Re: List archives and copyright [WAS Re: John Cowan supports 3683 PR-act

Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
> <delurk><lawyer>
>
> 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 [..]
IANAL but one really doesn't have to bother with US law, that really
doesn't apply to many folks (fortunately :) There is a much better thing
than US law, it's called IETF, and the fact that there is:
http://www.ietf.org/maillist-new.html which contains:
8<--------------
All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules of RFC 3978 and RFC 3979.
-------------->8
Mailinglist traffic also are subject to that.
One gets a copy of this when signing up for the various lists.

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.
According to you Google and every other website indexing service is a
violation of copyright, better get sue'ing then, you might get rich.

> And archives can be purged after the fact, without impairing the flow
> of messages to the list in real time.
Archives are meant to store things, which is what they are doing, if you
don't want to contribute then simply don't.

Greets,
 Jeroen

(Who wonders that now I've quoted mr Atkielski if I am in violation of
his copyright...)

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf