[PD] Pd-list Digest, Vol 65, Issue 121
r at raakvlak.net
Tue Aug 24 07:04:18 CEST 2010
i spent several years at an online news publication and we regularly
received "requests" in this vain (including threats to sue if not complied
with within x number of days) from people we had published interviews with.
the standard reply was always "you agreed to the interview, therefor to its
publication, so no, we won't delete it."
needless to say, nothing ever went beyond a couple of emails back and
forth. (at most we would get a reply saying "yeah, but i don't want to be
associated with that part of my life anymore" - which was always good for a
hans, your reply sounds balanced and spot-on to me.
besides the 'it's a public list and you agreed to it' argument, if you give
in to this, you are creating a precedent and the public archive loses its
value as a historical record.
he has not given a strong enough reason to do that.
he won't sue.
(and if he's based in the states, afaik, you can then sue him for
threatening to sue and not following through :D )
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:49:57 +0200
> From: "IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m zmoelnig)"
> <noc at iem.at>
> Subject: [PD] [ot] sueing the mailing list...
> To: pd-list <pd-list at iem.at>
> Message-ID: <4C725255.5010101 at iem.at>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
> hi all,
> sorry for posting an OT mail to the mainlist, but i really want to have
> as many opinions as posible on this.
> i (as list admin) have just received an email by somebody who wants
> their mail to be removed from the archive:
> Subject: FORMAT NOTICE
> August, 22 2010
> I posted a message on the pd-announce list, being not aware that it was
> a public list: http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-announce/XXXX
> Someone replied to my message, also publicly, on the pd-list list:
> Today, I ask you to remove these two messages from your website,
> because I don't want my name to appear publicly on the web.
> If they are not removed within 15 days, I will do the necessary to sue you.
> XXX XXXXX
> i must say, that i'm a bit perplex.
> while in principal i'm not opposed to removing the post if they have any
> problems with it,
> however, i find the tone at least impertinent, and would prefer to not
> give way to a threat to sue.
> i have thus answered:
> hold on!
> i understand that you probably don't want an unsubscribe request to be
> available in a public archive.
> however, all the pd-mailinglists have always made it clear, that
> everything will be archived and made available to the public.
> thus, by subscribing to one of those mailinglists, you have given your
> agreement that all your postings to the list will be made available via
> those archives.
> furthermore, you are of course free to ask that your posting is removed
> from the archives.
> however, if somebody replied to your posting and has made this available
> to the public, then i don't see what entitles you to request a removal.
> it is their posting.
> the pd-lists are an open forum.
> they are no place to threaten people with sueing.
> what do you think of all this?
> IEM - network operation center
> mailto:noc at iem.at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list