Re: NVDA elequence question


Gene
 

The issue isn't just legal protection, though I consider that a valid consideration.  NVDA relies on a reputation for not engaging in questionable activities in terms of its promotion and this list is a part of that mechanism to develop and keep such a reputation.  NVDA gets grants from various companies, Microsoft, Mozilla, and I don't know who else might provide grants.  It is unwise to have a major organ for discussion and promotion of NVDA that allows questionable content.
 
Obviously, you can't stop all discussion.  Someone is going to make some comment or mention some illegal product.  but to allow such discussion to continue is tantamount to the list owner endorsing the discussion, which is a very bad idea for reasons I've already discussed.
 
Gene
----- Original Message -----

Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2019 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] NVDA elequence question

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@...>
> *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.
>
>
>



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