Re: Pseudo-law on the list and libel

[Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>]

> At 9:27 PM -0600 11/6/96, Jim Choate wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >There is one important legal aspect which the operator of the Cypherpunks
> >mailing list has opened themselves up for with this action. In short they
> >have now opened themselves up for defamation and liable suites by imposing
> >an editorial policy on the contents of this list (1).

Disagree.

> >
> >This opens up the potential, for example, for Tim May to sue the operator of
> >the Cypherpunks mailing list now for posts from users (even anonymous ones)
> >which defame or otherwise liable his character, reputation, or ability to
> >pursue income in his chosen field. In short the operators of the list
> >becomes publishers and distributors of the material. It is the legal
> >difference between a bookstore and a book publisher.

There is a very distinct difference between ejecting disruptive influences
and conducting one's self as a publisher and distributer.

Though these are issues which will end up before a jury (should it ever
get that far) the fact that the list owner might have booted off a
disruptive entity after repeated warnings is hardly going to meet the
threshold to throw Mr. Gilmore into the catagory of "publisher."

> Pseudo-law on this list is really getting out of hand.

We need more lawyers.  That should replace the pseudo-law with real law.

--
Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures
Finger for Public Key   Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern
Vote Monarchist         Switzerland