Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> Illegal in the united states ATM because that's where the server is. We
> >> have no choice there.
> > Then we'll need to move the server ... the raw mail archives are *not* in
> > the US, and are not subject to their laws ...
> Moving the server just means there's some different set of laws to worry
> about; Canadian or Panamanian or wherever. One set might be more or less
> friendly to us but I don't think we are going to choose our server
> locations on that basis.
However, maybe it would be good that both the raw Mj2 archives and the
HTML archives are within the same jurisdiction (Canada or Panama,
because I very much doubt that Marc is going to accept moving the Mj2
server to the US). That way we would not be forced to do nasty tricks
in the archive conversion procedure if the US law says that something
must be removed from the HTML site but we don't want to remove it from
the upstream source for whatever reason.
> The real point in my mind is that mentioning any such consideration in
> our posted policy just encourages people to try legal threats first
> (as I gather occurred recently to prompt Dave to worry about this topic
> at all). If they actually have a basis for such threats they'll think
> of it soon enough; we don't need to encourage it via a posted policy.
That's a good point, yes ...
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
In response to
pgsql-www by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2009-04-16 17:36:55|
|Subject: Re: Archives policy|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-04-16 17:02:10|
|Subject: Re: Archives policy |