Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!think.com!spool2.mu.edu!samsung!uunet!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!hoss!hoss.unl.edu!greg
From: greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Personal Privacy Violations
Message-ID: <1991Jan10.204101.29296@hoss.unl.edu>
Date: 10 Jan 91 20:41:01 GMT
References: <465.2786E0CF@Tqc.FidoNet.Org> <1991Jan06.180558.4405@looking.on.ca> <1991Jan06.230231.21840@hoss.unl.edu>
Sender: news@hoss.unl.edu (Network News Administer)
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Lines: 26

... greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) writes:
>... brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes:

>>It is also futile, other than telling people to request deletion.  You can't
>>make what Lotus is doing illegal.  If the information is public (not gained
>>by breaking any confidences) and true, then they can publish it.  Congress
>>shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press and all that rot,
>>remember?

>Hello, since when is information encoded electronically on a CD ROM
>considered press?

Perhaps I should clarify this statement.  What I mean is that currently
electronic text is not press.  So if you take Lotus to court and lose, you
will gain a status of electronic text as speech/press, and if you win,
well you've prevented them from putting out the questionable CD ROM.
Either way, something is gained.

I think I phrased that better to someone in email -- perhaps he could
repost it for me, if he still has a copy of it.

--
   ///   ____   \\\
   | |/ /    \ \| |    greg@hoss.unl.edu
    \\_( \==/ )_//     Lig Lury Jr.
        \__\\/