Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!mupsy!matr-a!ken From: ken@matr-a.UUCP (Ken Farnen) Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal Subject: Re: Responsibility for postings. Message-ID: <307@matr-a.UUCP> Date: Fri, 16-Oct-87 16:54:02 EST Article-I.D.: matr-a.307 Posted: Fri Oct 16 16:54:02 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 25-Oct-87 22:07:36 EST References: <378d6016.b8ab@apollo.uucp> <5261@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <2050@kitty.UUCP> <4611@videovax.Tek.COM> Organization: Matrix Software Developement, Liverpool, England. Lines: 100 Summary: let's keep the net open! Xref: mnetor news.admin:1240 misc.legal:3292 In article <4611@videovax.Tek.COM>, stever@videovax.Tek.COM (Steven E. Rice, P.E.) writes: > > Perhaps it is asking too much, but if we all behave ourselves in a > civilized manner, it will not become necessary to find out what the > courts might decide. . . > > Steve Rice > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > new: stever@videovax.tv.Tek.com > old: {decvax | hplabs | ihnp4 | uw-beaver | cae780}!tektronix!videovax!stever I hope you are right, Steve, I for one, do not want to see the Net die, and I have a nasty feeling your analysis (that if someone DOES test this in the courts, either side of the pond), the death of the UseNet will result. I can't comment on US law, I know little enough about the law of my own country, never mind anyone elses! But I was involved with the BBOA over here (the Bulletin Board Operators Ascociaton) and the legal advice we got was that the only laws that were liable to be applied in a situation of an electronic communication system being sued (or prosecuted) were those that related to 'paper' publishing. If this is indeed true, there is no doubt that the operator, or proprietor of the system that is 'publishing' the item is the guy in the frame. Over here, there is an Act of Parliament that covers the Postal service, giving them an explicit waiver of any responsibility for items passed through their medium ("Mute Carrier" I think is the term used), and interestingly enough, the first UK public Viewdata (read videotext) service managed to get themselves written into an amendment of this bill, extending the cover to THAT SINGLE SYSTEM EXPLICITLY. This was when we still had a single, national Post/Telecomunications body, rather than the new separate, privitised ones. Subsequent events seem to show that no-one is sure enough of the law to want to get in the way of it, e.g.... One of my favorite BBS systems was shut down in '85, it had a SIG for 'Hackers' which carried the usual passwords, 'phone numbers (no credit card numbers, you guys in the states were much more progressive than us there! :-) ), it was generally a good board, with a Multi-User games section, agony aunt, i.e. not DEVOTED to hacking! The sysop wasn't a hacker, or a 'kid', and he provided a hackers SIG because that was what people wanted. There was no legal problems here, he was just banned from all Telephone service. This was a well worked out punishment, as he was a freelance contractor (read: lived via the phone!). There was a big storm over a few 'joke' messages on TELECOM-GOLD (a commercial E-Mail system), result? They withdrew ALL non-E-mail message facilities, no more bulletin board! Very recently, a BBS had the bad luck to be featured as an 'expose'' of "The underground electronic communication network for perverts, paedophiliacs, homosexuals and prostitutes" (you know, what computer comms. is REALLY all about :-} ). The publicity did him the WORLD of good, and his original views on free speech have changed! He isn't interested in running a BBS any more. The point(s) I'm trying to make are: There is always a body of people, a vocal minority, looking for a cause in their fight for justice and morality. This is a warning more to BBS operators, and public access UseNet sites (but hey, since we don't get soc.singles over here, I don't know what the Commercial/Academic lot are up to, do I? :-) ). * If one of these crusaders takes exception to something, I'm willing to bet they will aim their substantial funds and power at the system, and the operators, NOT at the originators of messages. As for CIVIL liability, all that the traffic of the last few weeks prove is that the only way we will find out who is liable is the HARD way (someone gets sued). I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO FIND OUT THAT BADLY! Let's just keep our hair on, and learn to ignore 'stupid' comments from others, I doubt that any other course will help to improve ANYONE's network credibility. To people who offer commercial services, and/or public UseNet access, all I can do is give you the findings of the study we did at the BBOA. * It's very uncertain that any disclaimer will protect you, it'll be up to some bored judge to decide whether it's enforcable. * Take out legal liability insurance, or, if you prefer, cross your fingers before you go to bed at night. * If you want your user's to be responsible, your best bet is to try to include an indemnity in your user's contract, along the lines of "The user agrees to indemnify against any and all actions against in respect of material posted onto the system by you." It may not help that much, but at least you get the satisfaction of sueing the guy who caused it all :-) I think the only solution for the net is for us all to develop thicker skins, I want to keep my newsfeed (I only just got it!), and I know how quiet it would be without all the US messages! As a final note, if anyone rang my employer to complain about my actions on the 'net', I would smile. If they tried to get me fired, I may even snigger, and wonder what sort of reference I would get when I sacked me (double :-) ). Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, or even expert, all this is from memory of some reasearch we did a fair time ago, don't take it as the gospel, it's not straight out of K&R. - - - - - - - - - - Matrix Software Development | Ken Farnen. UUCP:..!mcvax!ukc!matr-a!ken * Unix Software Solutions * |flames and complaints to| VOX: +44 51 737 1915 *Apple Certified Mac Developers*|my boss, ken@matr-a :-) | BBS: +44 51 737 1882