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

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

Joshua B. writes:

 > > 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.

I don't think that would work.  All the author would have to do is say
"I forgot, give it back."  The ToS would probably protect you from
damages, but I don't think the automatic licensing provision would be
upheld in a U.S. court.  You'd really need to have a paper contract,
like the FSF's assign.future.

 > Back to the OP's question.  If you are going to be strictly legal, you
 > cannot mirror content without permission of the author/owner.

Actually, what Larry Rosen told me is that in the U.S. (a) it's not a
matter of "illegal" (copyright infringement is basically a tort unless
there is clear intent to profit financially) and (b) pragmatically,
the way to think about it is that absence of prohibition is implicit
permission -- which can be withdrawn retroactively and with statutory
damages then applied. :-)

 > I imagine that at getting permission from mailing list admins is a
 > good idea.

This is true, but it has nothing to do with copyright, since mailing
lists essentially never have copyright in anything.

 > 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.

I don't really see how that could apply to a public mailing list
archive, though.  If the information is not supposed to be public
after all, you can be forced to remove it, and perhaps to shut down
until you do.  The list operator might be held responsible for
damages, with sufficiently good lawyers on the part of the author.
But I don't think mirrors can be held responsible for damages for
copying allegedly public material.