Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)
Valdis.Kletnieks_at_vt.edu
Date: 11/02/04
- Previous message: Hugo van der Kooij: "[Full-Disclosure] I am out of here"
- In reply to: yossarian: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)"
- Next in thread: jesse michael: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: yossarian <yossarian@planet.nl> Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:21:41 -0500
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:12:46 +0100, yossarian said:
> Interesting - who said that DMCA or the Communications Decency Act or the
> Patriot Act were tech friendly?
Please note that the DMCA (in addition to the infamous circumvention clause),
*also* included the ISP safe-harbor exemptions in 17 USC 512. That's quite
arguably been a *very* tech-friendly piece of legislation - who wants to be
an ISP if you could be sued for material one of your users put up and the
existence of which you were unaware?
(If you think being an ISP and getting handed a '512 takedown order' sucks,
consider that before the DMCA, the alternative was that you got handed papers
that named *you* as a party to the lawsuit along with your (probably) John Doe
user(s)...)
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Hugo van der Kooij: "[Full-Disclosure] I am out of here"
- In reply to: yossarian: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)"
- Next in thread: jesse michael: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] OT-POLITICAL: (Was: www.georgewbush.com)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
