Norbert Bollow <nb@cisto.com> wrote:
> Actually I believe that such a responsibility exists only where
> the list-owners want the situation to be different from the default
> that is implied by copyright law, namely:
OMIGOD, you still believe in the copyright law? :-)
> I support the idea of creating an RFC about a simple and yet
> sufficiently powerful and machine-parseable format for communicating
> whatever rules the list-owner wants to be applicable to any given
> list.
That's an excellent idea, I can think of a variety of rules that could
be promulgated that way, not just archiving policies. Let's do it!
--
Mike Nolan
Follow-Ups:
|
|
