1 |
On 12/12/20 09:47, Aaron Bauman wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> |
4 |
> On December 12, 2020 8:24:44 AM EST, Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
>> On 2020.12.12 12:07, Andreas K. Hüttel wrote: |
6 |
>>>> I have a major concern with the concept of the council |
7 |
>>>> deciding to close any part of the forum. Its like this ... |
8 |
>>>> At present, Gentoo is a common carrier, like the mail. |
9 |
>>>> The content of letters and parcels is of little concern to the |
10 |
>>>> carrier. |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>>> Gentoos status could be changed by a council decision to |
13 |
>>>> close any part of the forum from common carrier to publisher, |
14 |
>>>> were the council seen to be exercising editorial control. |
15 |
>>>> Being a publisher makes Gentoo liable for the published |
16 |
>>>> content. Gentoo could not run the forums at all under those |
17 |
>>>> conditions. |
18 |
>>> |
19 |
>>> This is misinformation at best, and deliberate confusion sowing at |
20 |
>>> worst. |
21 |
>>> |
22 |
>>> I assume that you're talking about the US legal situation. [#] |
23 |
>>> |
24 |
>> |
25 |
>> <snip totally irrelevant material> |
26 |
>> |
27 |
>>> [...] |
28 |
>>> ==================== |
29 |
>>> https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 |
30 |
>>> |
31 |
>>> Cheers. |
32 |
>>> |
33 |
>>> |
34 |
>>> |
35 |
>> |
36 |
>> <snip references> |
37 |
>> |
38 |
>>> |
39 |
>>> |
40 |
>>> -- |
41 |
>>> Andreas K. Hüttel |
42 |
>>> dilfridge@g.o |
43 |
>>> Gentoo Linux developer |
44 |
>>> (council, qa, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice) |
45 |
>> |
46 |
>> |
47 |
>> Rule 1 is never assume. |
48 |
>> That makes the rest of your post irrelevant. |
49 |
>> |
50 |
>> In the UK, which selfishly, is all that matters to me, if I compile |
51 |
>> and edit a community newsletter, I'm the publisher, with all the |
52 |
>> liabilities |
53 |
>> of a publisher. Like, say, the News of the World. I have editorial |
54 |
>> control and am liable for the content. |
55 |
>> |
56 |
>> When someone distributes that same newsletter by putting it |
57 |
>> through the village letterboxes, they have no liability for the |
58 |
>> content. |
59 |
>> |
60 |
>> In the same vein, is the council accidentality, through ignorance or |
61 |
>> otherwise, in danger of making Gentoo a publisher, with all the |
62 |
>> attached liability for content? |
63 |
>> |
64 |
>> I don't know the answer either. |
65 |
>> |
66 |
>> Oh, the News of the World folded after a lawsuit related to an |
67 |
>> article it published. |
68 |
> |
69 |
> This doesn't correlate. The problem is and has been, the content is not aligned with our community values and standards. |
70 |
> |
71 |
> Simple enough. No need for legal shenanigans, liability, etc. |
72 |
> |
73 |
Somehow, I doubt that "But, your honor, I was willfully ignoring that |
74 |
the law even existed, I can't be held liable." is considered a valid |
75 |
defense in any jurisdiction. Though you are welcome to try it and report |
76 |
back. |