To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 1582
1581  |  1583
Subject: 
Re: Terms and Conditions Question
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general
Date: 
Tue, 4 May 1999 23:26:19 GMT
Viewed: 
773 times
  
James Brown wrote:
no, but it could be considered defamatory.  Also, another portion of that
clause covers it quite nicely:

Well doesn't any flame-war have defamatory posts?  Especially in
off-topic-debate

"...including without limitation any transmissions constituting or encouraging
conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil
liability, or otherwise violate any local, state, national, or international
law."
The phrase above could quite happily give rise to civil liability, and odds
are it violates some law, somewhere.  (probably in California)(1)

OK, but some countries don't have the right to free speech so we can't
post at all.  I don't think that laws can affect someone's personal
point of view and their right to say it - that's going against civil
liberties isn't it?

Essentially, I think that Todd & Suzanne have been ambiguous enough to cover
all their bases, from a legal point of view.  Besides, when push comes to
shove, this is a private organization, and if racism/sexism/otherism becomes a
problem, they can change the rules to account for it.

Well it's not sexism - after all "ill people want to get well they just
don't know it" - now how is 'defamatory' ?

James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
1:Wait!  Was that defamatory?  My apologies to the state(2) of California.

You've broken some by-law somewhere like Macau.

2:Take that however you will.(3)
3:D'oh! There I go again.

Oh no!  Not the footnotes - there should be something in the Terms and
Conditions about them.

--
Carbon 60
ICQ # 5643170



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Terms and Conditions Question
 
<cross-posted to off-topic.debate> (...) Yup, they do. (...) encouraging (...) Laws don't affect our right to say things. Laws enforce the consequences of our having said them. (...) By using the term 'ill', you are implying that there is something (...) (25 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Terms and Conditions Question
 
(...) no, but it could be considered defamatory. Also, another portion of that clause covers it quite nicely: "...including without limitation any transmissions constituting or encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise (...) (25 years ago, 4-May-99, to lugnet.admin.general)

150 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR