Shawn Boyette ☠ wrote:
On Nov 27, 2007 12:25 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 27 November 2007 08:53:52 Jonathan Rockway wrote:
What legal precedent is there here? Violating the ToS is the
responsibility of the user of the module, not people distributing the
module.
Would you also distribute a module which effectively performed a DoS against
search.cpan.org and *.perl.org?
There must be some story missing here. Those of us who are only on
perl-qa and not whatever list this got started on know nothing except
what was stated in David Landgren's message, which, free of context,
comes across as somewhere between reactionary and panicky. Barring any
revelations (which I now hope are forthcoming), I tend to agree with
jrockway.
Yes, please accept my apologies for that. There is no list that I am
aware of that would have been better. If you know how to get in touch
with people who are not obliged to tell you who they are (and even if
they did there is no formal channel for doing so) then I'm all ears.
Admins running backpan are free to ignore my request and do nothing,
that's fine by me, it's not like I'm paid for it. I've done my part by
getting the word out, and if we ever hear back from the company (which I
doubt) we'll say we did what we could.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled Perl-QA.
Thanks,
David
