I think the privacy issue is the important one here. If snooping on someone's email is an invasion of privacy for the purposes of checking whether a user is infringing copyright - then it must be an invasion of privacy for everything. The implication is that sysops simply should not snoop - period.
And if a sysop is not supposed to snoop, and doesn't snoop, they surely cannot be held responsible (as an accessory) for any illegal activities of their users.
Of course if the police come along with some kind of warrant - then privacy goes out of the window. But if the sysops can't actually look inside users' email repositories.... Hmmm. And what about logs of where messages are sent (or from where they are received)?
Just something I picked up following Glyn Moody on Twitter & Identi.ca https://mobile.twitter.com/glynmoody http://identi.ca/glynmoody
________________________________________ From: Anna Morris [say.hello.to.anna@googlemail.com] Sent: 16 February 2012 10:46 To: D.Bolton U0970268 Cc: manchester@lists.fsfe.org Subject: Re: [Manchester] EU to the rescue
looks good, just a shame it doesn't clarify the exact position on other illegal activities :S
Good work! Where did you find it?
Anna
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:23 AM, D.Bolton U0970268 <U0970268@unimail.hud.ac.ukmailto:U0970268@unimail.hud.ac.uk> wrote: "Online Copyright: EU Court of Justice Rules Out Private and Automatic Censorship"
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/online-copyright-eu-court-of-justice-rules-ou...
Good news for the community hosting service?
David _______________________________________________ Manchester mailing list Manchester@lists.fsfe.orgmailto:Manchester@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/manchester
-- www.ethical-pets.co.ukhttp://www.ethical-pets.co.uk - The pet shop thats all sorts of ethical!