/8/05, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
snip snip
OK, this is arguably Anthony's best-ever troll, and ranks pretty highly when
compared to past list trolling.
Could someone give the man an award for his achievements and then let's kill
this useless
On Sat 7 May 05 10:39, Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
For those of us with ethics and conscience, registration is
irrelevant. We do not refrain from infringement out of fear of
prosecution, we refrain because infringement is wrong.
Where is the infringement here?
Have you spoken
Joshua Tinnin writes:
Where is the infringement here?
Reproducing a copyrighted work without permission.
Have you spoken to an actual lawyer about this issue? I have. Guess what
he said?
I prefer not to guess. Invite him here.
In any case, lawyers don't decide what is or isn't
On Sat 7 May 05 15:01, Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Joshua Tinnin writes:
Where is the infringement here?
Reproducing a copyrighted work without permission.
Then so is every single tech help list with public archives. Or every
single email list with public archives. I'm
Joshua Tinnin wrote:
On Sat 7 May 05 15:01, Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Joshua Tinnin writes:
... Snip
I hate to bring up the old cliche ... but, seriously, Anthony, most of
what you do here is spread:
Fear
Uncertainty
Doubt
Oh no!!!
Fear?
Uncertainty?
Doubt?
I
Joshua Tinnin writes:
Then so is every single tech help list with public archives.
Yes. The fact that certain infringing actions may take place with great
frequency does not make them any less infringing.
Some of them have been in existence before the web. I can't figure out
why you keep
On Sat 7 May 05 15:35, Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Joshua Tinnin writes:
I hate to bring up the old cliche ... but, seriously, Anthony, most
of what you do here is spread:
Fear
Uncertainty
Doubt
Much of the prudence that lawful behavior demands is based on these.
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 04:05:09PM +0100, Chris Hodgins wrote:
This keeps coming up time and time again. Why don't we simply put up
a message on the subscription page that says if you subscribe you
agree that your messages will be archived for public viewing. End of
story. No more bitchy
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 01:32:37PM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Alex de Kruijff writes:
So? As long as your system is protected by a password nobody has a legal
defence.
Unfortunately they do. For example, if they guess a user name and
password and it works, they can enter your
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 11:16:02AM -0400, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On May 6, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Roland Smith writes:
On the page where you subscribe to a mailing list there is a link to
the
list archives. The existance to this link implies a public accessible
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 10:38:04AM +0200, Marc Fonvieille wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 02:49:23AM +0200, Alex de Kruijff wrote:
Well, the Mailing lists link on http://www.FreeBSD.org/ homepage
points on
On May 7, 2005, at 1:53 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Dilemma...how do I get permission to quote you to reply to you?
You can e-mail me and ask. However, backquoting of portions of a
message generally falls within the scope of fair use, IMO (IANAL).
Nope, because that
On May 7, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Chris wrote:
Oh no!!!
Fear?
Uncertainty?
Doubt?
I guess OpenSource isnt the way to go. I guess FreeBSD isnt right for
me.
Oh no - Look at all this termoil...
I guess I should just buy the Microsoft product so I won't violate
anything. Surely becasue if I pay for it -
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On May 7, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Chris wrote:
Oh no!!!
Fear?
Uncertainty?
Doubt?
I guess OpenSource isnt the way to go. I guess FreeBSD isnt right for me.
Oh no - Look at all this termoil...
I guess I should just buy the Microsoft product so I won't violate
On May 7, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Joshua Tinnin writes:
Then so is every single tech help list with public archives.
Yes. The fact that certain infringing actions may take place with
great
frequency does not make them any less infringing.
Fine. Take them each to court. See
On May 7, 2005, at 10:44 PM, Chris wrote:
Aaaarrggghhg
Isn't anyhing sacred anymore?!
Oh how I long for the Dos-dayz.
Whoa is mee
...licensed too. Sorry. You don't own it.
:-p
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Twas said by Bart Silverstrim and my ignorance encourages me to join
the dialogue and say hey guys can this one be droppd -- my mail box is
getting overstuffed with this and it is now way off topic
Thanks
D
David Southwell Ham call sign M0TAU
Remove nospamme_ from reply
Hello.
I have a big problem. My privacy has been violated.
I had no idea when I first started writing posts to the FreeBSD
mailinglist that it would be archived, let alone indexed by Google
so that the world can spy on my words.
Can the FreeBSD mailinglist administrators change my name and
Fafa Hafiz Krantz writes:
I have a big problem. My privacy has been violated.
I had no idea when I first started writing posts to the FreeBSD
mailinglist that it would be archived, let alone indexed by Google
so that the world can spy on my words.
Can the FreeBSD mailinglist administrators
### Please DO NOT CROSS-POST messages to a bazillion lists! ###
On 2005-05-06 05:39, Fafa Hafiz Krantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I have a big problem. My privacy has been violated.
I had no idea when I first started writing posts to the FreeBSD
mailinglist that it would be archived,
No, that would be impossible. Hint: third-party mirrors (i.e. Google).
What if ones life is at risk?
Would that be up to the 3rd party mirror administrators?
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
It _is_ the fault of the mailing list manager that posts are being
archived without the permission of mailing-list members. Members must
Fafa Hafiz Krantz writes:
What if ones life is at risk?
As I've said, send a DMCA to the owner of the archive (and to other
parties if they have copies). If they don't take down the infringing
material, you can sue. If their ISPs don't cooperate, you can sue them
as well.
There should be a
Fafa Hafiz Krantz wrote:
There should be a law protecting users against this.
There should be a way to help them!
No, there should be a law protecting us from dunderheads like you.
The sign-up page cleary states that your posts are archived. If you didn't
read that, then more fool you.
Please
On 2005-05-06 05:57, Fafa Hafiz Krantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, that would be impossible. Hint: third-party mirrors (i.e. Google).
What if ones life is at risk?
Would that be up to the 3rd party mirror administrators?
I'm afraid that if your life would be at risk because you posted
On 06 May Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
It _is_ the fault of the mailing list manager that posts are being
archived without the
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:51:45PM +0200, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
On 06 May Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
It _is_ the fault of the
On May 6, 2005, at 6:57 AM, Fafa Hafiz Krantz wrote:
No, that would be impossible. Hint: third-party mirrors (i.e.
Google).
What if ones life is at risk?
Would that be up to the 3rd party mirror administrators?
A) You sent messages to unknown hundreds or thousands of people on the
mailing
On 06 May Fafa Hafiz Krantz wrote:
There should be a law protecting users against this.
There should be a way to help them!
Yea sure. A way to help them..
But there IS a way. It's so simple. All you have to do is take some
responsebilaty for your _own_ acts in stead of crying out loud and
You know, for some odd reason the word troll springs to mind...
-- Dave
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On May 6, 2005, at 7:06 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
It _is_ the fault of the mailing list manager that posts are being
archived without the
On May 6, 2005, at 7:08 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Fafa Hafiz Krantz writes:
What if ones life is at risk?
As I've said, send a DMCA to the owner of the archive (and to other
parties if they have copies). If they don't take down the infringing
material, you can sue. If their ISPs don't
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:06:48PM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
It _is_ the fault of the mailing list manager that posts are
On Fri, 06 May 2005 22:18:06 +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
You know, for some odd reason the word troll springs to mind...
Probably the wisest response yet.
Let's face it: The guy spams every BSD list out there with some inane
grandiosity and is now worried for his life? All spammers should be
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 05:39:34AM -0500, Fafa Hafiz Krantz wrote:
Hello.
I have a big problem. My privacy has been violated.
I had no idea when I first started writing posts to the FreeBSD
mailinglist that it would be archived,
On the page where you subscribed to the list is a link to
On Friday 06 May 2005 14:32, David Benfell wrote:
On Fri, 06 May 2005 22:18:06 +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
You know, for some odd reason the word troll springs to mind...
Probably the wisest response yet.
Let's face it: The guy spams every BSD list out there with some inane
grandiosity
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:06:48PM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
It _is_ the fault of the mailing list manager that posts are
--On Friday, May 06, 2005 01:08:45 PM +0200 Anthony Atkielski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've said, send a DMCA to the owner of the archive (and to other
parties if they have copies). If they don't take down the infringing
material, you can sue. If their ISPs don't cooperate, you can sue them
--On Friday, May 06, 2005 03:27:09 PM +0200 Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On the page where you subscribe to a mailing list there is a link to the
list archives. The existance to this link implies a public accessible
archive of the list. If you don't like that, don't subscribe.
Or
On Friday 06 May 2005 05:52, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
DMCA
So, how's that working out for you with non-US third-party mirrors that
aren't subject to American law in any way?
--
Kirk Strauser
pgp8pIAyidpmi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On May 6, 2005, at 1:04 PM, Kirk Strauser wrote:
On Friday 06 May 2005 05:52, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
DMCA
So, how's that working out for you with non-US third-party mirrors that
aren't subject to American law in any way?
Give it time...
With what seems to be growing acceptance of censorship over
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 12:52:26PM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
You hold a copyright on your posts, so you can force them to be taken
off the Net with a DMCA notification.
This advice is more ridiculous than telling him to put aerosol spray back
into a can.
A little common sense _before_
Bart Silverstrim writes:
A) You sent messages to unknown hundreds or thousands of people on the
mailing list, all of which could have a cached copy of your messages,
and now wonder about privacy?
I've explained the differences before; perhaps I need to explain them
again.
When you sign up
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Yeah, cuz, we wouldn't want the archives to be referenced for people
who are looking for help on topics, after all.
Do you think that subscribers would refuse to grant permission to have
their posts archived? If so, doesn't that say something to you about
archiving
Roland Smith writes:
On the page where you subscribe to a mailing list there is a link to the
list archives. The existance to this link implies a public accessible
archive of the list. If you don't like that, don't subscribe.
You cannot be sure that subscribers have read it unless you require
Roland Smith writes:
Subscribing to a list means that you give permission for your messages
to be sent to all subscribers. Any one of those could save the messages,
creating an archive. So posting to the list implies permission for
archival.
It doesn't give permission to make the archive
Paul Schmehl writes:
So, if I *respond* to one of his posts (including his email address and at
least a portion of what he wrote) and therefore have *some* of his
copyrighted material in my post then he can request that *my* post be
removed *without* my permission?
Not if your backquoting
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
