Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Copyright Notices
From: full-disclosure () lists netsys com (HggdH)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 20:52:22 -0600
Might be a good idea, given what is going on. I am unsure on the restriction, anyway "(...may not...used for any commercial...). It is obvious all vendors follow BUGTRAQ, vul-watch, etc -- it would be stupid not to. If I am a vendor, and someone posts a vulnerability on my product together with such a restriction, this would put me in a dilema: if I do not use it, I maintain my product vulnerable; if I use it, I will have to pay someone to **allow me to correct my product**. This sounds even more wrong than Symantec buying BUGTRAQ. ..hggdh.. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Cartwright" <johnc () grok org uk> To: <johnc () grok org uk> Cc: <full-disclosure () lists netsys com> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 18:24 Subject: [Full-disclosure] Copyright Notices Hi Some interesting debate about the whole copyright issue going on... We were wondering about appending some kind of statement to posts to back up these points. IANAL, but what do you think of a statement such as this: "The above post and all elements thereof are copyrighted by the poster, and may not be reproduced or used for any commercial purpose without the express permission of the author, unless specified otherwise." Obviously by posting you have to agree that a) Other members might quote what you said in *their* posts. b) It will all end up in the list archives. Alternatively we could spell out the situation in the list charter and point to it in the footer to save room. We'd welcome your comments. - John _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Full-Disclosure () lists netsys com http://lists.netsys.com/mailman/listinfo/full-disclosure
Current thread:
- Copyright Notices John Cartwright (Jul 18)
- Copyright Notices HggdH (Jul 18)