[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Schwartz conviction
In article <3vn6u4$s9p@maureen.teleport.com>, davezeit@teleport.com wrote:
> I can't say it puts the fear of God in other consultants. But I just got
> on the net & am VERY concerned about some thing I say being misconstrued
> so I post little & stick to general topics. Maybe it's good I am not
> computer literate & can't figure mine out let alone be a hacker. But I
> think it's scary that the Govt. is LOOKING at regulating the net. I feel
> like I am in uncharted waters on the net & am concerned about what is
> safe to post & not to post. I am kind of using as guidelines what I use
> on Prodigy. But I had hoped the net would provide more freedom to discuss
> ideas. The thought of losing a house is pretty scary indeed.
David --
Relax. Randall's case had absolutely nothing to do with the Internet. He
was accused of using a computer that he wasn't supposed to be on, and of
stealing password information. All at the company where he was consulting.
This has absolutely nothing to do with posting messages anywhere.
However, the same old laws that have been around for centuries (?)
regarding libel and such have some relevance to net postings. If you don't
publicly make unsubstantiable derogatory statements about people or
corporations, nobody's going to sue you for a posting. And if you don't
use the Internet for blatantly illegal activities, you're safe (maybe even
if you do...).
For now, anyways...
-- Dave Goldman
Research Software Design
References: