Re: NVDA elequence question


Antony Stone
 

I think the fundamental point here is that the people, the developers and the
company behind NVDA do not want to be associated in any way with discussion of
illegal activity.

Therefore, if you want to discuss it, do it somewhere else.

That's a policy which the operators of this list have decided upon, and anyone
subscribing to list is expected to go along with it.

Most mailing lists (and similar forums, groups, etc, which are basically the
same thing by another name) have rules which subscribers are expected /
required to abide by, and this is one of the rules for this list.

Regards,


Antony.

On Thursday 03 January 2019 at 21:24:00, mikolaj holysz wrote:

It must then either be a groups.io issue or lack of cooperation by the
admins when explicitly requested. Anyway, there's no need to share the
link directly over here, the fact that such a discussion even exists
probably made a lot of people open up their Googles and that's all they
needed. The addon isn't especially hard to find, so I think discussing
it and not sharing it would be the best option. Those who really want it
will find it eventually, those who prefer to stay on the legal side
won't even look for it. I don't think there are people who are able to
install addons but aren't able to make a simple Google query, so I don't
see the point in sharing the link directly if it might get us into
trouble. Those people should know that such a thing exists and that it
is illegal, as it's not clearly indicated on the addons website. That's
why most people think there's a free legal Eloquence.

BTW if groups.io is really that keen on shutting down list for such a
reason (they probably are too lazy to deal with DMCas) then I'm very
uncertain as to this list's future. If it gets big enough, something
will eventually happen whether we want it or not and they might shut the
list down. It might be illegal content, obscene language or whatever
else we might deem appropriate but they won't. I would recommend looking
for alternatives like Googlegroups. Google is much bigger, probably less
whimsy and their skin might be a bit thicker, though we'd have to see
about that.

W dniu 2019-01-03 o 19:42, Gene pisze:
I don't know if others on list know more about the law in the United
States. I do know that many lists have been shut down in the last year
or two for illegally sharing material such as books and movies. The
owner of this list serve has done so. I don't know who else may have,
but such is not allowed on this list serve and probably elsewhere.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
*From:* mikolaj holysz <mailto:miki123211@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, January 03, 2019 11:34 AM
*To:* nvda@nvda.groups.io <mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io>
*Subject:* Re: [nvda] NVDA elequence question

> If a list allows such discussions, it is opened to legal liability.
> It is illegal to use such programs. Promoting their use is illegal
> and lists that allow it may be shut down by the owner of whatever
> list serve the list is on and, though very unlikely, the list could
> have legal action taken against it by the owner of whatever
> intellectual property is being used illegally.

Can I ask for a source of that info, please? This is definitely untrue
in most countries. An admin is not and will never be responsible for
what it's users post, if that weren't true, no one would dare to make
web 2.0 websites (like Facebook, Wordpress etc). The only responsibility
of the admin is to remove content from their website if they get an
official letter from a copyright owner stating that this content is
illegal, with all the necessary statements. I don't know why many admins
in the blind community think otherwise. Even so, no law can prohibit
discussing such content if it's not shared. Discussing how much such a
content is worth is, in most cases, allowed. That's why the /r/piracy
Reddit flourishes and Reddit itself doesn't do anything about it. They
don't have to. THey have a strict "no posting of content" policy. They
only put general links to websites, not even direct links to content,
and they're perfectly fine, even though most of that subreddit consists
of threads like "is downloading xxx from torrents safe" or "on what
website can I get books in language xxx for free". Discussing technical
processes used to make cracks or avoid drm might be illegal, though. If
there's someone who can be sued, it's definitely the developer of such
cracked software, and probably the one who put it there, maybe the one
who posted the link but that's questionable.

Of course the information presented above should not be considered legal
advice, and actually doing some reading is recommended. Doing some
reading is always recommended, blindly repeating what others have said
never does us much good, and actually that's what many website owners
do, that's why we have that Eloquence and GDPR dramas in the first
place. Most of that is wildly unnecessary. I personally think that
admins (of websites in general) should do as little as the law allows
them to, respond to whatever they're obliged to respond and not overdo
it out of fear.
--
A good conversation is like a miniskirt;
short enought to retain interest,
but long enough to cover the subject.

- Celeste Headlee


Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.

Join nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.