Xref: utzoo news.admin:3050 misc.legal:5315 soc.women:12005
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!yale!husc6!mit-eddie!ooblick
From: ooblick@eddie.MIT.EDU (Mikki Barry)
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal,soc.women
Subject: Re: Proposed lawsuit
Message-ID: <9722@eddie.MIT.EDU>
Date: 19 Jul 88 20:55:00 GMT
References: <12165@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <6278@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <12180@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <2306@ur-tut.UUCP>
Reply-To: ooblick@eddie.MIT.EDU (Mikki Barry)
Organization: MIT, EE/CS Computer Facilities, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 22

Regardless of the merits or lack of same of this proposed suit, think of
this:  Do we really want a judge, jury and bunch of lawyers who have NEVER
TOUCHED a computer in their lives to attempt to make precedent out of the
Usenet?

They might rule that Mark is a public figure and must prove malice and
actual damage to collect.  They might rule that sysadmins are editors
and as such are responsible for the content of articles and mail coming
from their machines (sure death for the net).  They might rule that all
sites carrying such material and tranferring it to other sites are liable
for the content.  Or they might all just laugh and throw it out of court.
But do we really want to find out?

Never underestimate the stupidity of the legal system when regarding
technology.  Remember, these are the same fools who believe that cellular
telephone transmissions are private and listening to them on legally available
equipment constitutes a federal offense.  You want them to put their slimy
fingers into the net?

Then again....

Mikki Barry