At 11:04 AM -0800 12/3/96, John Anonymous MacDonald wrote:

It is unlikely that anybody is going to pay money for our postings, even Igor's postings. Copyright is not the issue.

Copyright is not identical with commercial use. A copyrighted work, even if not sold commercially, remains protected. (Though of course the most commercial works are the works most aggressively litigated on copyright grounds.) In any case, my example was not arguing that someone was planning to pay for our posts. Even if I had made this point, I'd've been _right_, as some of the filtering services charge _money_, e.g., Eric Blossom's service, so people are clearly paying for the posts, or the filtering, or both. A familiar situation with edited items. (And the issue becomes much more tangible when stuff from commercial newspapers gets forwarded to the Cypherpunks list, and then archived. Even if Igor Chudov is not primarily concerned with commercialization of his posts, clearly "The New York Times" and "The Wall Street Journal" are. Recall the reports--confirmed?--that Todd Masco had to drop his archiving of the list when legal warnings arrived from these sorts of news services, complaining about their items being archived and made available via search engines.)

Perhaps, Igor is worried about the unpredictable consequences of his posts being readable by anybody, anywhere, forever. The solution to that problem is straightforward and I leave it as an exercise.

Indeed, if Igor does not want his posts added to his dossier entry in the BlackNet Dossier Service (coming to an offshore site soon), he has various ways to ensure this. At least until better tools exist to link nyms to true names, a service BlackNet expects to offer (using the latest Bayesian inference techniques) within the next 18 months. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

John Anonymous MacDonald wrote:

At 10:24 AM 12/3/1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

...

At 10:15 AM -0600 12/3/96, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

...

This is primarily addressed to the person who supports cypherpunks mail-to-news gateway. If you know who such person is, please send his/her address to me. .... I am opposed to seeing my articles showing up in DejaNews and other search engines. All my emails and usenet postings have this header line. However, when cypherpunks-to-newsgroup gateway reposts all articles, it strips this header line. I believe it to be a mistake and hope that it will be corrected.

Igor raises an important point.

I believe he is misguided in his expectation that his public utterances in a forum containing at least 1200 readers (and probably more, through gateways, etc.) that he can limit uses of his posts. Any recipient of his public utterances may choose to quote them in other articles, forward them to friends, archive them on his own disks, etc.

...

In a free society it is impossible to control what people do with material given to them. The best means of protecting one's writings is not to distribute them.

It is unlikely that anybody is going to pay money for our postings, even Igor's postings. Copyright is not the issue.

Perhaps, Igor is worried about the unpredictable consequences of his posts being readable by anybody, anywhere, forever. The solution to that problem is straightforward and I leave it as an exercise.

Surely, I am not expecting that presence of some magic header line would prevent everyone from archiving all my posts. I am fairly sure that Dimitri Vulis, for example, archives all my messages just in case. There is little one can do to prevent that. I do, however, believe that limiting the availability of archived posts, even to a small degree, is a valuable thing. - Igor.