Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!unisoft!jef
From: jef@unisoft.UUCP
Newsgroups: news.stargate,news.misc,comp.org.usenix
Subject: Re: Stargate
Message-ID: <398@unisoft.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Jun-87 12:26:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: unisoft.398
Posted: Mon Jun  8 12:26:52 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Jun-87 05:30:03 EDT
References: <3254@well.UUCP>
Sender: news@unisoft.UUCP
Reply-To: jef@unisoft.UUCP (Jef Poskanzer)
Distribution: world
Organization: Paratheo-Anametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric, Ada Lovelace Cabal
Lines: 18
Xref: utgpu news.stargate:164 news.misc:466 comp.org.usenix:227

In the referenced article, rab@well.UUCP (Bob Bickford) wrote:
>  The second point is the question of liability in the case of
>a customer who is offended by an article.  I've always felt that
>the lawyers have their heads stuck firmly up their asses on this
>point: anything that you must deliberately make an effort to
>receive, you have no claim to being "harmed" by.  You could simply
>not have turned the receiver on.

If someone broadcasts a message claiming that you are a child molester,
or perhaps even an incompetent engineer, you've been harmed whether you
read the message or not.  This is called libel.  You and I would view
the harm as trivial and not worth bothering with.  Others, however, might
seek compensation.
---
Jef

 Jef Poskanzer  unisoft!jef@ucbvax.Berkeley.Edu  ...ucbvax!unisoft!jef
           "...and now for something completely different."