cosell@bbn.com (Bernie Cosell) (03/25/89)
What do we think the current situation is WRT the legal exposure of newgroup mdoerators? In a funny way, this *whole* r.h.f<->GEnie morass is made MUCH more complicated (for me, at least) because of the intertwining copyright issues. *IF* r.h.f were not copyrighted by Brad, the case for arguing that what he's doing with GEnie is unethical is virtually moot (IMHO: the reason is that *anyone* could do the same, and there is no "moderator's privilege" that Brad could be accused of abusing). BUT. That "copyright" on r.h.f came as a result of Brad's having to CHA in the face of a (threatened??, I forget) lawsuit. There are two questions to me on this: a) IF we make moderators agree NOT to copyright or otherwise 'control' their newsgroups, what legal defenses and barriers WILL we allow? OR b) if we're going to argue "NONE", is that _really_ appropropriate? Must it be the case that the ONLY folks eligible to be moderators should be those that are either lawsuit-proof or foolhardy? __ / ) Bernie Cosell /--< _ __ __ o _ BBN Sys & Tech, Cambridge, MA 02238 /___/_(<_/ (_/) )_(_(<_ cosell@bbn.com