From: Kent Landfield (kent@landfield.com)
Date: Fri Jun 01 2001 - 07:53:55 CDT
# > --------
# > 6.12. Archive
# >
# > This optional header provides an indication of the poster's wishes
# > regarding preservation of the article in publicly accessible archives.
# > This MUST be indicated with either "yes or "no".
# >
# > The use of the keyword "no" in the Archive header indicates the poster
# > does not want the article made available in a public archive. "Archive:
# > yes" or the lack of an Archive header indicates the article can be
# > archived.
# >
# > Archive-content = [CFWS] ("no" | "yes" ) [CFWS]
# >
# > NOTE: There is no way to assure articles posted to USENET are either
# > archived or not archived. It is unwise to assume that merely marking
# > an article with "Archive: no" will reliably prevent it from being made
# > available in a long-lived public form; indicating your wishes does not
# > guarantee that they will be respected.
# > ------------------
# >
# > Can we agree on this ?
#
# It tells only about wishes, and then only for those undefinable
# "archives", it may be a good text but it does almost nothing for helping
# the author to clearly express or demand their rights.
Dennis, rights are legal issues that are not going to be decided by us.
They will be decided by courts. The only right that a poster *REALLY*
has is not to post in the first place. After that, everything falls to
the interprative nature of the courts.
Let's use some common sense here and not drag this out. We need to get
to a compromise set of verbage that expresses our intent in what makes
sense to those that understand Usenet. The courts will simply need an
education when the time comes.
-- Kent Landfield Phone: 1-817-545-2502 Email: kent@landfield.com http://www.landfield.com/ Search the Usenet FAQ Archive at http://www.faqs.org/faqs/ Search the RFC/FYI/STD/BCP Archive at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/