If you post to a list with a publicly announced public archive -- and even
more so if you are informed about the archive at the time you join the
list (hint: you usually are) -- then I think it's pretty clear under US
law (and, I'd imagine but don't actually know, also the law of most
civilized countries) that you are impliedly granting a license to archive
by posting to the list. Hence the archive is not a copyright violation.
Interesting academic questions might, or might not, arise if in a given
post one attempted to assert that the implied license is being revoked for
that post (including the issue of whether given the automation
involved such an assertion could be legally effective), but they have low
operational relevance to date.
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Anthony G. Atkielski wrote:
Since public archives are usually a violation of copyright, anyway,
the entities that maintain them are poorly placed to complain.
And archives can be purged after the fact, without impairing the flow
of messages to the list in real time.
http://www.icannwatch.org Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin(_at_)law(_dot_)tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
-->It's warm here.<--
Ietf mailing list