On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 11:58:03 -0700
JC Dill <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> That's opt-out, and exactly why spam is such a problem. They need to
> ask for permission *to* archive from each list they want to archive,
> not add lists in-masse and then require each list A) to discover this
> and then B) ask them to NOT archive.
There's a cultural divide here. Its similar to the cultural divide
between the idea of a list-mom versus a list-owner. Many list owners
consider that they own their lists, own the content of their lists, etc.
Among list owners its not a particularly uncommon view. However among
list users I find it is rather uncommon -- the more laissez faire model
which says that content is essentially public domain as soon as it
leaves your network seems more common at a percentage level.
Which of course puts this solidly in the realm of the cultural divide
surrounding DRM, and say, MP3 distribution.
I'm not interested in arguing the validity of one side or the other,
just observing the fact of the different..
The topic is important and interesting to be sure, especially if, like
Chuq, you have questions of corporate asset, legal liability, and
shareholder interest to protect, but most of the world, and in
particular most of the list world, is not in that position.
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
email@example.com He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.