XPost: news.groups, rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: kalelfan@yanospamhoo.com   
      
   On rec.arts.tv, "John Kirkpatrick XVII" (as opposed to Bloxy XVIII) did   
   provide impetus for further discussion when he wrote in message   
   news:ig59ok$1mo$1@speranza.aioe.org...   
      
   > On 06/01/2011 11:51 AM, KalElFan wrote:   
   >   
   >> AOL was sued when one of its own subscribers posted an SF   
   >> author's work on a newsgroup. AOL did not fully win in its   
   >> defense and ended up settling with the SF author. That was   
   >> certainly an often-cited possible factor in AOL's decision to   
   >> bail on Usenet.   
   >   
   > Excuses, excuses. Back when AOL was sued, we didn't have the   
   > DMCA and the CDA which, together, cover a service provider   
   > from liability for posted content (except, oddly, for trademark   
   > infringement) as long as they take down the content if they are   
   > ordered to by courts or rights-holders.   
      
   The information I read was that the DMCA was in force at the   
   time, at least the "passive conduit" definition part that you're   
   basically alluding to.  It's the part of the case they won.   
      
   Compared to any specific web site, where typically there's just one   
   service provider, the distributed nature of Usenet is what makes   
   its "passive conduit" definition possible.  Nobody has to take any   
   responsibility for the cesspool stuff and the noise, except for the   
   posters.  If a blogger posted some of the worst on Usenet, they   
   could lose access and get shut down.  WikiLeaks got booted off   
   and had to relocate.  Assange's backup plans were Switzerland   
   and then email.  Usenet is more robust because an email can   
   get the information sitting on every news server.  It can also get   
   the cesspool and noise out that way too though.  So...   
      
   It's a case of a strength causing the decline.  Too much Freedom   
   and the Tragedy of the Commons as a poster in the first thread   
   noted.  Usenet may well be unsalvageable as a whole, but one or   
   more new hierarchies might be able to address the issues that   
   led to the decline.  It's way past the band-aid stage.   
      
   > Any modern usenet server in the US would be covered against   
   > anything but a trademark-infringing sale offered in a .forsale   
   > group...   
      
   Methinks the top-level hierarchy names are also an issue here,   
   because of trademark or other ownership rights.   Try sending   
   a control message for disney.* and see what happens.  I'd be   
   surprised if a single news server picks it up unless they're on   
   autopilot acceptance of all newgroup messages.  If there are   
   many of the latter it probably gets the attention of Disney's   
   lawyers.  There've been various company name hierachies like   
   microsoft.* and so on, but I suspect news servers that carried   
   it would have had to have been meticulous treating that as a   
   managed hierarchy of Microsoft.   
      
   I see no basis for the Big 8 having any such protection, nor   
   alt.* obviously.  A new hierarchy could, but then it also risks   
   loss of the passive conduit.  If Google were to start google.*   
   with a distributed model for their Google Groups, letting   
   anyone post... well it would go completely against their TOS   
   now where they insist  they have absolutely no control over   
   Usenet.  They'd have to add "except for google.*" and at   
   that point they're into front-end screening and at least   
   some moderation for that hierarachy.  News servers would   
   again be more meticulous about handling of the hierarchy,   
   because there's a bona fide ownership claim.   
      
   When I registered optmod.org, .com and .net, I viewed those   
   as "in trust" for whatever approach the concept eventually   
   evolved into.  I'd prefer it be Open Source, but it might not   
   be if, for example, it isn't going to be on distributed Usenet   
   at all.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)