RE: POLICY PROPOSAL: The list and copyright

[Jon Gabriel]

From: "J. van Baardwijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: POLICY PROPOSAL: The list and copyright
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 20:15:08 +0100

At 11:46 14-2-2003 -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:

You have threatened (and seemed most intent and serious about it, too) to post a wall of shame that would have very real life, damaging consequences to many list members.

Assuming for a moment that such damage would actually occur, the authors of those messages themselves would be responsible for any damage that might occur, not me. It is, after all, their own writings that got them into the Hall of Shame.

No. You would bear at least some responsibility for any negative consequences that might occur. You would have organized said materials (very possibly out of context), and pronounced judgement on them arbitrarily.

Let's say that you apply for a job. The employer does a Google search on your name and finds your recent messages in the Yahoo!Groups archives. He concludes from those messages that you are intolerant and decides not to hire you. As those messages are *your* writings, you have only yourself to blame, not me. Nobody forced you to write those messages.

Yes, and if he drew such a conclusion and was not convinced by you, then you could be held blameless. The moment you post those posts on a widely available website and provide your own opinion of them then you must accept responsibility for doing so.

Compare: you have committed a crime, you are arrested and tried, and sentenced to a year in prison. Your conviction is obviously a consequence of you committing the crime. Following your reasoning, the judge and jury, not you, would be to blame for you being jailed.

Are you planning on setting up an impartial jury to pass judgement as to whether or not people who disagree with you have violated either Dutch or US law? If not, your comment here seems more like a non sequitur. You would be imposing your own arbitrary value judgements on people and that could easily have unfair real life consequences.

BTW, the definition you give of "threat" proves you wrong, and actually proves that my Legal Notice does not contain any threats; nowhere do I mention any intent to "inflict evil, injury or damage". Damage *might* result from publishing your message elsewhere, but doing damage is not the *intent* behind publishing your message elsewhere.

I am, as usual, not interested in debating semantics with you.

This is more than just "semantics". I think it says a lot about you that you fail to see that.

I never said I was perfect. :)

Please explain what your intent would be in posting the oft-touted "Brin-L Wall of Shame" and then I'll address this.

Jon

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l