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