Re: [tlug] Mailing list web archives..... Is this leagal ?

["Joshua B." <juggins@example.com>]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull
<stephen@example.com> wrote:
> Attila Kinali writes:
>  > Or to put it into a non-virtual example: if you collect old news
>  > papers and make your archive open to anyone who happends to be
>  > there, then there is nothing the newspaper can do about it.
>  > Though, you are not allowed to make copies of the newspapers and
>  > distribute then, your "users" are allowed to take your newspapers
>  > to the next copy machine and make copies for themselves.

You might still run affoul of laws in various parts of the world that
prohibit "aiding and abetting copyright infringement" (google:pirate
bay)

> Sure.  But re-posting something on the web requires that you make
> copies for your users and send the copies to them.  In the
> U.S. copyright law definitely applies.  In particular, it would
> certainly be possible for an author to insist that his posts be
> archived only on the original site.  (On my lists I'd fix that by
> banning the author. ;-)

A lawyer would say just add this to the terms of your click-though
terms of service agreement when people sign up to the mailing list.
"Every email sent to this list is released to the public domain or is
available under a suitable Creative Commons Licence" type thingie.

> Not in the U.S.  I'd be willing to bet it's not true in Europe,
> either, but I don't claim to know anything about European law.  (I'm
> sure that privacy laws do apply in Europe; what I'm willing to bet is
> that copyright law applies too.)

EU privacy law is much much stronger than in the US  Certain laws in
the EU prohibit the transfer of customer/user information outside of
the EU unless to a country whose privacy standards are deemed
"compatible". The US doesn't (and wont) meet this standard so the EU
finally relented and allowed EU companies to export private data to
the US as long as it was going to a company or entity bound by
contract to meet EU levels of privacy protection. (Yes off topic but I
just wanted to share.)

> The whole point of copyright is to allow you to publish (make public)
> your work, and still retain control over making and distributing copies.

Nicely put.

Back to the OP's question.  If you are going to be strictly legal, you
cannot mirror content without permission of the author/owner. However,
practically speaking, people make choices that are not "strictly
legal" every day. The important thing to consider are the *probable*
negative consequences and weigh them against benefits.  I imagine that
at getting permission from mailing list admins is a good idea. While
copyright certainly applies and extends to almost every corner of the
civilized world, the economic value of restraining or controlling
re-publication of mailing list comments about linux is so minimal that
it ought not be an obstacle. Basically, the cost of enforcing
copyright is prohibitive for anyone other than massive aggregators of
copyright.

The privacy issue is potentially more of a problem in certain
jurisdictions because a person might be able to make a "privacy
complaint" to a bureaucrat somewhere without actually starting a civil
action to enforce their own rights. Potentially said bureaucrat could
decide to take an intense interest in your mirroring project and cause
more trouble. However there are no global "privacy treaties" yet so it
all depends on your jurisdiction.

~j