Xref: utzoo news.admin:7762 misc.legal:12401 Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!samsung!uunet!ateng!chip From: chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal Subject: Re: Usenet and legal liability Message-ID: <256C5724.296@ateng.com> Date: 23 Nov 89 20:46:27 GMT References: <25683CAB.25106@ateng.com> <10771@max.u.washington.edu> <10814@max.u.washington.edu> Organization: A T Engineering, Tampa, FL Lines: 22 According to wcn@max.u.washington.edu (W C Newell Jr): >I am getting very frustrated with the recurrant postings by some admins >which proclaim their sites to be immune from liability [...] Mr. Newell has apparently been reading a different network. The only articles here claiming _immunity_ from liability have referred to the Usenet as a whole: the Usenet, in a very real sense, does not exist, and if it doesn't exist you can't sue it. Sites do exist and can be sued; the likelihood of success in such a suit is unknown. >I have this nagging feeling that there is a hidden motive to these articles, >namely that the spectre of legal hassles, and the suggestion that these can >be avoided as long as Usenet has no formal organization or structure, >are being used as a scare tactic to forestall any attempts by the large >academic sites to propose administrative changes. We're just discussing the issues involved and stating opinions. Please take further speculation about hidden agendas to alt.conspiracy. -- Chip Salzenberg at A T Engineering; or Spokesman for the Cabal of Commercial Usenet Sites (there is no Cabal) You may redistribute this article only to those who may freely do likewise.