Full Disclosure mailing list archives
RE: [spam] RE: [inbox] Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T-
From: "Exibar" <exibar () thelair com>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 22:55:55 -0500
-----Original Message----- From: J.A. Terranson [mailto:measl () mfn org] Sent: Saturday, December 25, 2004 11:52 AM To: Exibar Cc: Bart.Lansing () kohls com; full-disclosure-bounces () lists netsys com; morning_wood; full-disclosure () lists netsys com Subject: [spam] RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-disclosure] This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- On Sat, 25 Dec 2004, Exibar wrote:His parents become the gardians of his estate by default (assuming he wasn't married or had children). His parents now owneverything that manhad while alive, digital and physical.You don't seem to understand the terms "guardian" and "own". They have nothing to do with each other. A "guardian" has a fiduciary responsibility, *NOT* "ownership".
sorry, but you're missing the point. Lets take a couple of givens here. 1) the boy killed in war was not married. 2) the boy killed in war did not have any children 18 years old or over. Both points have a pretty good chance of being true. With this being the case, upon death, his parents or garudians would then inherit *everything* that boy owned in life. Without a court having to say anything at all. They *now* own everything that was once his, digital rights included. Period, end of story. If anyone wants to contest this, they can, but I doubt anyone will claim ownership of something that was once his to a point it would wind up in court.... it could, just slim chances of happening. His parents have to prove to Yahoo that they now own his stuff by means of his death.
Same thing as if I had died, my wife would inherit everythingthat I own. Inheritance happens *after* the estate has been sttled by a *court*. Often, this will involve a type of "guardian" an ("executor"), but almost as often it will not. Until the estate is settled (meaning the court has decided who gets to "own" each of the estate's component parts"), she/they "own" *nothing". Since Yahoo! has an explicit contract with the decedent which stipulates that the contract is extinguished by the death of the box "owner", this whole estate business is moot anyway - there is no longer an account to intervene on.
Yahoo's good PR would be that they are simpathetic to this man's (sorry I called him a boy earlier, he was a man in every sense of the definition I'm sure of it) parents' situation and wanting to read what might be the last bit of their son, be it goodly or badly received by them. Most of the world doesn't look through a Security Engineer's eyes, they look through that man's greiving parents eyes that just lost their son to the war in Iraq.
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- n3td3v (Dec 22)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Bart . Lansing (Dec 22)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- morning_wood (Dec 22)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Exibar (Dec 24)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Bart . Lansing (Dec 24)
- RE: [inbox] Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Exibar (Dec 25)
- RE: [inbox] Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- J.A. Terranson (Dec 25)
- RE: [spam] RE: [inbox] Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Exibar (Dec 26)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- morning_wood (Dec 22)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Bart . Lansing (Dec 22)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- J.A. Terranson (Dec 24)
- RE: [spam] Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Exibar (Dec 25)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- n3td3v (Dec 24)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Brenno J.S.A.A.F. de Winter (Dec 24)
- Re: This sums up Yahoo!s security policy to a -T- Bart . Lansing (Dec 24)