🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6n977j$s14$1@news.interlog.com>,
Marc Bissonnette <dragnet@internalysis.com> wrote:
|In article <35981165.2F55@pacbell.net>, mdenman@pacbell.net says...
|
|>I also question the value of putting such a policy in writing at all.
|>The moral and ethical duty to report is sufficient in Canada. Perhaps a
|>statement to the effect that all data passing through the ISP is not
|>confidential and may be accessed, saved, or used by the ISP for any
|>purpose, notwithstanding copyright laws.
|>
|The value is in letting the members know of which laws govern, limit or affect 
|their use of the TFN. It's quite scary to think of the literal reams of laws 
|that the average Canadian is completely unaware of. 
|
|By re-stating these laws, we are not making ourselves 'more' liable than we 
|already are. After all, ignorance of the law is no defense. The AUP is simply a 
|reminder and an education to users of their rights and freedoms, as well as 
|those that cannot be violated by others (or themselves)


	Um, Marc, I don't think you quite heard what he is
	saying.  He's pointing out that if improperly worded,
	such a document could in fact bring *more* liability
	to the TFN.  Perhaps this is true, perhaps not - but
	given the facts of situations like the Prodigy case,
	his warning that sound legal advice is needed in this
	area seems prudent indeed.


-- 
  ,u,	 Bruce Becker		Toronto, Ontario	1 416 699 1868
a /i/	 Internet: bdb@gts.org	Uucp: ...!gts!bdb
 `\o\-e	 "...and then we had to reformat the Ontario government
 _< /_	 		'cos it had a boot-camp virus"		- Gully Foyle