Re: Where is the Searchable Applescript-users Archive?
Re: Where is the Searchable Applescript-users Archive?
- Subject: Re: Where is the Searchable Applescript-users Archive?
- From: Chuq Von Rospach <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 12:06:56 -0800
On 3/6/01 10:45 AM, "email@hidden" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
Having spent way to much time around lawyers, I'm always nervous to hear
>
that somebody wants to get a lawyer involved. : (
I like lawyers. I like Apple's lawyers. Unlike many lawyers, Apple's lawyers
are pretty tech-clueful and internet-clueful. They also tend to hide when I
show up, because I generally hand them things that give them headaches
(grin).
But Apple's lawyers, if they get involved, will have Apple's best interests
foremost, and the lists best interests where it doesn't conflict and I can
convince them it's the right thing to do. If they get involved, I lose a lot
of control in how things are done, and everyone else loses ALL control. I'd
rather avoid that, not because I'm not following Apple's policies here, but
because I'd rather not find out they want to re-think those policies if I
can help it (at least, not on their terms instead of mine)
>
When I when a lawyer's client says that, I get even more nervous. The
>
easiest thing for a lawyer to do in this case would be to simply pull the
>
plug on a free service that offers little tangible benefits and, currently
>
at least, seems to be inviting contention. How many hours of their
>
lawyers' time will Apple be willing to invest in this service before they
>
decide it's not worth it?
They won't pull the plug. Lists.apple.com is a easily justifiable corporate
asset. Has been justified, in fact. It's not the under-the-desk skunkworks
it was back in 1995 or 1996 when I was doing this more or less on the sly.
But I'd rather not go through the need to evaluate the system formally and
what that entails. I'd rather finish the search engine. I'm not as worried
about the lawyers coming in and pulling plugs as I am the time involved in
working with them to understand and evaluate the issues. And that they might
see things from their perspective differently that we might not like, but
wouldn't get a vote on.
>
If people are serious about copywriting their posts and start claiming some
>
exclusive rights to their messages that limit's apple's use of the
>
collected body of work or their ability to protect the list users or even
>
maintain the collection on their website then those people should be
>
prevented from posting to the list.
Just to make sure this is clear, because I covered it in a post earlier
today but I want to make sure there's no ambiguity: if you put a copyright
message on a posting that is in conflict with how the list server operates,
the way that copyright will be enforced is by refusing access to those
messages to the list server. You either accept how the server system
operates or you don't. If you try to do something like refuse persmission to
place your messages in the archives, that will be done by refusing access to
posting to the server -- because I HAVE NO OTHER WAY of enforcing that kind
of restriction, and I have to enforce it.
Be careful what you ask for. You might get it... (grin)
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Apple Mail List Gnome
(
mailto:email@hidden) + (
mailto:email@hidden)