[SNIP]

>
> i think "technical" people often think of the law-system as something
> as C-code, as it's written there is only one way for a standard
> compliant compiler to interpret it. I think the judges are more flexible
> than gcc in this regard, they can also assume that one perfectly knows
> that one is supposed to read http://www.cnn.com but not to read
> http://qz25srv.competitor.com/internal/memos/strategy.doc (made up
> example) even if -- from a technical standpoint -- there is no
> difference.
>
> They will most likely assume that it was very negligent for the
> competitor to leave his business plan in the open and value this in
> their decision, but nevertheless you should have known better than to
> state "I thought it was meant to be published".
>
> And yes, I'm normally also in favour of the technical viewpoint... :-)
>
>

And of course all know that banners implicitly stating access policies can
help support the legal standing when there may be doubts.

Thanks,

Ron DuFresne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity. It
eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart
***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***

OK, so you're a Ph.D. Just don't touch anything.

[ reply ]