On 2012-04-11, at 2:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Joshua D. Drake's message of jue abr 16 15:07:59 -0400 2009:
>> On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 15:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
>>>> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>>>> (and I don't think we're going to attempt to delete pornographic
>>>>> messages posted months ago -- if anything of the sort happens, action is
>>>>> going to be taken pretty hastily).
>>>
>>>> Agreed ... there isn't any reason why someone 'internally' doesn't notice
>>>> it from jus scanning the lists ...
>>>
>>> I think by far the most likely problem scenario is that someone claims
>>> to hold copyright on something-or-other in an old message and files a
>>> DMCA takedown notice against it. AFAICT the standard of proof in such
>>> cases is "guilty until proven innocent", so we'd probably have to cave
>>> rather than argue about it. How are the copyright laws in Canada these
>>> days?
>>
>> I think what we really need to do is stop playing attorney and ask one
>> what our exposure is. I will contact SFLC.
>
> I just got another guy requesting me to remove an archived email from
> very old archives. Nothing illegal so I'm not doing it. Still, I just
> reread this thread and saw this offer and no followup. JD, did you ever
> get around to asking SFLC about this?
Iin the past, the policy was defined nice and simple: once in the archives, there are no changes, period, since its not
justour archives that the messages is in, but every public / private archive that exists on the Internet …
The one exception to this was a few years back when we were alerts that there was a bunch of porn, but we didn't
*remove*the posts, onlly XXXX'd out the text, so that the archives URLs didn't get changed in the process …
As for 'copyright laws in Canada', which was asked also above … consider Canada, in large part, to be a sister-state to
theUS, if not a bit more fascist(god, hope that is the right word) … it fluctuates somewhat, but over time, the net
resulttends to be that what is adopted in the US, gets adopted here …
